This post is a factual record of proceedings in open court. The matter remains pending before the Court, which will issue a written ruling in due course.
Nebraska Religious Cannabis Accommodation Hearing Complete: Case Taken Under Advisement
By Jason Karimi | WeedPress
April 10, 2026
On April 8, 2026, an evidentiary hearing was held in Nebraska District Court, Case No. CR 23-13, on my pro se motion to modify a probation condition that prohibits cannabis use. The hearing addressed a request for a narrowly tailored religious accommodation under Nebraska’s First Freedom Act (the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act) to allow sacramental use consistent with my Rastafari faith.
The court heard testimony and received exhibits. At the conclusion of the evidentiary portion, the matter was taken under advisement by the judge. A ruling is pending.
Testimony Presented
Your Honor, thank you for allowing me to speak today.
I am Jason Karimi, the defendant in this case, CR 23-13. I am appearing pro se and I am here to support my motion to modify the probation condition that currently prohibits me from using cannabis.
I have been a practicing Rastafari since approximately 2006 — that’s almost twenty years. For me, the sacramental use of ganja is not recreational. It is how I pray. As Rev. Brandon Baker explained in his affidavit, in the Rastafari faith you cannot pray without ganja. It is a central part of meditation, spiritual observance, and my connection with the Creator.
I first met Rev. Baker around 2008 in a religious and spiritual context. He has counseled me for many years and knows my practice firsthand. Everything he said in his notarized affidavit is true and accurate. My beliefs are sincere, deeply held, and have been consistent for nearly two decades. They are not something I adopted for convenience or to get around the law — they are part of who I am.
The current probation condition that bans all cannabis use substantially burdens my ability to practice my religion. When I cannot use ganja sacramentally, I literally cannot engage in prayer the way my faith requires. That prohibition forces me to choose between obeying the Court and obeying my religious conscience. That is exactly the kind of burden the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is meant to prevent.
I am not asking for special treatment or to use cannabis freely for any non-religious purpose. I am only asking for a narrowly tailored religious accommodation so that I may use cannabis sacramentally, in the privacy of my own home, as part of my sincere Rastafari practice. This accommodation would allow me to fully exercise my religion without interfering with the goals of probation or public safety.
I have provided the Court with Rev. Baker’s notarized affidavit and he was prepared to testify by Zoom to confirm everything I have just said. I respectfully ask the Court to grant my motion, modify the probation condition, and enter an order allowing this religious accommodation.
Thank you, Your Honor. I am happy to answer any questions the Court or the State may have.
Closing Statement
Your Honor, the record shows that my religious exercise is sincere, that the THC prohibition substantially burdens that exercise, and that I am being forced to choose between compliance with my beliefs and punishment. I am not asking for unlimited freedom from supervision. I am asking for a narrow accommodation because narrower alternatives exist.
If the government wants to impose this burden despite RFRA, it must do more than invoke general interests. It must show that this specific prohibition, as applied to me, is the least restrictive means of serving a compelling interest. On this record, it has not done so. For those reasons, I respectfully ask the Court to grant my request for a tailored religious exemption or accommodation.
For the Record
This hearing is another chapter in the ongoing public documentation of how religious exercise claims are handled in Nebraska’s evolving cannabis policy environment. The motion and supporting materials emphasize sincerity of belief, substantial burden, and the availability of narrower alternatives—core elements under the First Freedom Act.
The case remains pending. I will post the written ruling when it is issued.
WeedPress.org continues to publish the paper trail on statutory interpretation, administrative procedure, and constitutional accommodations in cannabis policy across multiple states. Records, not narratives.
WeedPress: The Paper Trail 
Leave a comment