There’s something in the air at Muskegon’s Orchard View Schools, and it’s not the sweet smell of spring.

“I’m reaching out … to address a concern that has recently come to our attention, and although it’s not a message I expected to write as a school administrator, I feel it is a message that needs to be sent,” Superintendent Jim Nielsen wrote in a letter to parents last week.

“As the weather warms up and more windows are rolled down during school drop-off and pick-up times, we’ve received multiple reports of a strong odor of marijuana coming from vehicles on school property,” the letter read. “It is important for people to know that Orchard View Schools is a drug-free zone, and the possession or use of marijuana on school grounds is strictly prohibited.”

The letter explains the law, noting that while marijuana is legal in Michigan, it remains illegal for drivers or passengers to consume the plant inside a vehicle. It’s also illegal to drive or carry minors in a vehicle while under the influence, Nielson noted.

However, police’s ability to enforce those laws was severely restricted on Wednesday, when the Democratic majority Michigan Supreme Court found smell alone insufficient cause to search a vehicle without a warrant, WXMI reports.

“We agree with the Court of Appeals that in light of the voters’ intent to legalize marijuana usage and possession, the smell of marijuana, standing alone, no longer constitutes probable cause sufficient to support a search for contraband,” Justice Megan Cavanagh wrote in the 5-1 majority opinion.

Republican Chief Justice Elizabeth Clement sided with Cavanagh and three other Democratic justices. At the same time, Democrat Justice Kimberly Thomas did not participate and Republican Justice Brian Zahra dissented, according to The Detroit News.

Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial

The Supreme Court’s decision upholds a Court of Appeals ruling dismissing three criminal charges against Jeffery Armstrong following a 2020 search of his vehicle in Wayne County. The search produced a handgun under a seat in the vehicle, and a charge of felon in possession for Armstrong.

Prosecutors relied on a 2000 Michigan Supreme Court decision in People v. Kazmierczak to justify probable cause from the smell of marijuana for searching the vehicle. Still, Cavanagh argued that “the smell of marijuana might just as likely indicate that the person is in possession of a legal amount of marijuana, recently used marijuana legally, or was simply in the presence of someone else who used marijuana,” according to The News.

The 2018 Michigan ballot referendum legalizing recreational marijuana means officers now need “something more” than smell to justify a warrantless search, such as observing the person actually smoking, or erratic driving.

“The presence of other inculpatory facts that suggest not only the illegal use of marijuana but, importantly, the where, when, and who of that use, is critical to determining whether probable cause exists to support a search,” Cavanagh wrote.

Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial

The Illinois Supreme Court came to a similar conclusion in September when Justice P. Scott Neville Jr. argued that “there are now a myriad of situations where cannabis can be used and possessed, and the smell resulting from that legal use and possession is not indicative of the commission of a criminal offense,” according to MLive.

The shift is a boon for defense attorneys, who have been frustrated with what East Lansing attorney Mike Nichols described as a subjective and hard-to-disprove standard for warrantless vehicle searches.

“For a long time, it was the bane of criminal defense attorneys,” he told The News.

Matthew Abel, a Michigan marijuana attorney for two decades, told the news site the decision was “a long time coming.”

“I think that’s the right decision,” he said. “It’s nice to have honesty in the courts.”

Zahra, the lone dissenter in the case, wrote “lower courts’ errors” did not exclude the possibility marijuana smell was one of multiple factors justifying the search, and he pointed to other illegal situations like the Orchard View pick-up line for suggesting the case should have been returned to a lower court for a fresh ruling.

“True enough, evidence of the mere possession or use of marijuana no longer automatically suggests criminal activity in the same way it did when we decided Kazmierczak,” he wrote. “But marijuana use can still be criminal in numerous situations, particularly in relation to motor vehicles.”