Is it legal to discriminate due to the medicine used to treat a medical condition?Is it legal to discriminate in employment based on needing future sponsorship?Legal to treat customers differently based on where they live?What exactly is a “major medical condition”?Is it legal in California to require extra behavior/communication from a single employee?Is it legal for a bank to discriminate against someone by the services they offer based upon their marital status?In UK, can religious institutions discriminate against the sexual orientation of their own clergy?“due process” hearing concerning returning to work after medical leaveIs there a legal definition of race in the US?How does the US legal system treat car accidents with pedestrian casualties?What questions can be asked in interview? Can questions that can be used to illegally discriminate be asked?

Is there a problem with hiding "forgot password" until it's needed?

How to deal with or prevent idle in the test team?

What to do when my ideas aren't chosen, when I strongly disagree with the chosen solution?

How do ultrasonic sensors differentiate between transmitted and received signals?

Freedom of speech and where it applies

Did US corporations pay demonstrators in the German demonstrations against article 13?

Latex for-and in equation

What will be the benefits of Brexit?

Why is delta-v is the most useful quantity for planning space travel?

Simple image editor tool to draw a simple box/rectangle in an existing image

A social experiment. What is the worst that can happen?

Can the electrostatic force be infinite in magnitude?

How to prevent YouTube from showing already watched videos?

Is it possible to build a CPA Secure encryption scheme which remains secure even when the encryption of secret key is given?

Why isn't KTEX's runway designation 10/28 instead of 9/27?

Installing PowerShell on 32-bit Kali OS fails

word describing multiple paths to the same abstract outcome

Modern Day Chaucer

What do you call the infoboxes with text and sometimes images on the side of a page we find in textbooks?

Is the next prime number always the next number divisible by the current prime number, except for any numbers previously divisible by primes?

What is Sitecore Managed Cloud?

I2C signal and power over long range (10meter cable)

Stereotypical names

Is there enough fresh water in the world to eradicate the drinking water crisis?



Is it legal to discriminate due to the medicine used to treat a medical condition?


Is it legal to discriminate in employment based on needing future sponsorship?Legal to treat customers differently based on where they live?What exactly is a “major medical condition”?Is it legal in California to require extra behavior/communication from a single employee?Is it legal for a bank to discriminate against someone by the services they offer based upon their marital status?In UK, can religious institutions discriminate against the sexual orientation of their own clergy?“due process” hearing concerning returning to work after medical leaveIs there a legal definition of race in the US?How does the US legal system treat car accidents with pedestrian casualties?What questions can be asked in interview? Can questions that can be used to illegally discriminate be asked?













1















I will present two different scenarios. Lets say Bob has PTSD from his time in the military. He wants to become an FBI agent. Here are the following requirements from the FBI to qualify;



- Must be a U.S. citizen.
- Must be able to obtain a Top Secret clearance.
- Must complete form FD-887, Request for Access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI).
- Must pass an FBI polygraph examination.
- Must pass an FBI-administered urinalysis drug test.
- Must be in compliance with the FBI Employment Drug Policy:
- No use of marijuana within the last three years.
- No use of any other illegal drug in the past 10 years.
- No selling, distributing, manufacturing or transporting of any illegal drugs.
- No use of a prescription drug or a legally obtainable substance in a manner for which it was not intended within the last three years.

- Must never have been convicted of a felony.
- Must not be in default on a student loan insured by the U.S. government.
- Must be registered with the Selective Service System (males only, exceptions apply)


Scenario 1) Bob is prescribed a controlled narcotic for his PTSD condition.



Scenario 2) Bob is prescribed medical marijuana for his PTSD condition.



  • Is it legal to discriminate employment based off prescribed medicine in either situation?

  • If the employer wasn't the FBI, does it change the right to discriminate?









share|improve this question




























    1















    I will present two different scenarios. Lets say Bob has PTSD from his time in the military. He wants to become an FBI agent. Here are the following requirements from the FBI to qualify;



    - Must be a U.S. citizen.
    - Must be able to obtain a Top Secret clearance.
    - Must complete form FD-887, Request for Access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI).
    - Must pass an FBI polygraph examination.
    - Must pass an FBI-administered urinalysis drug test.
    - Must be in compliance with the FBI Employment Drug Policy:
    - No use of marijuana within the last three years.
    - No use of any other illegal drug in the past 10 years.
    - No selling, distributing, manufacturing or transporting of any illegal drugs.
    - No use of a prescription drug or a legally obtainable substance in a manner for which it was not intended within the last three years.

    - Must never have been convicted of a felony.
    - Must not be in default on a student loan insured by the U.S. government.
    - Must be registered with the Selective Service System (males only, exceptions apply)


    Scenario 1) Bob is prescribed a controlled narcotic for his PTSD condition.



    Scenario 2) Bob is prescribed medical marijuana for his PTSD condition.



    • Is it legal to discriminate employment based off prescribed medicine in either situation?

    • If the employer wasn't the FBI, does it change the right to discriminate?









    share|improve this question


























      1












      1








      1








      I will present two different scenarios. Lets say Bob has PTSD from his time in the military. He wants to become an FBI agent. Here are the following requirements from the FBI to qualify;



      - Must be a U.S. citizen.
      - Must be able to obtain a Top Secret clearance.
      - Must complete form FD-887, Request for Access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI).
      - Must pass an FBI polygraph examination.
      - Must pass an FBI-administered urinalysis drug test.
      - Must be in compliance with the FBI Employment Drug Policy:
      - No use of marijuana within the last three years.
      - No use of any other illegal drug in the past 10 years.
      - No selling, distributing, manufacturing or transporting of any illegal drugs.
      - No use of a prescription drug or a legally obtainable substance in a manner for which it was not intended within the last three years.

      - Must never have been convicted of a felony.
      - Must not be in default on a student loan insured by the U.S. government.
      - Must be registered with the Selective Service System (males only, exceptions apply)


      Scenario 1) Bob is prescribed a controlled narcotic for his PTSD condition.



      Scenario 2) Bob is prescribed medical marijuana for his PTSD condition.



      • Is it legal to discriminate employment based off prescribed medicine in either situation?

      • If the employer wasn't the FBI, does it change the right to discriminate?









      share|improve this question
















      I will present two different scenarios. Lets say Bob has PTSD from his time in the military. He wants to become an FBI agent. Here are the following requirements from the FBI to qualify;



      - Must be a U.S. citizen.
      - Must be able to obtain a Top Secret clearance.
      - Must complete form FD-887, Request for Access to Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI).
      - Must pass an FBI polygraph examination.
      - Must pass an FBI-administered urinalysis drug test.
      - Must be in compliance with the FBI Employment Drug Policy:
      - No use of marijuana within the last three years.
      - No use of any other illegal drug in the past 10 years.
      - No selling, distributing, manufacturing or transporting of any illegal drugs.
      - No use of a prescription drug or a legally obtainable substance in a manner for which it was not intended within the last three years.

      - Must never have been convicted of a felony.
      - Must not be in default on a student loan insured by the U.S. government.
      - Must be registered with the Selective Service System (males only, exceptions apply)


      Scenario 1) Bob is prescribed a controlled narcotic for his PTSD condition.



      Scenario 2) Bob is prescribed medical marijuana for his PTSD condition.



      • Is it legal to discriminate employment based off prescribed medicine in either situation?

      • If the employer wasn't the FBI, does it change the right to discriminate?






      united-states employment discrimination






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 4 hours ago







      Digital fire

















      asked 4 hours ago









      Digital fireDigital fire

      1,75411133




      1,75411133




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          1) Bob could disclose the PTSD condition and seek accommodation for it (in reality, controlled narcotics aren't actually used to treat PTSD but it isn't hard to imagine a situation where another controlled substance, e.g. ketamine, was used to treat this or some other Americans with Disabilities Act recognized disability and the absence of that disability was not a bona fide qualification of the job).



          The legal analysis in the case of the FBI (a federal government civilian civil service employer subject to special rules applicable to governmental employers), and a private employer, is not exactly the same, but it ends up in the same place.



          2) Medical marijuana is, as a matter of federal law an oxymoron, because it is a Class I controlled substance that as a matter of law (contrary to reasonable facts) has no medical applications, and the FBI is charged with enforcing this law (among other agencies), so medical marijuana would legally disqualify someone from FBI employment.



          In Colorado which has legal under state law medical marijuana, employers have been allowed to discriminate based upon medical marijuana use because an employer is at a minimum allowed to treat federal law as enforceable.



          It is conceivable that some U.S. state other than Colorado which allows medical marijuana at the state level might reach a different conclusion as a matter of state law on the employment discrimination point, but potentially, the employer could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on a pre-emption argument so it would be a tenuous legal position to take.






          share|improve this answer
























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "617"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38419%2fis-it-legal-to-discriminate-due-to-the-medicine-used-to-treat-a-medical-conditio%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            4














            1) Bob could disclose the PTSD condition and seek accommodation for it (in reality, controlled narcotics aren't actually used to treat PTSD but it isn't hard to imagine a situation where another controlled substance, e.g. ketamine, was used to treat this or some other Americans with Disabilities Act recognized disability and the absence of that disability was not a bona fide qualification of the job).



            The legal analysis in the case of the FBI (a federal government civilian civil service employer subject to special rules applicable to governmental employers), and a private employer, is not exactly the same, but it ends up in the same place.



            2) Medical marijuana is, as a matter of federal law an oxymoron, because it is a Class I controlled substance that as a matter of law (contrary to reasonable facts) has no medical applications, and the FBI is charged with enforcing this law (among other agencies), so medical marijuana would legally disqualify someone from FBI employment.



            In Colorado which has legal under state law medical marijuana, employers have been allowed to discriminate based upon medical marijuana use because an employer is at a minimum allowed to treat federal law as enforceable.



            It is conceivable that some U.S. state other than Colorado which allows medical marijuana at the state level might reach a different conclusion as a matter of state law on the employment discrimination point, but potentially, the employer could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on a pre-emption argument so it would be a tenuous legal position to take.






            share|improve this answer





























              4














              1) Bob could disclose the PTSD condition and seek accommodation for it (in reality, controlled narcotics aren't actually used to treat PTSD but it isn't hard to imagine a situation where another controlled substance, e.g. ketamine, was used to treat this or some other Americans with Disabilities Act recognized disability and the absence of that disability was not a bona fide qualification of the job).



              The legal analysis in the case of the FBI (a federal government civilian civil service employer subject to special rules applicable to governmental employers), and a private employer, is not exactly the same, but it ends up in the same place.



              2) Medical marijuana is, as a matter of federal law an oxymoron, because it is a Class I controlled substance that as a matter of law (contrary to reasonable facts) has no medical applications, and the FBI is charged with enforcing this law (among other agencies), so medical marijuana would legally disqualify someone from FBI employment.



              In Colorado which has legal under state law medical marijuana, employers have been allowed to discriminate based upon medical marijuana use because an employer is at a minimum allowed to treat federal law as enforceable.



              It is conceivable that some U.S. state other than Colorado which allows medical marijuana at the state level might reach a different conclusion as a matter of state law on the employment discrimination point, but potentially, the employer could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on a pre-emption argument so it would be a tenuous legal position to take.






              share|improve this answer



























                4












                4








                4







                1) Bob could disclose the PTSD condition and seek accommodation for it (in reality, controlled narcotics aren't actually used to treat PTSD but it isn't hard to imagine a situation where another controlled substance, e.g. ketamine, was used to treat this or some other Americans with Disabilities Act recognized disability and the absence of that disability was not a bona fide qualification of the job).



                The legal analysis in the case of the FBI (a federal government civilian civil service employer subject to special rules applicable to governmental employers), and a private employer, is not exactly the same, but it ends up in the same place.



                2) Medical marijuana is, as a matter of federal law an oxymoron, because it is a Class I controlled substance that as a matter of law (contrary to reasonable facts) has no medical applications, and the FBI is charged with enforcing this law (among other agencies), so medical marijuana would legally disqualify someone from FBI employment.



                In Colorado which has legal under state law medical marijuana, employers have been allowed to discriminate based upon medical marijuana use because an employer is at a minimum allowed to treat federal law as enforceable.



                It is conceivable that some U.S. state other than Colorado which allows medical marijuana at the state level might reach a different conclusion as a matter of state law on the employment discrimination point, but potentially, the employer could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on a pre-emption argument so it would be a tenuous legal position to take.






                share|improve this answer















                1) Bob could disclose the PTSD condition and seek accommodation for it (in reality, controlled narcotics aren't actually used to treat PTSD but it isn't hard to imagine a situation where another controlled substance, e.g. ketamine, was used to treat this or some other Americans with Disabilities Act recognized disability and the absence of that disability was not a bona fide qualification of the job).



                The legal analysis in the case of the FBI (a federal government civilian civil service employer subject to special rules applicable to governmental employers), and a private employer, is not exactly the same, but it ends up in the same place.



                2) Medical marijuana is, as a matter of federal law an oxymoron, because it is a Class I controlled substance that as a matter of law (contrary to reasonable facts) has no medical applications, and the FBI is charged with enforcing this law (among other agencies), so medical marijuana would legally disqualify someone from FBI employment.



                In Colorado which has legal under state law medical marijuana, employers have been allowed to discriminate based upon medical marijuana use because an employer is at a minimum allowed to treat federal law as enforceable.



                It is conceivable that some U.S. state other than Colorado which allows medical marijuana at the state level might reach a different conclusion as a matter of state law on the employment discrimination point, but potentially, the employer could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on a pre-emption argument so it would be a tenuous legal position to take.







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 3 hours ago

























                answered 4 hours ago









                ohwillekeohwilleke

                51.2k259131




                51.2k259131



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38419%2fis-it-legal-to-discriminate-due-to-the-medicine-used-to-treat-a-medical-conditio%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

                    Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?Space(n) not closed under Karp reductions - what about NTime(n)?Class P is closed under rotation?Prove or disprove that $NL$ is closed under polynomial many-one reductions$mathbfNC_2$ is closed under log-space reductionOn Karp reductionwhen can I know if a class (complexity) is closed under reduction (cook/karp)Check if class $PSPACE$ is closed under polyonomially space reductionIs NPSPACE also closed under polynomial-time reduction and under log-space reduction?Prove PSPACE is closed under complement?Prove PSPACE is closed under union?

                    Is my guitar’s action too high? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Strings too stiff on a recently purchased acoustic guitar | Cort AD880CEIs the action of my guitar really high?Μy little finger is too weak to play guitarWith guitar, how long should I give my fingers to strengthen / callous?When playing a fret the guitar sounds mutedPlaying (Barre) chords up the guitar neckI think my guitar strings are wound too tight and I can't play barre chordsF barre chord on an SG guitarHow to find to the right strings of a barre chord by feel?High action on higher fret on my steel acoustic guitar