Thursday, December 12, 2024

Search

‘If the Law is Not Changed, Then We Have a Problem’

Detail

By Vince Conti

COURT HOUSE – The Middle Township Committee meeting June 6 surfaced public concerns about the use of cannabis products by off-duty police officers.  

In response to a question from a resident, Police Chief Christopher Leusner said his department must follow the law, which currently is interpreted by the state Acting Attorney General Matthew Platkin as allowing such use.  

Leusner added, “If the law is not changed, then we have a problem.” 

The discussion began when Stanley Doniger, of Rio Grande, asked about Platkin’s guidance to law enforcement agencies that they “may not take any adverse action against any officers because they do or do not use cannabis off-duty.”  

Platkin added that “an employee shall not be subject to any adverse action by an employer due to the presence of cannabinoid metabolites in the employee’s bodily fluid.” 

Platkin’s memo states that there should be “a zero-tolerance policy” for cannabis intoxication while performing the duties of a law enforcement officer.  

Leusner said this places the burden on the department to ensure that an officer who presents himself or herself for duty is not impaired. Alcohol has a reliable breathalyzer test for intoxication. Marijuana lacks an equivalent test. Leusner hypothesized a situation in which there is an officer involved in an accident or shooting. Such a situation could be an invitation to litigation. 

Platkin states that the cannabis used, if any, by an officer must be a regulated product from a state-licensed retail seller. Then there is also the issue of the municipality’s insurance umbrella and how insurers will react to certain circumstances. 

In an attempt to answer Doniger’s question with respect to other first responders, Mayor Timothy Donohue reminded the public that firefighters in the municipality are part of separate and distinct fire companies. Emergency medical services (EMS) responders are now likely to be employees of Inspira Health to whom the municipality contracted out its EMS response. All organizations are subject to the same law but there is no guarantee they all will adopt the same policies and practices with respect to that law. 

Various municipalities in the state are reacting negatively to Platkin’s guidance. In Jersey City, Mayor Steve Fulop said publicly that the city will ignore the guidance. He said the city will inform all officers that they may not use cannabis on or off-duty. 

Many are calling for a ban on cannabis use by law enforcement personnel until there is a reliable test that can determine if an officer is under the influence of cannabis. 

In Trenton, some lawmakers are rushing to introduce legislation to ban the use of cannabis products off-duty. Gov. Phil Murphy said that he is open to such legislation.  

Meanwhile, the legal sale of regulated recreational cannabis has already begun. Legal weed is available close by in Egg Harbor Township and across the bay in Lewes, Delaware. 

The State Policemen’s Benevolent Association (SPBA) has not taken a firm position either way, but it has expressed concern for the position its members may be in. 

There is an added conflict between New Jersey’s state law legalizing adult cannabis use and federal law where such use remains a crime. SPBA has stated that it does not want one of its members to be the test case for a conflict between state and federal laws. Federal law specifically prohibits gun use or ownership by marijuana users. This has been a major cause of controversy with medical marijuana users.

At a hearing in Trenton, state Sen. Michael Testa (R-1st) raised the issue that the use of cannabis by law enforcement officers could cost the state federal dollars in grant funding. When Testa pressed on the issue of conflict between federal and state law, Platkin said, “I share the concerns of what this will mean for law enforcement officers, but as with any law, we are bound to enforce the law that is on the books.” 

In the midst of all this Trenton-created controversy, lawmakers have introduced a series of bills to restrict the use of cannabis products by certain categories of workers from police officers to the operators of heavy machinery. 

One bill (A3868) would prohibit use by all first responders. Another (A3914) focuses its concern on a prohibition for law enforcement. Yet another (S2518) would ban use for “those who put the public at risk.” 

Spout Off

Avalon – Eighty percent of working-age Americans have jobs, and the average after-tax income is up almost $4,000 since before the pandemic, significantly outpacing inflation.

Read More

West Wildwood – The assertion there is a presence of population of rabid squirrels running around the streets of West Wildwood is crazy. The squirrels here are all timid, well behaved and cause no problems. I feel…

Read More

Clermont – Watch out for them skunks that are testing positive for rabbits!

Read More

Most Read

Print Editions

Recommended Articles

Skip to content