Clarence Cocroft, owner of a cannabis dispensary in Olive Branch, Mississippi, is pursuing legal action to gain the ability to advertise his medical cannabis business more widely. Despite the legalization of medical cannabis in the state, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a ban by the Mississippi State Department of Health that restricts broad advertising for medical cannabis products.
A spokesperson from the Department of Health stated that neither the Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH) nor the Mississippi Medical Cannabis Program (MMCP) would comment on the court’s ruling.
Current Advertising Limitations
Under state law, the Mississippi Department of Health and the Department of Revenue are empowered to regulate the advertising practices for medical cannabis businesses. As it stands, businesses in this sector face significant restrictions. Permitted advertising methods include listings in business directories, advertisements in medical publications, sponsorship of non-profit events, maintaining a website, and using social media accounts, as well as logos that can depict cannabis images.
In response to these restrictive advertising rules, Cocroft has initiated a lawsuit challenging the state’s position to allow for broader advertising channels typically available to other businesses.
Legal Challenges and Their Implications
On Friday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirmed the state’s advertising ban, citing the ongoing federal prohibition against marijuana as a basis for the decision. The court ruled that advertisements related to medical marijuana do not qualify for First Amendment protections due to the federal criminalization of the substance.
Cocroft aims to expand his advertising options to include magazines, newspapers, and social media platforms. In a statement from the Institute for Justice, he remarked, “Upholding this ban makes it incredibly difficult for me to find potential customers and to educate people about Mississippi’s medical marijuana program. I remain committed to continuing this fight so my business can be treated the same as any other legal business in Mississippi.”
Potential for Appeal
Despite this setback, Cocroft’s legal team, led by attorney Katrin Marquez, is considering requesting a rehearing from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals or an en banc review involving all judges. An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is also possible.
Marquez emphasized the importance of advertising for any business owner, arguing that with the state now permitting the sale of medical cannabis, businesses in this market should enjoy the same advertising rights as other legal businesses, such as casinos and bars. “If a business is legal at the state level, the state cannot prevent people from discussing that business,” stated Senior Attorney Ari Bargil.
Impact of Location and Visibility
One of the critical challenges facing Cocroft is the location of his dispensary in an industrial area with low traffic, making it difficult to attract customers. “He can’t have ads that direct people in how to get to his location even though it’s very hard to find,” Marquez explained.
She further argued that First Amendment protections should apply to legal businesses, asserting that Mississippi cannot use federal law to create a legal market for a product while simultaneously limiting discourse around it. However, the court maintained its stance, stating that a state’s authority to ban commercial speech is tied to the illegal status of the underlying activity.
In summation, while Cocroft’s lawsuit highlights the ongoing complexities within Mississippi’s medical cannabis framework, the Fifth Circuit’s ruling reinforces the limitations still faced by businesses in this emerging market.