[basch]

Nearly any amount of intoxication is vaguely illegal under disorderly conduct. It’s a catch all they can apply whenever. Fighting it and winning still costs time and money.

So sure, the act of consuming might be legal, but having consumed isn’t.

[gruez]

>Nearly any amount of intoxication is vaguely illegal under disorderly conduct.

Isn't that limited to public spaces? If you're getting high in private you should be fine?

[falcor84]

As I understand it, the issue is only about showing up to work with any level of drugs in your system, even if there aren't any actual signs of you being intoxicated.

[Wytwwww]

But that's just a policy some companies have, it has nothing to do with legality.

[chimeracoder]

> Nearly any amount of intoxication is vaguely illegal under disorderly conduct. It’s a catch all they can apply whenever. Fighting it and winning still costs time and money.

This is a weak argument. Almost nobody is getting prosecuted for "disorderly conduct" when under the influence of marijuana as a proxy for marijuana consumption. And even if they were, the connection between that and employer drug tests is extremely tenuous.