Sen. Rarick: A New and Concerning Cannabis Law

Last Session, Democrats passed many controversial bills, one of these is legalized adult-use cannabis and expunged criminal records with petty misdemeanor and misdemeanor cannabis convictions. This was an incredibly controversial bill that, like many other bills last session, was hundreds of pages long, yet was pushed through committees at breakneck speeds. Because of this, we were left with new laws that had far-reaching repercussions. 

A main issue Republicans continued to raise was public safety concerns. Our law enforcement officers do not currently have a reliable roadside test to determine if someone is under the influence of cannabis. Sheriffs throughout the state have also voiced concerns over the issue. Earlier this year, the Kanabec County Sheriff released a statement saying that “adding more impaired drivers to the road without a roadside testing method will inevitably lead to more deaths on our roadways than we already see.” There is clear widespread concern that our roads will become less safe as cannabis use becomes more prominent. Earlier this year, a study was done in Colorado that showed fatal crashes involving THC impairment on the rise. It is alarming to consider this same future in Minnesota.

Another notable concern is that anyone who engages in marijuana use will be unable to possess a firearm. Even though marijuana is use is now legal at the state level, that does not override federal law. If a Minnesotan chooses to engage in using cannabis without knowing the ins and outs of the laws, they are potentially giving up their constitutional right to self-defense. I find it incredibly troubling that this issue of gun rights has largely been left out of the conversation. Many Democrats have discussed how “important” it is to decriminalize cannabis but have not been forthcoming on how this law change intersects with federal law. This lack of transparency could potentially hurt many folks, causing them to lose their Second Amendment rights.

Through the process, there was also a clear disregard for local control and input. Not every community in our state is interested in cannabis or cannabis-distribution businesses, yet this bill fails to offer them the flexibility to deny licenses to these businesses. Local municipalities can temporarily restrict recreational sales but can only do so until January 1, 2025. Though cities can exercise local control over the number of retailers that can operate within cities, they cannot outright ban it. So far, at least 10 Minnesota cities have either adopted or considered adopting measures to temporarily restrict recreational cannabis sales.

I’m also worried about how this new law will affect our kids. By legalizing this drug, we are allowing it to be more widely available, which means it will be even easier for kids to get their hands on it. This law once again fails to address that concern and disregards the damaging effects it could have on kids, especially in terms of addiction. Numerous studies have been done that show marijuana use is harmful to the developing brain during adolescence. In 2022, over 30% of 12th graders reported using marijuana. It is shocking that Democrats wanted so desperately to legalize this drug, knowing it will become more accessible to our kids.

Unfortunately, this new law went into effect on August 1 of this year. It was pushed through so rapidly, with virtually no input being accepted from Republicans, law enforcement, city officials, and concerned citizens—there was a clear disregard for the safety concerns and the effects a law like this would cause. Though marijuana use and possession is now legal, there will be virtually no oversight until the Office of Cannabis Management is formally established, which will cost the state and taxpayers millions. I’m disappointed in this law for many reasons: it fails to consider public safety, local control, the safety of children, and Second Amendment rights. Minnesotans deserve to feel safe on their roads and in their communities, and this bill wholly undermines that.