[TChris]

The SCOCA got this one right.

[Redcloak]

So then... Legislating from the bench is OK when it goes the way you want?

[Hoof Hearted]

"The SCOCA got this one right."

Damned right they did! At least the alcholics on the job are still protected cuz "it's a disease".

Damned potheads! Now, what'd I do with my brewski?

[fr_freak]

The SCOCA got this one right.

I think it is the correct outcome, but for the wrong reason. An employer should be able to fire an employee for whatever reason they want. However, this court seems to be of the opinion that there are restrictions on an empoyer's right to fire employees at will (which has been the prevailing opinion in CA for some time), but that the federal ban on marijuana is a sufficient justification for firing the employee.

In effect, the California Supreme Court appears to have just ceded the entire authority of the State of California over to the federal government, in direct violation of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution ofthe United States. I can't imagine a more irresponsible position for a state court to take than to undermine its own sovereign government.

[BlazingArizona]

The SCOCA got this one right.

But for the wrong reason. This should have been an employer rights decision: that an employer has the right to insist that his workers be drug free. Without passing judgment on the "medical" reason for sparking up, it is an established fact that being baked affects mental faculties that an employer might deem vital.

But no: the Court ruled that the marijuana being against federal law means the employer has to assume state liability for its use by employees. It should have treated these as separate issues. And because this case covered off-job usage, the employer would not have been liable under federal law anyway.