PFT: Nevada Law Makes NFL Pot Ban Harder to Enforce

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... marijuana/

"Nevada, the new home in 2020 of the Raiders, has become the first state to prohibit employers from refusing to hire employees based on a failed marijuana test (with obvious exceptions for safety-sensitive jobs). This undoubtedly applies to the Raiders."

This could be like California's law saying NCAA athletes can profit from their own names. The NCAA, faced with jettisoning all its programs in California, instead went along with the new law nationwide.

It's a long time in coming to fix an archaic standard toward marijuana.

Is 'refusing to hire' the same as 'suspending when already employed'? Sounds like they're prohibiting employers from punishing behavior that happened when the person wasn't under their (job) control, which is different than prohibiting employers from punishing behavior that happens after they are already employees and therefore subject to those sort of rules.

GeekHawk":3n2cjspc said:

Is 'refusing to hire' the same as 'suspending when already employed'? Sounds like they're prohibiting employers from punishing behavior that happened when the person wasn't under their (job) control, which is different than prohibiting employers from punishing behavior that happens after they are already employees and therefore subject to those sort of rules.

Click to expand...

Here's the actual text: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/R ... /6191/Text

It does appear to exclude already existing employees grandfathered in with a contract or CBA. But then again, it's not clear as to how someone would be regarded if they weren't already under this. The wording of this particular law really could have been done better.

That said, this law is part of a trend: NYC and the state of Maine have already passed something similar. California or the PNW could be next. The trend is toward leaving people alone for pot when pot is legal in the venue.

I wonder if player contracts are viewed as "unemployed" during offseason? Just looking for a loophole.

ivotuk":ngias6i3 said:

I wonder if player contracts are viewed as "unemployed" during offseason? Just looking for a loophole.

Click to expand...

Marshawn's agent tweeted his latest contract, and it was up in March.

That said, I've heard too that if you haven't officially retired, you still are subject to tests, especially if you've been escalated in the drug program. Pete alluded to this in the Josh Gordon situation. His returning would be predicated on him proving clean to get a conditional reinstatement, same as before, even though no one's paying him.

"Refusing to hire" is not he same as "already employed with." Also the NFL is a league and not just based only out of Nevada. It's a league and for joining a league or being employed by a league you have to follow league rules. The thing is somewhat a can of worms. It will probably be fought out in the courts. But I think the NFL policy does have some legs to stand on.

Where does it end? Nevada makes steroids legal? If they did that for example. The Raiders players would all be on Roids and the other players would get tested and banned for performance enhancing drugs. Just think of the road this goes down. To be a league you need to have uniform rules across the league otherwise you are not a league with the same competitive edge across the board. There would be different advantages and disadvantages depending on the state. You can't run a league like that. It just wouldn't work at all.

I think the NFL changes the pot rule this offseason.
Jerruh Jones is tired of some of his players getting suspended for pot use, and has stated he intends to get that rule changed.

Sports Hernia":umvemxzy said:

I think the NFL changes the pot rule this offseason.
Jerruh Jones is tired of some of his players getting suspended for pot use, and has stated he intends to get that rule changed.

Click to expand...

Prices for Cocaine must have went up, Michael Irvin and the Dallas Jailbirds of that Era had a pretty good line on that stuff

I hope the new law gives the NFL an "excuse" to just scrap the pot test.

Any suspension can involve pot, so that's what people are assuming it usually is.

Teams and fans both get irate over SA-related suspensions because it could be just pot. And the vast majority doesn't think it's worth punishing people severely for just pot.