- Mississippi businessman Clarence Cocroft faces state advertising restrictions for his medical marijuana dispensary, despite the product being legal in the state.
- Cocroft argues that the advertising ban violates his First Amendment rights, as it prevents him from truthfully promoting a legal product.
- The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Cocroft, citing marijuana’s federal illegality, but he has appealed to the Supreme Court.
Small-business owner Clarence Cocroft budgeted for advertising when he launched his company in DeSoto County. He even purchased billboards. But when the time came to announce his presence, state regulators silenced him.
Talking about his business on the radio or television is illegal, they told him. Newspaper, internet and outdoor advertising is also off limits. Cocroft can hang a sign on his property, but that is about it.
The censorship has nothing to do with Cocroft, who obtained all the proper business permits during a tedious startup process. The state is targeting him instead because of his industry: Medical marijuana.
Mississippi lawmakers legalized medical marijuana in 2022. But at the same time, they empowered the state Department of Health to control advertising.
The extent of the ban was not immediately clear. The rules took shape as Cocroft worked to launch Tru Source Medical Cannabis, Mississippi’s first Black-owned medical marijuana dispensary. By the time he opened his doors, the speech police were ready.
“I own this billboard,” Cocroft said during a 2023 interview, pointing to one of his highway signs. “But I cannot advertise because it is a medical marijuana business.”
Normally when pot dispensaries face discrimination, the tension is due to an ongoing power struggle between federal and state governments. The feud started in 1996, when California set its own pot policy in defiance of the federal Controlled Substances Act.
Since then, 40 states have followed with marijuana laws of their own. Yet the issue in Mississippi is different. Nobody in Washington, D.C., is meddling. Federal agencies do not enforce against state-legal medical marijuana businesses.
Mississippi is engineering its conflict entirely from within, claiming that medical marijuana is legal to sell but not advertise. This gamesmanship leaves Cocroft in limbo. He can run his business legally, as far as the state is concerned. But he cannot talk about his business due to federal rules that no one is pushing.
“When you can’t advertise, it’s a disaster,” Cocroft said. “They’re setting you up for failure.”
Besides defying logic, the censorship is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court held in Central Hudson Gas & Electric that the First Amendment protects truthful advertising about legal products.
This is where Mississippi sees a loophole. The state wants to argue that medical marijuana is legal under state law, while clinging to federal rules that make the product illegal. In other words, Mississippi wants to have its pot brownie and eat it too.
Cocroft challenged the absurdity in a First Amendment lawsuit in 2023. Our public interest law firm, the Institute for Justice, represents him. Despite Supreme Court precedent, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Cocroft on Nov. 22, 2024.
Because marijuana is federally illegal, a three-judge panel held, “the state faces no constitutional obstacle to restricting commercial speech relating to unlawful transactions.”
Mississippi can defy Congress when it wants, and then turn around and hide behind Congress to silence people like Cocroft, singling them out for restrictions that other small-business owners do not face.
“You will see billboards from casinos to gentlemen’s clubs to whatever,” Cocroft said. “This is the only industry they will not allow advertising.”
If the ruling stands, the discrimination will continue. But Cocroft is not done fighting. On March 21, 2025, he petitioned the Supreme Court to hear his case. His ultimate goal is to help patients, who cannot find his shop if they do not know it exists.
“Chemo patients, patients suffering from depression, patients that are suffering from PTSD, a lot of veterans, and patients with neurological or neuropathy pain,” Cocroft said. “They have a story, and it hits home.”
Other states could also use clarity from a Supreme Court decision.
As things stand, pot dispensaries cannot advertise on highway billboards in California. They cannot have online popup ads in Colorado, show images of cannabis plants in Connecticut, or pass out fliers in Maine. Minnesota even requires dispensaries to submit advertisements to the government for pre-approval.
All Cocroft wants to do is speak truthfully about his business. Mississippi must let him.
— Katrin Marquez is an attorney and the Elfie Gallun Fellow in Freedom and the Constitution at the Institute for Justice in Arlington, Va. Daryl James is an Institute for Justice writer.
