Michigan: Supreme Court Ruling Allows for Marijuana Use While on Probation
- The Michigan Supreme Court ruled that judges cannot categorically prohibit marijuana use as a condition of probation.
- The Court determined that the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) does not preempt Michigan’s Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act (MRTMA), which provides state-level immunity for compliant marijuana use.
- The Court found that the Probation Act’s prohibition against violating federal law is inapplicable when it conflicts with the MRTMA, emphasizing that the MRTMA controls in such conflicts.
- The ruling affirms that probation conditions cannot bar marijuana use that complies with state law solely because it violates federal law, reinforcing voter-approved cannabis rights in Michigan.
Judges cannot categorically prohibit marijuana use as a condition of probation, according to a judgment by the Michigan Supreme Court.
In a unanimous ruling, the Court the rejected arguments that marijuana use is a per se probation violation because the substance remains federally illegal. “The CSA does not preempt the MRTMA [Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act,]” it determined, “[which] provides Michiganders with state-law immunity from arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner for MRTMA-compliant acts.”
The Court further opined that a separate state law (The Probation Act) prohibiting probationers from violating federal statutes is also inapplicable in this case. Specifically, the Court ruled, “The MRTMA provides that all state laws ‘inconsistent with this act do not apply to conduct that is permitted by this act.’ … Among the MRTMA’s intentions was a desire ‘to prevent arrest and penalty for personal possession and cultivation of marihuana by adults 21 years of age or older.’ … The probation act’s absolute bar on MRTMA-compliant marijuana use is inconsistent with the MRTMA’s stated intent as well as its express dictates. … And in light of the MRTA’s provision on conflicts of law, where the MRTMA and the probation act conflict, the MRTMA controls.”
Therefore, it concluded, “Courts may not impose probation conditions barring MRTA-compliant marijuana use solely because it violates the CSA.”
Commenting on the decision, NORML’s Board Chair and legal counsel Joseph A. Bondy said: “The Michigan Supreme Court correctly recognized that a state’s legalization law cannot be nullified by reflexive reliance on federal prohibition. Voter-approved rights deserve meaningful judicial protection, and this decision reinforces that courts must respect them absent a genuine, individualized justification.”
Michigan voters in 2018 overwhelmingly passed a citizens’ initiative legalizing cannabis use by adults.
The case is People v. Hess.