- Apr 10, 2025
Loading
Nearly two weeks after a federal judge deferred a decision on the legality of New Jersey police officers using marijuana, the Civil Service Commission is poised to determine the outcome of another officer terminated for cannabis ingestion.
On Wednesday, the commission is expected to review the case of Mackenzie Reilly, a Jersey City police officer dismissed in August 2023 following a positive drug test for cannabis in his urine.
Reilly is among five Jersey City police officers challenging their terminations due to cannabis use, while also aiming to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Jersey City against the state in October. The lawsuit argues that the federal ban on cannabis supersedes the state law that legalized the substance.
An administrative law judge has recommended that Reilly's termination be reversed.
New Jersey legalized cannabis in 2021, and the state attorney general stated that police officers cannot face discipline for legally using marijuana while off duty. However, Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop declared that the city would continue to prohibit its officers from cannabis use, defying the state's directive. Fulop is a Democratic candidate for governor in 2025.
The five officers named in the lawsuit, including Reilly, Omar Polanco, Norhan Mansour, Montavious Patten, and Richie Lopez, argue that they should be allowed to consume legal cannabis while retaining their law enforcement positions. The Civil Service Commission has already instructed the city to reinstate Mansour and Polanco, although it remains uncertain if the city has complied.
Despite the city's claims in its lawsuit against New Jersey, attorneys argue that federal law prohibiting cannabis use for gun owners supersedes the state's marijuana legalization. However, both the Civil Service Commission and administrative law judges have consistently ruled otherwise.
The five officers and the Jersey City Police Officers Benevolent Association contend that the city lacks standing to sue and assert that the city's federal court filing is a response to their losses in state employment proceedings.
The judge presiding over the lawsuit has declined to intervene as of August 2, postponing his decision until all officers contesting their terminations have their cases heard by the Civil Service Commission.
Comments
Leave a Reply