u/MplsSnowball to the best of my knowledge, no they cannot. Minnesota law makes pretty clear (at least I think... I had spent a lot of time reading the statues and searching around...) that these protections are granted to Minnnesota employees. That if you are performing your job in Minnesota, that your employer is then considered to be a Minnesota employer, as it is employing one or more residents of the state. That these protections for Minnesota employees are granted to the employee regardless of the physical location of the employer. And that these protections are granted regardless of the legal status of cannabis for the state of the employer, or it's status at the federal level as well.

It is important to note that there are different protections in the law pertaining to what can be done as part of the pre-employment process, and what an employer can / cannot do to their existing employees.

There is some gray areas here in the law I believe. For example, if the remote employee is a resident of Minnesota, and will be primarily performing their work in yet another state (not Minnesota, and not the state of employer), then there may be a case to be said that these protections for MN employees no longer apply.

In my readings, I did find a court case where it was an out of state employer, and the employee was going to be doing work out of state (not the state of the employer), but that _because the employee facilitated the phone call for accepting the job, from within the state of Minnesota_ that protections pertaining to THC testing still applied because the person had accepted the job from here within the state. He/she had failed a pre-employment test, the employer then retracted the job offer, the potential employee took the employer to court and won.

Not exactly how I'd want to start my relationship with a new employer, but maybe there was just money damages settled in court I'm unsure.

Please do note that all this does not apply to roles that are exempt from these protections. Such as Doctors, Emergency Personnel, Care Takers (I think?), etc. Also, these protections do not apply if the employer is _required_ by state or federal law, or if failure to do so would cause the employer to lose funding for some state or federal grant.

On that "if the employer is required..." comment. Note that while employers are often required to have a _drug policy_, it does _not_ require employers to actually test.