Fed. Law Preempts Medical Marijuana Treatment for Minn. Worker

Minneapolis, MN (WorkersCompensation.com) – Headlines from around the country over the past few years have suggested that marijuana is legal in its recreational or medicinal forms.

And while that might be practically true in terms of punishment someone might receive, as a worker discovered in Brandia v. LKQ Minn., No. WC22-6455 (Minn. W.C.C. 10/24/22), nothing passed at the state level can do away with federal law, which still outlaws marijuana in any form.

A worker experienced an injury to her right elbow on the job. She underwent several medical treatments to alleviate her symptoms, but those treatments did not relieve her ongoing pain.

After undergoing a successful trial of a spinal cord stimulator, the employee heeded a doctor’s suggestion to try medical cannabis to obtain further pain relief and to stop using opioids.

A workers’ compensation judge granted the employee’s request for reimbursement of her out-of-pocket expenses associated with medical cannabis, finding that it was reasonable and necessary to treat the worker’s injury.

Two years later, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued decisions in which it concluded that the federal Controlled Substances Act preempted the obligation of an employer to pay for medical cannabis under state law.

After those decisions, the worker submitted a claim to the employer and insurer seeking reimbursement for medical cannabis. Based on the Minnesota Supreme Court’s rulings, the employer and insurer refused to pay.

The employee filed a claim seeking payment of the denied reimbursement. A workers’ compensation judge concluded that the requested reimbursement was not compensable and was barred as a matter of law.

Preemption

The worker appealed to the workers’ compensation court of appeals.

Looking to the Supreme Court rulings, the court in this case explained that the Controlled Substances Act preempts an order under the state’s medical cannabis program, known as the THC Therapeutic Research Act, that obligates an employer to reimburse an employee for the cost of medical cannabis.

As a result, the court sided with the employer and insurer.

“As medical cannabis is the subject of the employee’s claim for reimbursement, the preemption of reimbursement applies here,” the court wrote. “No error of law was committed by the compensation judge in declining to consider the employee’s argument regarding the CBD content of the medical cannabis obtained by the employee.”

Thus, the employer and insurer did not have to compensate the worker for medical cannabis costs.

Keep current on compliance news and information from Minnesota and the rest of the U.S. on WorkCompResearch

Share This Article: