medical marijuana for sale.JPG

Different strains of marijuana are displayed during the grand opening of the Seattle location of the Northwest Cannabis Market, for sales of medical marijuana products.

(Photo by Elaine Thompson / Associated Press [file])

For Robert Mayerson, chief executive officer of Patriot Care Corporation, a medical marijuana company, the basics of setting up a business were not always easy.

"The ability to take credit cards, to bank, is challenging," Mayerson said. Mayerson said some landlords are hesitant to lease space to dispensaries out of concern that the bank holding their mortgage would disallow the lease. He would not reveal what banks his company used.

Patriot Care Corporation has received provisional state approval to open medical marijuana dispensaries in Greenfield, Lowell and Boston, one of about a dozen medical marijuana companies currently moving through the state's licensing process. Banking for these companies is one area that is complicated by the conflict between state and federal laws. While Massachusetts voters voted in 2012 to allow medical marijuana, and the first dispensaries are now preparing to open, all forms of marijuana remain illegal under U.S. law.

"There are impediments that have to be dealt with that are caused by the federal laws," Mayerson said.

In December 2014, Congress passed and President Barack Obama signed into law a measure prohibiting the Department of Justice from spending money interfering with states' medical marijuana laws. The issue got renewed attention last week when U.S. Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J., Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced a bill that would end the federal prohibition on medical marijuana.

The bill has sparked conversation about the disparities between federal and state laws governing medical marijuana - and how a repeal of the federal law would impact states like Massachusetts.

State officials say it is too early to identify the impact, since it depends on what exactly, if anything, Congress does.

"We would take a close look at any new federal guidelines or regulations that are implemented regarding medical marijuana. However, it is premature to say precisely what impact that would have," said Scott Zoback, a spokesman for the Massachusetts of Department of Public Health.

Attorney General Maura Healey pointed to issues around keeping money in banks due to the federal prohibition. "There are a lot of implications right now to the medical marijuana law, and it's something that my office is looking at and working on with regard to implementation," Healey said.

Matt Simon, New England political director of the Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington, D.C.-based, pro-marijuana political advocacy group, said easier banking would be one of the main implications of a repeal of the federal law. Now, banks have to file a suspicious activity report any time they take a deposit from a group that sells medical marijuana, since selling marijuana is a violation of federal law. As a result, banks are unwilling to do business with medical marijuana dispensaries. Some dispensaries in other states have begun taking cash only, Simon said.

"A cash only business is not in anyone's interest," Simon said. "Cash attracts crime and makes it harder to be regulated."

But banking is not the only implication. Doctors in the Veterans Affairs system, who are federal employees, now are unable to give patients recommendations for medical marijuana. If the federal ban is repealed, a VA doctor in Massachusetts could recommend medical marijuana.

Additionally, if the federal government moves marijuana from being a "Schedule I" drug, which is considered the most dangerous, to a less dangerous category, that could increase opportunities for research.

Today, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, a federal agency controlled by the National Institutes of Health, is the only organization able to supply marijuana for research purposes. According to NIDA, a study must undergo a three-step approval process involving multiple federal agencies in order to receive marijuana.

"Everybody seems to agree we need more research, and nobody seems to be moving marijuana out of Schedule I yet to enable it to actually happen," Simon said.

Mayerson said Patriot Care Corp. also would like to do more research to evaluate the efficacy of medical marijuana on various conditions and potentially to develop new strains. But he said medical institutions have been wary of getting involved because they take federal funds.

"The federal government has made it difficult," Mayerson said.

Northwestern District Attorney David Sullivan said lifting the federal ban could also help doctors who want to recommend medical marijuana, but now fear losing their licenses.

"I think the greatest impact is going to be to free doctors up, so they don't feel like they're going to lose their license by prescribing marijuana," Sullivan said.

Nichole Snow, deputy director of the Massachusetts Patient Advocacy Alliance, said in Massachusetts, U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz has not done anything to crack down on the state's medical marijuana business. But until Congress passed the 2014 law forbidding the Department of Justice from interceding, there was fear among patients, dispensary owners and some city zoning officials based on crackdowns in other states. The Boston Globe reported that some critics of medical marijuana dispensaries had urged Ortiz to shut down dispensaries that planned to open within 1,000 feet of a school, playground, or public housing, due to federal law.

"This bill passing in Congress hopefully will alleviate those fears," Snow said.

Correction: Contrary to an earlier version of this story, it is federal agencies other than NIDA that approve marijuana studies.