OG Article: here.
View our Fair Use Policy: here.
Kyle Jaeger
A top U.S. intelligence official reaffirmed on Wednesday that it is not the federal government’s current policy to deny people security clearances based on past marijuana use alone, stating that it is counterproductive to recruitment efforts, especially amid the growing legalization movement.
At a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) took the opportunity to ask Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Avril Haines to explain the rationale behind the discretionary policy on prior cannabis use.
“We recognize, frankly, that many states have legalized or decriminalized marijuana use and wanted to be sure that we’re not disqualifying people solely for that purpose in that context,” she replied.
“We obviously believe that we want to have the talent that exists in America—and when somebody is using [cannabis] experimentally in a legal state that’s something that shouldn’t on its own essentially disqualify,” Haines said. “We continue to approach this from a whole-person perspective. And we expect if anybody takes the job to comply with our policies and our laws in a trusted position.”
DNI issued a memo in 2021 saying that federal employers shouldn’t outright reject security clearance applicants over past use and should also use discretion when it comes to those with cannabis investments in their stock portfolios.
A spokesperson in the DNI’s office told Marijuana Moment at the time that “increased legalization of marijuana use at state and local levels has prompted questions on how the federal government treats an individual’s involvement with marijuana to determine eligibility for national security positions or access to classified information.”
Last year, the Intelligence Committee approved an amendment from Wyden that would have codified that the federal government would be prohibited from denying people the security clearances they need to work at intelligence agencies simply because they’ve used marijuana.
That legislation had been scaled back in the panel before advancing, as it initially would have applied to any federal worker, not just those working in intell