Massachusetts Marijuana Testing Bill Advances
Massachusetts House Bill 2179 signals a potential shift away from pre-employment marijuana screening, limiting employers’ ability to deny jobs based on cannabis test results and emphasizing impairment over past use. Read more on what the bill would mean for employers, how it fits into a broader national trend, and why HR and talent leaders should reassess drug testing policies now.
Massachusetts may be on the verge of a significant shift in how employers approach marijuana screening. A bill that would narrow the scope of pre-employment cannabis testing has advanced through committee, signaling momentum behind the idea that employers should focus less on past cannabis use and more on current impairment.
What H. 2179 Would Do
House Bill 2179 would prohibit most employers in the Commonwealth from testing applicants for marijuana before extending a conditional offer of employment. Employers could still test post-offer, but a failed result couldn’t be used to deny the job, unless one of the bill’s exceptions applies.
Those exceptions include safety-sensitive roles, positions governed by federal drug testing requirements, or jobs covered by a collective bargaining agreement that mandates testing. For the majority of private-sector roles, cannabis screening as a gatekeeping tool would no longer be permitted.
The bill permits post-offer marijuana testing but prohibits making employment contingent on the results. That creates a paradox. If employers can’t revoke an offer based on a failed test, what’s the point of testing at all? H. 2179 signals a shift toward impairment-based workplace policies, but its text leaves employers in a gray area when it comes to interpreting and enforcing those rules.
This framework reflects a broader legislative trend of treating marijuana use as a legal off-duty activity that should not automatically disqualify candidates.
The Bill’s Movement Is a Marker
On November 3, the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development reported H. 2179 favorably and sent it to the House Steering, Policy and Scheduling Committee. While a floor vote hasn’t been scheduled, that referral signals that the bill is alive, viable, and positioned for future action.
In Massachusetts, a favorable committee report is more than a formality. It indicates a level of consensus that gives the bill credibility heading into the next phase of the legislative calendar.
A Moment to Reassess Testing Protocols
Many employers continue to rely on traditional drug testing models that treat THC detection as a stand-in for impairment. These models often reflect longstanding policies or contract language that haven’t kept pace with state-level legalization. Yet as more jurisdictions restrict or reshape marijuana testing, employers may need to rethink their approach regardless of whether they agree with the policy shift.
H. 2179 doesn’t outlaw workplace testing altogether. It still permits post-offer and post-hire screening in defined circumstances. But the bill draws a clearer line between what’s legal outside of work and what constitutes a workplace risk. And while post-offer testing remains technically permissible, the bill’s language raises an operational dilemma. If employers cannot make a job offer contingent on passing a marijuana test, the usefulness of such testing, except in the law’s narrow exceptions, may be significantly reduced. Most cannabis tests identify past use, not current impairment, which complicates their use in evaluating job performance or safety risks.
Even if the legislation ultimately stalls, the direction of the policy conversation suggests employers should begin reviewing where testing is legally required, where it is safety-driven, and where it may no longer serve a meaningful purpose.
A Broader Legislative Pattern
Massachusetts is not alone. Over the past few years, several states and localities have enacted laws restricting or regulating marijuana testing in employment:
New York, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh ban most pre-employment marijuana testing.
Minnesota barred cannabis testing for most workers when it legalized recreational use in 2023. For employers still permitted to test, the law requires specific notice procedures when taking adverse action against registered medical cannabis users.
Montana, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Washington, D.C. prohibit adverse employment actions based on
California and Washington disallow employment decisions based solely on tests that detect
While the scope and mechanics vary, the trend is clear. Policymakers are reconsidering whether marijuana test results, particularly those that don’t demonstrate impairment, should carry employment consequences.
A Regional Counterpoint: New Hampshire’s HB 186
Just across the border, New Hampshire lawmakers advanced a cannabis legalization bill earlier this year that stands in stark contrast to Massachusetts’s employer-focused approach. HB 186, introduced in January 2025, proposed a state-run model for adult-use cannabis sales. It would have legalized possession and use for adults 21 and over, established a network of state-authorized retailers, and imposed a 15% tax on cannabis products.
But the bill said very little about the workplace.
Unlike other legalization efforts, HB 186 did not include protections for off-duty cannabis use or restrictions on employment-related testing. Employers weren’t expressly prohibited from disciplining employees who tested positive or from maintaining zero-tolerance policies. The bill focused on retail regulation, licensing, and taxation, leaving the question of workplace impact largely unaddressed.
That omission is unusual in today’s legislative environment, where many cannabis bills now include at least some consideration of employment rights or testing limits. In states like Minnesota and Connecticut, legalization bills explicitly restrict employer action based on lawful use. HB 186 left those issues on the table.
The New Hampshire House passed the bill in April, but it stalled in the Senate and failed to meet floor deadlines before the session ended. Lawmakers may refile the proposal in 2026, creating an opportunity to revisit the question of whether employer policies should evolve alongside legalization.
The bill’s trajectory illustrates that workplace cannabis reform isn’t just a coastal or progressive issue. States with different political compositions are debating similar questions, and employers with regional footprints should take notice.
Next Steps for Employers
H. 2179 has not yet been signed into law, and its final form may change. But its movement, paired with similar developments in other states, should prompt employers to start preparing.
Identify roles where marijuana testing is required by law or justified by risk.
Evaluate whether job offers or onboarding procedures assume universal drug screening.
Train managers on impairment indicators and workplace safety interventions that don’t rely on test results alone.
Consider whether existing panel configurations remain appropriate given changing laws and workplace norms.
Marijuana remains illegal under federal law, and nothing in H. 2179 forces an employer to tolerate on-the-job use or impairment. But for roles that don’t implicate federal standards or safety-sensitive duties, a positive THC result may soon have less bearing on a hiring decision.
The national landscape is changing. Massachusetts may be the next to act. Employers don’t need to overhaul their programs overnight, but they do need to stay ahead of the curve.
Release Date: December 16, 2025
Alonzo Martinez
Alonzo Martinez is Associate General Counsel at HireRight, where he supports the company’s compliance, legal research, and thought leadership initiatives in the background screening industry. As a senior contributor at Forbes, Alonzo writes on employment legislation, criminal history reform, pay equity, AI discrimination laws, and the impact of legalized cannabis on employers. Recognized as an industry influencer, he shares insights through his weekly video updates, media appearances, podcasts, and HireRight's compliance webinar series. Alonzo's commitment to advancing industry knowledge ensures HireRight remains at the forefront of creating actionable compliance content.