Read on Twitter
From the perspective of the cannabis industry, this is a completely pyrrhic victory. The BCC prevailed in the legal proceeding, but "win" comes after the BCC reversed course and argued that its regulation allowing statewide delivery does not conflict with local delivery bans. 1/8 https://twitter.com/Johnschroyer/status/1329468691352719361
It is this position that the Court based its ruling upon and adopted. The practical result is a court ruling that says local delivery bans are ok under current law. Localities can impose and enforce their own bans on cannabis delivery within their borders. 2/8
That the BCC's position is adopted in this ruling is significant. This is because of a legal concept call "judicial estoppel." This principle comes up in the ruling because BCC had taken the opposite position in a prior case, and the plaintiff cities tried to hold them to it. 3/8
Judicial estoppel is essentially the legal principal that a party in litigation cannot say one thing in one court and the opposite in another. But, in order for it to apply, the party has to succeed with a position in the first case. 4/8
In the East of Eden case, BCC took the position that the statewide delivery reg preempted local ordinances banning delivery. But the case settled before that issue was resolved. So, the BCC was never legally "successful" in making this argument. 5/8
The lack of success in East of Eden is why the Court did not apply judicial estoppel here. BUT, now BCC HAS succeeded in its new assertion that localities CAN impose and enforce local delivery bans. 6/8
The result is that BCC will now face problems of judicial estoppel if it attempts to argue later that a local ban and any enforcement action violate its statewide delivery regulation. They "won" the case, but only by essentially conceding defeat on its central issue. 7/8
This creates an incredibly murky and fraught situation for delivery licensees. The state does not view delivery into jurisdictions with bans as inherently problematic, but this conduct may be made criminal by local ordinance. And criminal conduct can jeopardize licensure. 8/8
