The California State Assembly passed a bill last month that would prevent state and local law enforcement from helping federal agencies enforce marijuana laws without securing a court order, Jurist reports. But as California and other states have legalized marijuana "many lawmakers have become concerned by the anti-marijuana policies promoted by Attorney General Jeff Sessions."

"At least eight states and the District of Columbia legalized recreational marijuana via the ballot box last November for adults 21 and older," the Daily Chronic reports. And Congress recently dealt Session’s anti-marijuana crusade a blow by declining to give him funding to fight states that have enacted laws to legalize marijuana, Newsweek reports.

A U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration report also noted no deaths from marijuana use last year compared to 13,000 deaths from heroin overdoses. And there is support across party lines for states that have legalized marijuana, but that has not dissuaded Sessions. 

"Marijuana possession is still a federal offence and Sessions had been considering whether he should enforce the federal U.S. Controlled Substances Act against users of the drug, which is [ranked] higher than cocaine and methamphetamines," Newsweek reports.

The federal prohibition of marijuana also means employers can refuse to hire someone who uses it, The Washington Post reports. McLane, a Colorado grocery supply chain that relies on its workers to drive forklifts and load heavy boxes, has had a tough time finding prospects to fill these jobs.

"Some weeks this year, 90% of applicants would test positive for something," automatically removing them from contention, says Laura Stephens, a human resources manager for the company in Denver. Colorado and Washington, the first states to legalize marijuana in 2012, had the biggest growth for positive testing.  

"Some employers are extremely worried about filling jobs," says Curtis Graves, the information resource manager at the Mountain States Employers Council, a business group in Colorado. "Work that is considered 'safety sensitive' typically requires that test, and that’s not changing."

Meanwhile some municipalities have acted with caution in how much leeway they should allow employees, Mass Live reports. Massachusetts is one of the states that has legalized recreational marijuana use, but the town of Ludlow has made clear that it won’t condone its use by its employees.

"For the avoidance of doubt, employees should be aware that the town considers marijuana to be illegal," says Carrie Ribeiro, Ludlow’s HR manager. While Ludlow will comply with the state law, it will not tolerate the drug’s use for its town employees while at work. "Obviously you can't come to work under the influence," Ribeiro said.

The town also will continue testing new employees, conduct tests after accidents that involve town workers and in instances of "reasonable suspicion," of drug use, Ribeiro noted, which could also involve testing. "So if anybody was to get into an accident--a vehicle accident, equipment accident, or whatever the case may be--they would go for testing,” she said.

HR should not be overly concerned as long as they have a clear drug-free policy, Jim Annis, president and CEO of The Applied Companies, writes for the Reno Gazette-Journal. Nevada is another state that has legalized recreational marijuana. 

But he does advise that HR consult with its attorneys because even with a stated drug-free policy in place, "that may not be the perception that employees have," Annis writes. His firm is an HR service provider.  "So, that is the first thing we suggest (aside from "ask your attorney") is that you need to prepare your employees," Annis writes. "An employer still has the right to have a drug-free workplace policy, and if you have one, have it reviewed by your attorney."

Additionally, employers should proactively educate employees and "be sure that any misconceptions about a free-for-all are addressed right now (the legalization is in effect now)," he writes. "If they did not use or possess at work, employers can still take action based on reasonable suspicion of intoxication, but be educated on how to implement that action."