A federal judge in Oregon just delivered a knockout blow to a woke labor law targeting cannabis businesses. According to Fox Business, U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon struck down Measure 119, a voter-approved mandate forcing marijuana companies to sign labor agreements and stay silent on unionization. The ruling spared businesses from a law that reeked of government overreach.
Last year, Oregon voters passed Measure 119, which tied cannabis business licenses to having labor agreements and required employers to stay neutral on union talks. Portland’s Ascend, a marijuana retailer, and Bubble’s Hash, a cannabis processor, sued in February, claiming the law violated their First Amendment rights. Their challenge proved the Constitution still has teeth.
Judge Simon’s 23-page ruling declared Measure 119 unconstitutional, citing violations of free speech and the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause. The decision came just two days before Bubble’s Hash’s license was set to expire, saving their business from bureaucratic strangulation. It’s a reminder that even progressive strongholds can’t rewrite the Bill of Rights.
“Measure 119 does not distinguish between permissible employer speech and threatening or coercive speech,” Simon wrote in his opinion. He’s right—vague laws like this invite abuse, chilling honest speech while empowering labor organizers to strong-arm businesses. The judge saw through the state’s flimsy defense and called it out.
The state initially argued the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) didn’t apply to cannabis businesses because marijuana remains federally illegal. Later, they flip-flopped, claiming the NLRA likely applied since Ascend and Bubble’s Hash also sell legal hemp. This legal tap-dance didn’t fool Simon, who prioritized constitutional clarity over bureaucratic waffling.
Measure 119’s failure to define “neutral” speech was a fatal flaw. It targeted any employer expression that wasn’t pro-union, going far beyond banning coercive or threatening speech. Sounds like a progressive dream to silence dissent, but Simon wasn’t buying it.
Ascend and Bubble’s Hash faced losing their livelihoods if they didn’t comply with Measure 119’s demands. The law’s “serious costs” could’ve crippled their operations, according to Simon’s ruling. Small businesses shouldn’t be pawns in a union power grab.
The lawsuit highlighted a broader issue: states can’t use licensing to force businesses into labor agreements that violate federal law. The Supremacy Clause exists for a reason, and Oregon learned that lesson the hard way. Actions, as they say, have consequences.
Simon’s ruling noted the NLRA’s role in regulating labor relations, even for cannabis businesses. Oregon’s attempt to sidestep federal law with Measure 119 was a bold but doomed overreach. The Constitution doesn’t bend for state-level experiments in progressive governance.
“This case is poised to have far-reaching impacts,” said attorneys Alexander Wheatley and Stephen Scott, representing Ascend and Bubble’s Hash. They’re not wrong—other states eyeing similar labor mandates should take note. Oregon’s misstep could cool the jets of overzealous regulators elsewhere.
The ruling protects free speech for businesses, ensuring they can discuss unionization without fear of losing their licenses. Measure 119’s vague language would’ve let labor organizers weaponize “neutrality” against employers. Simon’s decision keeps the playing field fair.
Cannabis businesses operate in a legal gray zone, balancing state and federal regulations. Oregon’s law tried to exploit that ambiguity to push a pro-union agenda. The judge’s ruling restores some sanity to an industry already navigating a regulatory minefield.
For Ascend and Bubble’s Hash, the ruling is a lifeline, preserving their ability to operate without bowing to unconstitutional demands. It’s a win for small businesses refusing to be bullied by progressive policies disguised as worker protections. The First Amendment still matters.
Oregon’s Measure 119 was a classic case of good intentions gone awry. Forcing neutrality on employers doesn’t empower workers—it silences honest debate. Simon’s ruling reminds us that free speech isn’t negotiable, even in the cannabis industry.
This decision should make other states think twice before copying Oregon’s playbook. The Constitution isn’t a suggestion, and businesses have the right to speak their minds. Here’s hoping this ruling sparks a broader pushback against regulatory overreach.
