CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-01030 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-01030

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date8/12/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionSee the appeal decision (Case 24-01030) →
Participants
Judge: Pamela C. Benson
Government Counsel: Daniel P. O'Reilley
Applicant's Counsel: Peter Noone
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 29-year-old government contractor who had held a secret security clearance since 2018. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing concerns under Guideline H regarding the applicant's use of medical marijuana, which is illegal under federal law. The SOR detailed allegations of drug involvement and substance misuse, specifically noting the applicant's admission of using medical marijuana to treat anxiety and PTSD, despite not having an official PTSD diagnosis.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to using medical marijuana from June 2020 until March 2025, although she later claimed to have reduced her usage. She acknowledged being aware of the federal prohibition on marijuana but believed her use was permissible due to state law and her employer's guidance. The applicant provided character references and evidence of her work ethic, asserting her willingness to cease marijuana use if it jeopardized her security clearance. However, the administrative judge found that the applicant failed to adequately mitigate the security concerns, concluding that her continued use of medical marijuana, despite knowing it was illegal federally, posed a risk to national security. Consequently, the judge denied the applicant's request for security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · Against Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 24-01030

deniedAug 12, 2025· Hon. Pamela C. Benson· hearing

Summary

A 29-year-old government contractor was denied a security clearance under Guideline H (Drug Involvement) due to her ongoing use of medical marijuana, which is federally illegal. The Statement of Reasons alleged that she failed to mitigate security concerns arising from this use, raising questions about her reliability and trustworthiness. It also noted her denial of intent to continue use, despite evidence suggesting otherwise.

The denial was based on several factors. The applicant continued her medical marijuana use despite knowing its federal illegality. Furthermore, she failed to provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or a clear intent to comply with federal drug laws.

Ultimately, the judge found insufficient evidence of rehabilitation or intent to comply with federal law, leading to concerns about her reliability and trustworthiness. The applicant's testimony also indicated a lack of understanding regarding the implications of her drug use on her security clearance eligibility.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant continued to use medical marijuana despite knowing it was illegal under federal law.
The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of rehabilitation or intent to comply with federal drug laws.
The applicant's testimony indicated a lack of understanding of the implications of her drug use on her security clearance.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 25(a)appliedAny Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(c)appliedIllegal Possession of a Controlled Substance
AG ¶ 25(f)appliedAny Illegal Drug Use While Granted Access to Classified Information

Key Rule Quoted

“The illegal use of controlled substances . . . can raise questions about an individual’s reliability and trustworthiness, both because such behavior may lead to physical or psychological impairment and because it raises questions about a person’s ability or willingness to comply with laws, rules, and regulations.”
— AG ¶ 24

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 29, 2024
Answer filedDec 2, 2024
Hearing heldJun 9, 2025
Decision dateAug 12, 2025

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Ongoing Drug Involvement Under Guideline H
Insufficient Evidence of Rehabilitation in Drug-related Cases
Impact of Federal Law on State-legal Medical Marijuana Use in Security Clearance Evaluations

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline H (Drug Involvement) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant's past and recent use of medical marijuana, which is prohibited by federal law, raised significant security concerns. The applicant's use of marijuana while holding a security clearance was deemed inconsistent with the reliability and trustworthiness required for such positions, leading to a denial of her security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant failed to mitigate the Guideline H (drug involvement and substance misuse) security concerns arising from her past and recent use of medical marijuana, which is prohibited by federal law.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	—
1.b	Applicant's use of medical marijuana while holding a security clearance raises questions about her reliability and trustworthiness.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Admitted	(a) any substance misuse (c) illegal possession, cultivation, manufacture, purchase, sale, or distribution; or paraphernalia (f) any illegal drug use while holding a clearance or sensitive position	—	—
1.c	Applicant denied the allegation that she intends to continue using marijuana in the future, despite evidence to the contrary.	Against Applicant	Stated Intent to Use Again	Not Applicable	Denied	—	—	Claimed Explanation of Omission Credible

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline H). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.