SB 504
Department of Legislative Services
Maryland General Assembly
2021 Session
FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE
First Reader
Senate Bill 504 (Senator Smith)
Judicial Proceedings
Discrimination in Employment – Use of Medical Cannabis – Prohibition
This bill prohibits an employer from discriminating in employment against an individual
who has received a written certification for the use of medical cannabis under the
Health-General Article or who has tested positive for cannabis components or metabolites
if the individual holds a written certification for the use of medical cannabis under the
Health-General Article, with exceptions as specified.
Fiscal Summary
State Effect: General fund expenditures likely increase at least minimally for the
Maryland Commission on Civil Rights (MCCR), as discussed below. The bill does not
materially impact the workload of the Judiciary or the Office of Administrative Hearings.
Revenues are not materially affected.
Local Effect: The bill is not anticipated to materially impact local finances or operations.
Small Business Effect: Minimal, as discussed below.
Analysis
Bill Summary: If an individual has received a written certification for the use of medical
cannabis under the Health-General Article or has tested positive for cannabis components
or metabolites and holds a written certification for the use of medical cannabis under the
Health-General Article, an employer may not (1) fail or refuse to hire, discharge, or
otherwise discriminate against the individual with respect to the individual’s
compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges or (2) limit, segregate, or classify its
employees or applicants for employment in any way that deprives or tends to deprive the
individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect the individual’s
status as an employee. However, an employer does not violate these prohibitions if an
employer’s failure to discriminate in employment for the use of medical cannabis would
violate federal law or regulations or cause the employer to lose a monetary or licensing
related benefit under federal law or regulations.
The bill’s prohibitions do not prevent an employer from adopting policies and procedures
that prohibit an employee from performing the employee’s duties while impaired by
medical cannabis.
Current Law:
Discrimination in Employment
Under § 20-602 of the State Government Article, it is State policy to assure that all persons
have equal opportunity in employment and in all labor management-union relations. As
such, discrimination in employment is prohibited on the basis of race, color, religion,
ancestry or national origin, sex, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or
disability (unrelated in nature and extent so as to reasonably preclude the performance of
the employment).
On any of these bases or because of an individual’s refusal to submit to or make available
the results of a genetic test, an employer may not (1) fail or refuse to hire, discharge, or
otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the individual’s
compensation, terms, conditions or privileges or (2) limit, segregate, or classify its
employees or applicants for employment in any way that deprives or tends to deprive any
individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect the individual’s
status as an employee. Additional prohibitions are also specified in statute.
MCCR is the State agency charged with the enforcement of laws prohibiting discrimination
in employment, housing, public accommodations, and State contracting. An individual
alleging employment discrimination may file a complaint with MCCR within specified
timeframes. If a complaint is filed with MCCR and an agreement to remedy and eliminate
the discrimination cannot be reached, the matter may be heard before an administrative law
judge. Remedies available on a finding that the respondent is engaging or has engaged in
an unlawful employment practice include (1) enjoining the respondent from engaging in
the discriminatory act; (2) ordering appropriate affirmative relief; (3) awarding
compensatory damages for pecuniary and nonpecuniary losses; and (4) ordering any other
equitable relief that the administrative law judge considers appropriate.
A complainant or a respondent may elect to have the claims asserted in a complaint alleging
an unlawful employment practice determined in a civil action brought by MCCR on the
SB 504/ Page 2
complainant’s behalf if (1) MCCR has found probable cause to believe the respondent has
engaged or is engaging in an unlawful employment practice and (2) there is a failure to
reach an agreement to remedy and eliminate the practice. MCCR may also elect to have
the claims asserted within the complaint determined in a civil action brought on its own
behalf under the same conditions. On a finding that discrimination occurred, the court may
provide the remedies specified above. A complainant may also file a private civil action
against the respondent under specified circumstances. In addition to the remedies specified
above, the court may award punitive damages in specified circumstances. Pursuant to
§ 20-1015 of the State Government Article, a court may award the prevailing party in a
civil action reasonable attorney’s fees, expert witness fees, and costs.
Maryland’s Medical Cannabis Program
The Natalie M. LaPrade Medical Cannabis Commission is responsible for implementation
of the State’s medical cannabis program, which is intended to make medical cannabis
available to qualifying patients in a safe and effective manner. The program allows for the
licensure of growers, processors, and dispensaries and the registration of their agents, as
well as registration of independent testing laboratories and their agents. There is a
framework to certify health care providers (including physicians, dentists, podiatrists,
nurse practitioners, nurse midwives, and physician assistants), qualifying patients, and their
caregivers to provide qualifying patients with medical cannabis legally under State law via
written certification.
A “qualifying patient” is an individual who has been provided a written certification by a
certifying provider in accordance with a bona fide provider-patient relationship.
Additionally, if younger than age 18, a qualifying patient must have a caregiver. A
qualifying patient with a written certification can generally obtain a 30-day supply of
medical cannabis.
Maryland’s medical cannabis program statute cannot be construed to authorize any
individual to engage in, and does not prevent the imposition of any civil, criminal, or other
penalties for, the following:
 undertaking any task under the influence of marijuana or cannabis, when doing so
would constitute negligence or professional malpractice;
 operating, navigating, or being in control of any motor vehicle, aircraft, or boat
while under the influence of marijuana or cannabis; or
 smoking marijuana or cannabis in any public place, in a motor vehicle, on private
property that is rented and subject to a policy that prohibits smoking marijuana or
cannabis on the premises, or on private property that is subject to a policy that
prohibits smoking marijuana or cannabis on the property of an attached dwelling,
as adopted by specified entities of a condominium regime or homeowners
SB 504/ Page 3
 association (however, the law establishes an exception for vaporizing medical
cannabis on private property).
Further, there is no immunity from criminal prosecution for a person who violates medical
cannabis laws that regulate or prohibit the use, possession, dispensing, distribution, or
promotion of controlled dangerous substances, dangerous drugs, detrimental drugs, or
harmful drugs, or any conspiracy or attempt to commit any of those offenses.
However, among other specified individuals, a qualifying patient or caregiver acting in
accordance with State law may not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or any civil or
administrative penalty, including a civil penalty or disciplinary action by a professional
licensing board, or be denied any right or privilege, for the medical use of or possession of
medical cannabis.
State Fiscal Effect: General fund expenditure likely increase at least minimally for
MCCR. MCCR advises that it does not currently investigate this type of discrimination.
Although MCCR receives federal reimbursement for investigating complaints related to
employment discrimination from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
MCCR advises that it would not be able to receive federal reimbursement for any expenses
incurred relating to investigating medical cannabis complaints. Accordingly, MCCR needs
to ensure that investigating any additional cases regarding medical cannabis does not
negatively impact its case closure rate, which may impact federal funding. Although
existing staff can investigate a small number of additional cases, an additional investigator
may be required to the extent that MCCR receives a large number of complaints. For
illustrative purposes only, if an additional investigator is required, general fund
expenditures increase by approximately $80,000 annually. Additional expenditures may
also be incurred for costs associated with training and education.
The Department of Budget and Management indicates that the State, as an employer,
already complies with the bill’s provisions.
Local Fiscal Effect: To the extent that local government employers do not already comply
with the bill’s provisions, changes to employment discrimination policies may be required.
Though local government employers may be subject to additional employment
discrimination complaints under the bill, these operational impacts can likely be managed
with existing resources.
Small Business Effect: Small business owners may be subject to monetary penalties based
on employment discrimination complaints under the bill. Employers with at least
15 employees may need to adopt policies and procedures in order to ensure that employees
do not perform their duties while impaired by medical cannabis.
SB 504/ Page 4
 Additional Information
Prior Introductions: HB 1239 of 2019, a similar bill, was withdrawn prior to receiving a
hearing in the House Economic Matters Committee.
Designated Cross File: None.
Information Source(s): Maryland Commission on Civil Rights; Baltimore City; Harford
and Montgomery counties; City of College Park; Department of Budget and Management;
Department of Legislative Services
Fiscal Note History: First Reader - February 6, 2021
rh/jkb
Analysis by: Tyler Allard Direct Inquiries to:
(410) 946-5510
(301) 970-5510
SB 504/ Page 5


Statutes affected:
Text - First - Discrimination in Employment – Use of Medical Cannabis – Prohibition: 20-606 State Government