Maryland Bill Would Allow Firefighters to Use Medical Cannabis Off-Duty

Legislation sparks fierce debate over public safety concerns

Published on Mar. 6, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The Maryland Senate is debating a bill that would allow firefighters and rescue workers to use medical cannabis while off-duty. Supporters argue it could help injured first responders avoid opioid addiction, while opponents raise concerns about public safety and the lack of a standard measure for impairment.

Why it matters

This legislation highlights the ongoing debate around medical cannabis use, particularly for professions that require quick reflexes and clear judgment. The bill aims to protect registered medical cannabis users from discrimination, but opponents worry it could compromise public safety.

The details

The bill, sponsored by Baltimore County Sen. Carl Jackson, would shield registered medical cannabis users from being disciplined or fired for using it off-duty. Supporters say it could help firefighters and other emergency workers avoid opioid addiction, which is common due to the physical and psychological stress of the job. However, opponents argue there is no standard measure to determine impairment from cannabis, and that having firefighters respond to emergencies with cannabis still in their system could be dangerous.

  • The Maryland Senate postponed a full vote on the bill until Friday to allow more time for discussion.
  • The bill passed the Senate last year but died in a House committee. This year, the House postponed a hearing on the measure until next week.

The players

Carl Jackson

Baltimore County Sen. Carl Jackson, D-District 8, is the sponsor of the bill that would shield registered medical cannabis users from being disciplined or fired for using it off-duty.

William Folden

Frederick County Sen. William Folden, R-District 4, voiced concerns about medical cannabis users potentially responding to emergencies with the substance still in their system.

Clarence Lam

Howard County Sen. Clarence Lam, D-District 12, argued that supervisors can be trained to gauge whether someone is impaired due to cannabis.

Dan Shaw

A public safety consultant who described the extreme physical and psychological stress that firefighters and rescue workers endure on the job.

Maryland Association of Counties

The Maryland Association of Counties opposes the bill.

Maryland Association of Firefighters

The Maryland Association of Firefighters opposes the bill.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“What inspired it was the firefighters who had come forward because of their dependency on using opioids.”

— Carl Jackson, State Senator (wbal.com)

“So, my concern is I get some guy and I'm having heart issues, and my heart issues go crazier because some dude sits down next to me and says, like, 'Yo man, relax, I'm going to take care of you.' I need really sharp responses. I need these people to be very keenly aware.”

— William Folden, State Senator (wbal.com)

“There are incidents where supervisors have to go through reasonable suspicion training, right? I've led some of these as well, where you're training supervisors to be able to gauge whether someone is impaired or not.”

— Clarence Lam, State Senator (wbal.com)

“From a resting heart rate, they are awoken by a loud bell and gong. Now, a resting heart rate is a maximum heart rate. They are now going to perform that job in 80 to 90 pounds of gear in a super-heated environment that is highly stressful and chaotic.”

— Dan Shaw, Public Safety Consultant (wbal.com)

What’s next

The Maryland Senate is scheduled to hold a full vote on the bill on Friday, which will also give the sponsor time to research whether fire truck drivers will have to undergo urine testing. The House has also postponed a hearing on the measure until next week.

The takeaway

This debate highlights the ongoing tension between protecting the rights of medical cannabis users and ensuring public safety, particularly for professions that require quick reflexes and clear judgment. The lack of a standard measure for impairment remains a key sticking point, and the outcome of this legislation could set a precedent for how other states approach this issue.