A quadriplegic man terminated from his job for medical marijuana use presented his case to the Colorado Supreme Court this week.

Six justices heard oral arguments in the case during an hour-long proceeding at the Ralph Carr Judicial Complex in Denver on Tuesday, Sept. 30. Brandon Coats filed the lawsuit after he was fired as a telephone customer service representative at Dish Network in 2010. Despite a lack of any evidence that he was impaired, Coats was immediately terminated after testing positive for cannabis during a random drug test.

“We are not arguing that (marijuana use) is a constitutional right, but we do argue that it is a lawful activity,” his attorney, Michael Evans, told justices on Tuesday.

A quadriplegic who suffers from seizures and spasms, Coats is a registered medical marijuana patient under Colorado law.

Evans said his client was never reprimanded during his three-year employment with Dish Network, or accused of being under the influence of marijuana while on the job.

Questioned by Supreme Court Justice Gregory Hobbs whether Dish Network had a zero-tolerance drug policy, Evans said a lower court found the company’s policy was “wanting.”

“He was not using marijuana at work,” said Evans.

Under Colorado’s Medical Marijuana Act, Evans argued the statute was state specific, and therefore not subject to interpretation and enforcement by federal law.

“This is truly a unique situation,” said Evans.

Meghan Martinez reminded justices that her client, Dish Network, neither wanted the court to endorse nor indict the state’s medical marijuana law. She said the company had a simple zero-tolerance drug policy.

“He smoked marijuana while at home, then crossed the threshold when he came to work,” said Martinez.

Martinez maintained that since Coats tested positive for THC at work, then he was under the influence of marijuana while on the job. She said company policy bars employees from appearing at work with prohibited substances.

“It doesn’t matter if he’s impaired or not,” said Martinez. “It’s a violation.”

Martinez further explained there were no provisions under the Medical Marijuana Act that required employers to accommodate registered medical marijuana patients.

She added marijuana remained illegal under federal guidelines; therefore, it must remain outlawed in Colorado.

Representing the state, Michael Francisco reiterated Martinez federal prohibition argument to justices, citing the case should easily be resolved. He added it would be absurd to hold employers responsible for employees who violate federal law.

Two lower courts have upheld Coats’ dismissal based on the premise that marijuana is illegal under federal law.

The Colorado Supreme Court has taken the lawsuit under advisement. The ultimate issues at stake is the ambiguous definition of “lawful,” and whether medical marijuana patients should be protected under state law.

Tuesday’s oral arguments were live-streamed on the Internet.

tbaker@cortezjournal.com