New Jersey Appeals Court Says Jersey City Officers Cannot Be Fired for Legal Off-Duty Cannabis Use
A New Jersey appeals court has ruled that Jersey City improperly fired two police officers over legal off-duty cannabis use, marking another major decision tied to the state’s marijuana employment protections.
In a decision issued on May 1, the New Jersey Appellate Division upheld earlier rulings from the state Civil Service Commission that ordered the reinstatement of officers Omar Polanco and Norhan Mansour. The court found that the officers were protected under New Jersey’s cannabis law because their marijuana use took place legally while they were off duty.
The case centers around the New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Marketplace Modernization Act, commonly known as CREAMMA. The law prevents employers from taking disciplinary action against workers solely for using regulated cannabis during personal time away from work unless there is proof of impairment while performing job duties.
Polanco and Mansour were members of the Jersey City Police Department when they tested positive for cannabinoids during random drug screenings in September 2022. According to court records, both officers admitted they had legally used cannabis while off duty. They were later terminated from their positions in March 2023.
The officers were never accused of consuming cannabis while working, nor was there any allegation that they reported for duty under the influence. That point became central to the court’s ruling.
Jersey City officials argued that federal firearms law prevented the officers from carrying weapons because federal law prohibits unlawful users of controlled substances from possessing firearms or ammunition. The city maintained that this federal restriction conflicted with New Jersey’s cannabis protections for employees, including police officers.
However, the appellate judges rejected that argument. The court concluded that the police department failed to prove a direct and unavoidable conflict between federal law and New Jersey state law. Judges also pointed to federal exemptions that apply to firearms issued for official law enforcement purposes.
Because of that finding, the court determined the department could not rely on federal law to justify firing the officers for conduct that was otherwise legal under state law.
The ruling also backed earlier decisions by the New Jersey Civil Service Commission, which had already ordered the officers reinstated with back pay, seniority, and benefits. Although the officers returned to modified duty in September 2024, they reportedly had not yet regained full police licenses or firearm identification approvals.
Their attorney, Michael P. Rubas, sharply criticized Jersey City’s handling of the matter and argued that the city ignored both state law and guidance from the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office. Rubas also said the ongoing legal fight could ultimately cost the city millions of dollars once back pay and related claims are resolved.
A separate lawsuit was filed earlier this year seeking restoration of the officers’ firearm credentials and police licenses.
Jersey City’s current administration has attempted to distance itself from the dispute. Officials from Mayor James Solomon’s office said the disciplinary actions were taken before the current administration entered office in January. City representatives stated that the earlier policy does not reflect the new administration’s views and that officials are reviewing the court’s decision.
The ruling is likely to receive attention across New Jersey because it addresses how cannabis legalization laws apply to law enforcement personnel and other public employees. As more states continue expanding legal marijuana protections, courts are increasingly being asked to determine how those laws interact with federal regulations and workplace policies.
For now, the appellate court’s decision reinforces that under New Jersey law, employees — including police officers — cannot automatically lose their jobs for legal off-duty cannabis use unless employers can prove workplace impairment or a direct conflict with federal requirements.
Sources:
- New Jersey Appellate Division
- New Jersey Civil Service Commission
- New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Marketplace Modernization Act (CREAMMA)
