American Jurisprudence  

Track Chair/s: Ian Rassman, Joshua Bauchner, Trisha Zulic

​

The American Jurisprudence Track examines how courts, judges, attorneys, and law-enforcement professionals are navigating the rapidly evolving legal issues surrounding cannabis, hemp, impaired driving, workplace disputes, civil liability, and constitutional criminal procedure. Sessions emphasize case law development, evidentiary standards, litigation strategy, forensic science interpretation, and real-world courtroom and field-enforcement challenges.

 

​

Cannabis Toxicology and Pharmacokinetics    

Session Chair/s: Robert  Fitzgerald

 

This session examines the complex scientific foundations of cannabis toxicology and pharmacokinetics, with emphasis on how different delivery systems influence absorption, metabolism, and delectability. The discussion will explore the implications for impairment assessment, forensic toxicology, and regulatory frameworks.

​

​

From Rulemaking to Reality: Synthesizing the Legal Impact on the Cannabis Industry 

Session Chair/s: Ian Rassman   

 

This facilitated session synthesizes key regulatory and policy themes emerging across the country. It provides an integrated analysis of how cannabis laws are being developed, implemented, and adapted across federal, state, and local systems, and how these changes are impacting the cannabis industry.

​

Topics include:

Regulatory trends and policy evolution
Implementation challenges across jurisdictions
Industry compliance realities
Gaps between regulatory intent and practical outcomes

Designed for regulators, policymakers, researchers, and industry professionals, this session delivers a comprehensive view of where cannabis policy is heading—and where current frameworks may require recalibrating.

​

​

Novel Approaches to Detecting Cannabis-related Impairment: Challenges and Opportunities    

Session Chair/s: Thomas Marcotte

​

As cannabis legalization expands, the field faces a central scientific and public health challenge: how to detect acute impairment, particularly relating to road safety, in a robust manner that balances sensitivity and specificity. Unlike alcohol, THC concentrations in blood or oral fluid do not reliably reflect functional impairment, and current roadside approaches such as standardized field sobriety tests have shown limitations. This symposium brings together leaders who are exploring novel methods to measure impairments associated with cannabis use. Methods, evaluated via controlled clinical trials, include 1) the use of mobile devices (tablets, phones) to directly assess cognitive abilities that putatively relate to driving ability, 2) portable functional near-infrared spectroscopy to identify prefrontal cortical signatures of acute THC intoxication, and 3) changes in pupillary and ocular functioning following THC use. The session will conclude with a panel discussion summarizing the successes, and limitations, of work to date, including accounting for individual differences in non-intoxicated individuals, identifying instrument form factors that facilitate use in the field, and the long road to acceptance and implementation within the legal arena.

​

​

Pharmacokinetics and Toxicology of Cannabinoids

Session Chair/s: Robert Fitzgerald, Ray Suhandynata

 

As cannabis legalization has expanded, many novel cannabis product types have emerged, and the co-use of cannabis with other intoxicating substances has increased. Simultaneously, the incidence of driving under the influence of cannabis has increased. Thus, controlled research to quantify cannabinoids across various biological matrices (e.g., blood, oral fluid, urine), product formulations/routes of administration, and under solo versus co-use conditions, is vital to public safety, as it can inform policies related to workplace drug testing and impairment detection. This symposium brings together leading researchers studying these critical issues using controlled human laboratory procedures. Specific research in this symposium will include: 1) studies on the impact of cannabis product formulation/route of administration on cannabinoid pharmacokinetics in blood, urine, and oral fluid, 2) innovative research quantifying cannabinoids in exhaled breath, and 3) research elucidating how other potentially intoxicating drugs, measured via broad spectrum drug screening and quantitative analysis, influence the pharmacokinetics and toxicology of cannabinoids. The session will conclude with a panel discussion summarizing how cannabis toxicology data is currently used in the US, the current state of science on this subject including current limitations to using toxicology data to infer impairment, lessons learned from other countries with differing cannabis policies in this area, and possible future research directions and solutions to current limitations.
 

​

​

Rescheduled, Not Safe for Work: Cannabis, Schedule III, and the New Fault Lines in Employment Law  

Session Chair/s: Trisha Zulic

 

Cannabis’s move from Schedule I to Schedule III has immediate and unresolved consequences for employers, HR professionals, and workplace policymakers. While rescheduling signals federal recognition of medical value, it does not legalize cannabis, eliminate impairment risks, or harmonize conflicting federal and state employment rules.
This session examines how the schedule change affects workplace drug policies, accommodation requests, safety-sensitive positions, and employee discipline. Panelists will analyze the growing gap between evolving medical and scientific understandings of cannabis and the blunt tools employers continue to rely on—urinalysis, zero-tolerance policies, and outdated impairment assumptions. The discussion will address how Schedule III status may influence ADA accommodation analysis, wrongful termination claims, unemployment benefits, workers’ compensation, and collective bargaining agreements, particularly in states with employee-protective cannabis statutes. Speakers will also explore whether rescheduling alters employer liability exposure, federal contractor obligations, and HR risk management strategies in regulated industries. Rather than offering simplistic compliance checklists, this session provides a doctrinal and practical framework for navigating cannabis in the modern workplace—clarifying what the law now requires, what it still prohibits, and where litigation risk is most likely to emerge.

​

​

United States v. Hemp: State and Federal Conflicts Over Hemp Regulation

Session Chair/s: Joshua Bauchner

 

This interactive mock mini-trial will place the federal budget amendment effectively banning most hemp products squarely in the courtroom. Framed as a condensed federal bench trial, the session will test whether Congress can lawfully eliminate a multibillion-dollar hemp industry through an appropriations rider scheduled to take effect in 2026.

Participants will watch counsel litigate core issues raised by the federal hemp ban, including statutory conflict with the 2018 Farm Bill, constitutional limits on Congress’s appropriations power, due process and vagueness concerns, and the practical consequences of redefining “hemp” through budgetary language rather than substantive legislation. The proceeding will feature opening statements, targeted witness examinations (scientific, regulatory, and economic), and focused legal argument before a presiding judge.

Designed for legal scholars, regulators, industry counsel, and compliance professionals, the session emphasizes doctrine over advocacy theatrics. The goal is not to predict litigation outcomes, but to illuminate how courts are likely to analyze standing, ripeness, preemption, and separation-of-powers arguments once enforcement begins.

Audience members will gain a clear understanding of how the federal hemp ban could be challenged, what defenses the government is likely to raise, and why timing and procedural posture may determine whether such cases ever reach the merits. This mock mini-trial offers a rare opportunity to see complex cannabis and hemp law questions tested in real-time, in a format that bridges scholarship, litigation strategy, and policy consequences.

​