Q1:

In Coats v. DISH Network, the Colorado Supreme Court held that an employer in Colorado may fire an employee for using marijuana (even if done legally with a medical marijuana card) on his or her own time away from work premises, if such usage violates the company's drug policy. The Court reasoned that because using marijuana violates federal law, employees are not protected by Colorado's "lawful activities statute."

How does the Court's ruling relate to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution?

Q2:

Marijuana usage in some form (for recreational or medicinal purposes) is legal in 28 States. However, the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) lists marijuana as a Schedule I drug, meaning that federal law designates it as having no medical accepted use, a high risk of abuse, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. Therefore, the use, possession or manufacture of marijuana is a federal crime unless used as part of a federally-approved research project. The CSA also conflicts with results of recent federal research projects that show marijuana may have medical benefits for some health conditions.

How does the CSA and the State laws relate to federalism? What should be the next steps are to address the inconsistency between the CSA and federal agency positions?

Q3:

Anti-discrimination laws are in the headlines a lot lately. Find a news article or case involving discrimination against someone in a protected class under Title VII. What happened? Is the discrimination a form of disparate treatment or disparate impact? If it was a case, what was the result? What should have been done differently or could be done to address the underlying discrimination?