Medical marijuana

H

Hexagon

Guest
Hey guys, I am currently looking to begin flight training but had a few concerns about the medical aspect.

I no longer use cannabis and I understand that whatever diagnosis that got me the card could be an issue. I stopped using medical cannabis almost a year ago and surrendered my card to the state. What's the best way to go about obtaining a medical? Am I automatically going to have to go through the HIMS process?

Any information is appreciated and once again I do not use cannabis anymore.

Thanks guys
 
Without knowing what diagnosis for you the card, is impossible to say if it will be an issue. But you have to disclose diagnoses forever, so you're sick with that. On the other hand, the question about illegal drug use is limited to the past two years, so you might be well served to wait that time out before applying.
 
Lindberg said:
On the other hand, the question about illegal drug use is limited to the past two years, so you might be well served to wait that time out before applying.
Click to expand...

Would the Feds still consider it "illegal" if the use was pursuant to a medical marijuana card issued by the state?
 
SoCal 182 Driver said:
Would the Feds still consider it "illegal" if the use was pursuant to a medical marijuana card issued by the state?
Click to expand...

yes. It has always been and still is illegal at the federal level. They don’t care what your state permits as once you are a pilot you can fly in any state regardless of their stance on cannabis.
 
SoCal 182 Driver said:
Would the Feds still consider it "illegal" if the use was pursuant to a medical marijuana card issued by the state?
Click to expand...
They don't consider it "illegal," it is illegal. It's been federal policy since the Obama presidency to not devote resources to prosecuting marijuana use that's in accordance within the letter and spirit of state laws, but it's still illegal.
 
Do you want to do this as a living or just recreation? If not looking to fly for a living consider going the LSA route. There are a lot of fun planes that fit in the LSA category. If the FAA ever catches up in a few years with how some states are treating marijuana you could then look to getting a full ppl.
 
bbchien said:
The presence of a marijuana card at any time in the past 100% triggers the FAA substance evaluation….
Click to expand...

Which question requires the yes answer for this? 18n is limited to 2 years.

Or, it's a prescription and they'll know that you had it?

Oh, totally asking for a friend because such cards don't exist in NC.
 
Hexagon said:
What is the substance evaluation?
Click to expand...
After a period of proven (urine test program negative urines to determine that you are not impaired), a HIMS psychiatrist's evaluation.

And to Brian: It's a state document. So it's easy for the Feds to find it.
 
bflynn said:
Which question requires the yes answer for this? 18n is limited to 2 years.

Or, it's a prescription and they'll know that you had it?

Oh, totally asking for a friend because such cards don't exist in NC.
Click to expand...
You're required to report the condition that the marijuana was being used to treat, for one thing.
 
kmacht said:
Do you want to do this as a living or just recreation? If not looking to fly for a living consider going the LSA route. There are a lot of fun planes that fit in the LSA category. If the FAA ever catches up in a few years with how some states are treating marijuana you could then look to getting a full ppl.
Click to expand...
Until there's a valid test that provides the same results as for alcohol, doesn't matter what the Feds do, the FAA can still prohibit it's use.
 
midlifeflyer said:
And...?

Depending on the state, medical mj cards get issued for all sorts of things. So you report your back surgery and...
Click to expand...

What I had in mind was that the form asks for an explanation of the condition. I have always assumed that this was supposed to include explaining how the condition was treated, i.e., mentioning the MJ use which according to bbchien would trigger an FAA substance evaluation. Am I mistaken?
 
Palmpilot said:
What I had in mind was that the form asks for an explanation of the condition. I have always assumed that this was supposed to include explaining how the condition was treated, i.e., mentioning the MJ use which according to bbchien would trigger an FAA substance evaluation. Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
You are not. The evaluation then occurs.
 
Palmpilot said:
What I had in mind was that the form asks for an explanation of the condition. I have always assumed that this was supposed to include explaining how the condition was treated, i.e., mentioning the MJ use which according to bbchien would trigger an FAA substance evaluation. Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
Dunno.

I've had back surgery and a hip replacement. The medication I was prescribed for post surgical pain management never came up.
 
kmacht said:
Do you want to do this as a living or just recreation? If not looking to fly for a living consider going the LSA route. There are a lot of fun planes that fit in the LSA category. If the FAA ever catches up in a few years with how some states are treating marijuana you could then look to getting a full ppl.
Click to expand...

Get high and fly? :D
 
kmacht said:
Do you want to do this as a living or just recreation? If not looking to fly for a living consider going the LSA route. There are a lot of fun planes that fit in the LSA category. If the FAA ever catches up in a few years with how some states are treating marijuana you could then look to getting a full ppl.
Click to expand...

I'm looking to make a career out of this so I'm am not willing to do anything that will potential ruin that in the future. I have considered the LSA route but for the time, money and limitations that come with I would rather go for my ppl.
 
So if you live in Colorado or visit there, and you have a PPL, do you have to stay out of the dispensaries?
 
bbchien said:
After a period of proven (urine test program negative urines to determine that you are not impaired), a HIMS psychiatrist's evaluation.

And to Brian: It's a state document. So it's easy for the Feds to find it.
Click to expand...

Does all past drug use result in going through the HIMS program?
 
Daleandee said:
Get high and fly? :D
Click to expand...

Not in the least. The poster said he no longer uses it. LSA would just be a way to get flying without having to jump through the medical hoops. I don’t advocate anyone fly while under the influence of any drug, legal or not.
 
Palmpilot said:
What I had in mind was that the form asks for an explanation of the condition. I have always assumed that this was supposed to include explaining how the condition was treated, i.e., mentioning the MJ use which according to bbchien would trigger an FAA substance evaluation. Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
All I've ever put in the explanation field was the diagnosis or condition that caused me to answer "yes," and a date. And then I've answered whatever questions the AME asked. This is probably where doing a consult and having the right AME is a good thing.
 
kmacht said:
Not in the least. The poster said he no longer uses it. LSA would just be a way to get flying without having to jump through the medical hoops. I don’t advocate anyone fly while under the influence of any drug, legal or not.
Click to expand...

I'm certain of that ...just rattling the cage a little! That's what the smiley was about ... :)
 
Gonna take issue with the above just a little…

A normal persons version of “honesty” is a bad idea. What you want is the FAA’s version of “administratively accurate.”

They don’t do what they do for the sake of the public’s safety. They do what they do to avoid risk to themselves. This usually does result in things being quite safe for the public, but in a very over reaching way.

VERY few Feds are lawyers, but they all “interpret” law, many times incorrectly, or they just aren’t sure. This results in a lot of pain for you, the customer, without practical recourse.

So, however you feel comfortable doing so, find someone who can interpret their administrative requirements, and comply completely. There is basically no question of “if” at that point. There are heroin addicted airline pilots flying around. What, you may ask, do they have that you may not? An AMAZING administrative staff.
 
The medical exam part of the process is not far from fog-a-mirror, not often an issue.

The part that gets people in trouble is that the rest of the appointment is really a medical audit.

It's a 3-step process.

1) Read the question carefully
2) Answer the question honestly
3) Shut-up

Not enough info to answer this question definitely, but on the surface:

MJ is illegal to the feds, period. So it's a 2-year look-back. You might be wise to wait a year and let it scroll off.

There is no question about a "card".

Not sure if the card is issued by a Medical professional. It would be reportable for 3 years if it was.

The biggest question would be why. What was the diagnosis. It might be a lifetime question or a 3 year question, or a "currently" question.

Just like an IRS audit. If they ask for your receipts for Nov 22, you provide them all. But it would not be wise to give them your Dec 22 receipts.

Compliance and honesty are good guiderails. It is not wise to answer questions not asked though.
 
All other considerations aside- federal law has always trumped state law.

In Arkansas, in 1957- racial segregation was “legal” under state law. Federal law trumped that, and ike sent the 101st airborne in when Fabius had activated the national guard there.

In 1967 Virginia , racially mixed marriages were illegal- until federal law said they weren’t.

Etc.
 
SFDukie said:
All other considerations aside- federal law has always trumped state law.
Click to expand...
No, that's far from true. There has to be some Constitutional authority to preempt local legislation. Tenth amendment stops that. The feds get pretty broad authority on aviation via the commerce clause. As far as drug laws go, neither the state nor federal preempt each other. They are both in effect.
 
flyingron said:
No, that's far from true. There has to be some Constitutional authority to preempt local legislation. Tenth amendment stops that. The feds get pretty broad authority on aviation via the commerce clause. As far as drug laws go, neither the state nor federal preempt each other. They are both in effect.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected. I should have known better than to make a sweeping pronouncement
Better phrased- a federal prohibition trumps lack of a same by a state.
 
flyingron said:
No, that's far from true. There has to be some Constitutional authority to preempt local legislation. Tenth amendment stops that. The feds get pretty broad authority on aviation via the commerce clause. As far as drug laws go, neither the state nor federal preempt each other. They are both in effect.
Click to expand...
The constitutional authority to preempt local legislation is the Supremacy Clause. There's no authority needed on a case-by-case basis. If federal and state law conflict, the state law is invalid. Even if state and federal law don't directly conflict, federal law can preempt state law even Congress has either expressly or implicitly indicated an intent to do so.

As relevant to this thread, marijuana is illegal in the US. Any state law that says otherwise is preempted. The feds choose when they want to enforce those laws, and when they do, the conflicting state law is no defense.
 
Lindberg said:
The constitutional authority to preempt local legislation is the Supremacy Clause. There's no authority needed on a case-by-case basis. If federal and state law conflict, the state law is invalid. Even if state and federal law don't directly conflict, federal law can preempt state law even Congress has either expressly or implicitly indicated an intent to do so.

As relevant to this thread, marijuana is illegal in the US. Any state law that says otherwise is preempted. The feds choose when they want to enforce those laws, and when they do, the conflicting state law is no defense.
Click to expand...
Um, no, that's not what the Supremacy Clause says. It says that if the federal government has constitutional authority for something, the states can't interfere with their exercise of that. It doesn't give the feds blanket authority to preempt any local law thay want. In fact, the Supreme Court in the 1930's and 40's limited the displacement of state laws.

None of that applies here. None of the states that have legalized Marijuana are in conflict of federal drug laws, they just don't have a "dual federalism" because the only law that applies there is the federal one.
 
flyingron said:
...if the federal government has constitutional authority for something, the states can't interfere with their exercise of that.
Click to expand...
Of course, I don't see anything in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to regulate what drugs people choose to use, or states choose to allow. The feds have done far too much in the name of "interstate commerce" because somebody "might" ship something across state lines.

Article 10: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

They absolutely have the right to restrict what drugs pilots may use while or before flying, though, as the airspace they're flying through is the avenue of interstate commerce.
 
Dana said:
Of course, I don't see anything in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to regulate what drugs people choose to use, or states choose to allow. The feds have done far too much in the name of "interstate commerce" because somebody "might" ship something across state lines.
Click to expand...
They stretch “interstate commerce” to its limits. Example: When I was in law enforcement, we arrested a gang member for brandishing a shotgun at his neighbors. The DA notified ATF, who took the case, since he was a convicted felon (long rap sheet filled with violent crimes, never should’ve been loose and feral in the first place).

The ATF agent on the case explained to me how they had jurisdiction under the commerce clause. The shotgun was a Remington, manufactured in New York, and was illegally possessed in California. He said that even if the gun was domestic to the state of possession, all they had to do was show that one component - a screw or spring - crossed state lines and money was exchanged.

Same theory with federal jurisdiction on drugs.

That case really cemented my jaundiced eye towards, and distrust in, the federal government. Especially when the US Attorney prosecuting the case completely blew it at the trial and the defendant was acquitted.
 
Dana said:
Of course, I don't see anything in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to regulate what drugs people choose to use, or states choose to allow. The feds have done far too much in the name of "interstate commerce" because somebody "might" ship something across state lines.

Article 10: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

They absolutely have the right to restrict what drugs pilots may use while or before flying, though, as the airspace they're flying through is the avenue of interstate commerce.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree. I was arguing the incorrect blanket statement made that "FEDERAL LAW ALWAYS TRUMPS STATE LAW" which is patently incorrect.

Again, there's no "conflict" here. Perhaps if the state tried to enact a law barring the feds from enforcing their drug laws, you'd have a situation where the supremacy clause would invalidate the state law. But just because there is dual sovereignty and one government decides to make something illegal and the ohter doesn't, doesn't mean you can't be prosecuted by the first.
 
Back
Top