Looking ahead to next March and beyond, we won't be surprised if there are test cases here in Utah on the right of patients to use medicine in their apartments.
Remember that powerful landlords like Walter Plumb were openly campaigning for landlords' right to evict patients on the grounds that cannabis users (including patients) are "repulsive" to right-thinking property owners…
…and it may also come down to vaporizing flower (legal under 3001 and not completely odorless) vs. smoking it, as we expect some patients who find smoking more effective, or who can't afford a good vaping rig, to continue to smoke….
"Like most things with cannabis, the answers live in the gap between state and federal laws. And there seem to be two categories of consumption: inhaled products, and everything else.
Edibles and topicals don’t affect other tenants, the building environment, or the unit. So if you’re operating on the private market, those forms of consumption are generally allowed. It’s a different story with public housing—about which, more later.
Landlord-tenant cannabis conflicts almost always center around inhaled products. And here, smoking usually always means all smoked substances. Even if you live in a legal adult-use state or have a medical card, if it is written in your lease agreement that you cannot smoke anything, that includes smoking cannabis. Your landlord—in almost every case—has the legal right to make and hold tenants to this demand."
Much more in the article. Your thoughts??
Most landlords don't care about your private life. But smoking can destroy a rental unit.