A New Jersey man’s attempt to hold Walmart accountable for denying him a job due to cannabis use has been dashed by a federal appeals court, marking a significant decision in the ongoing debate over employment and marijuana laws.
In a ruling that split the judges, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that New Jersey’s 2020 law, which prohibits employers from discriminating against workers who use cannabis off the job, does not permit individuals to sue employers directly. Instead, enforcement of the law was left to state authorities, as lawmakers did not specify a private right of action for employees in the legislation.
This ruling upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Erick Zanetich, who alleged that Walmart’s refusal to hire him as a security guard due to a positive cannabis test violated the state law. Zanetich’s legal team had argued that the law should empower workers to take legal action against employers who impose discriminatory drug policies.
The court’s majority, led by Circuit Judge Peter Phipps, interpreted the lack of any explicit remedy in the state’s law as a conscious choice, not an oversight. Phipps was joined in his opinion by Judge Kent Jordan, both of whom were appointed by Republican presidents. In a dissenting opinion, Circuit Judge Arianna Freeman, a Biden appointee, questioned whether New Jersey lawmakers intended to deny the option for private lawsuits, suggesting that the state Supreme Court should weigh in on this legal issue.
The case stems from New Jersey’s 2020 marijuana legalization, which includes provisions to protect employees from being penalized for using cannabis during off-hours. However, employers are still allowed to take action if an employee is impaired while working. New Jersey is one of the 24 states where recreational marijuana is legal, and the decision could have far-reaching implications for how marijuana-related employment cases are handled across the U.S.
While Walmart expressed satisfaction with the ruling, Zanetich’s attorney signaled plans to pursue further legal options. “We remain committed to defending the protections New Jersey voters intended for workers,” said Justin Swidler, who represents Zanetich.
This case highlights the evolving landscape of cannabis laws and their intersection with workplace rights, as more states legalize marijuana but face challenges in adapting employment laws to these changes.
