Tag: cannabis

Feds take down Chinese-operated grow home network in Massachusetts, Maine

An alleged network of interconnected grow houses in Massachusetts and Maine that Chinese nationals operated to cultivate and distribute marijuana is no more after authorities arrested the men behind the “sprawling criminal enterprise.”

Seven Chinese nationals have been indicted in connection with what the feds describe as a “multi-million-dollar conspiracy to cultivate and distribute marijuana across the Northeast.”

The group is accused of smuggling other Chinese nationals into the U.S. to work in the grow homes, found inside single-family properties in Massachusetts and Maine. The workers didn’t have access to their passports until they repaid their smuggling debts, according to a release from the office of Massachusetts US Attorney Leah Foley.

Authorities arrested six of the defendants Tuesday morning, while the seventh, Yanrong Zhu, 47, of Greenfield, Mass. and Brooklyn, N.Y., remains a fugitive.

The group allegedly used a Braintree home as the “base” for the enterprise to cultivate and distribute kilogram-sized quantities of marijuana in bulk. The network of interconnected grow houses also included properties in Melrose and Greenfield, among other locations in the Bay State, Maine and elsewhere, according to authorities.

“This case pulls back the curtain on a sprawling criminal enterprise that exploited our immigration system and our communities for personal gain,” Foley said in a statement. “These defendants allegedly turned quiet homes across the Northeast into hubs for a criminal enterprise – building a multi-million-dollar black-market operation off the backs of an illegal workforce and using our neighborhoods as cover.”

“That ends today,” she added.

Grow house operators allegedly communicated with one another through a list of marijuana cultivators and distributors from or with ties to China in the region, dubbed the “East Coast Contact List.”

Charging documents allege that the network began operating in or around January 2020.

Keep reading

Oregon Police Improperly Used Aerial Camera To Bust Marijuana Grow, State Appeals Court Says

Oregon’s Court of Appeals chided the state’s police force on Wednesday for using warrantless “technologically-enhanced surveillance” to bust an illegal marijuana operation, sending the court’s clearest message yet about how law enforcement may use the increasingly popular, but controversial technology.

The case, captured in an eight-page ruling from a three-judge panel, centers on a June 2021 multi-county investigation involving the Polk County Sheriff’s Office and Oregon State Police. The defendant, 54-year-old Sengdara Nakhiengchahn, was not the target of the investigation, but Oregon State Police Sergeant Tyler Bechtel, a leading officer on the case, noticed “what looked to be a massive agricultural operation” that “was likely a marijuana grow,” while flying in a surveillance plane nearly 5,000 feet in the air, according to the ruling.

The defendant was charged in August 2021 with two felonies for possession and manufacturing of marijuana. She pled guilty in a conditional deal that allowed her to get the possession charge dropped by serving two years of probation, court records show. But she maintained her right to appeal the charges, arguing the evidence gathered from aerial surveillance constitutes a warrantless and unlawful search and should not have been admissible.

The appeals court agreed with Nakhiengchahn, returning the case back to the trial court where she can withdraw her guilty plea. Bechtel did not respond to an email seeking comment.

“While the trial court didn’t agree with us, we’re grateful the appellate court did,” said Luke Miller, Nakhiengchahn’s trial attorney, in a statement. “It’s important for Oregonians to maintain the right to privacy, and be free from government intrusion absent legal justification for such intrusion.”

Jenny Hansson, a spokeswoman for the Oregon Department of Justice, said officials were still reviewing the decision and could decide to appeal the court’s ruling in the coming weeks.

Jolene Kelly, a spokeswoman for the Oregon State Police, declined to comment on the ruling or its findings, but said in an email the agency “remains committed to following applicable laws and court directives.”

The ruling was lauded by civil rights advocates and privacy watchdogs who were fresh off of a fight in the Oregon Legislature over Senate Bill 238, which would have extended unprecedented power to police to use unmanned aerial surveillance devices like drones when responding to 911 calls, executing a warrant or responding to “exigent circumstances.” The bill ultimately died in the House Rules Committee without a vote.

The ACLU of Oregon opposed the bill, warning in a news release that it was unnecessary and “undermines basic rights including privacy and free speech.”

Kelly Simon, legal director of the ACLU of Oregon, said Wednesday’s ruling marks an “important decision to ensure that as police technology advances, we are maintaining the integrity of our warrant requirements under the Oregon Constitution.”

“We’re beginning to see in the surveillance tech industry all sorts of high-powered enhancements,” she told the Capital Chronicle. “It is important that our courts maintain the integrity of our warrant requirements by making sure that if law enforcement wants to use those enhancements, they go to court first, they present the evidence they have against a person and they get permission to do that.”

In the ruling, Justice Scott A. Shorr wrote that state police saw “materially different information” through a camera attached to their aircraft than what could’ve been seen with a naked eye, striking down a decision by Polk County Circuit Judge Rafael A. Caso to allow evidence tied to the camera footage to be admitted at trial.

“We have never upheld as constitutionally permissible an officer’s technologically enhanced surveillance to see what was otherwise indiscernible. We decline to do so here,” Shorr said. “In this case, the officer used technology to obtain information from inside defendant’s private structures that was undetectable from his vantage point in public airspace.”

Keep reading

Top police chiefs say smell of cannabis is a ‘sign of crime’ that can make even them feel ‘unsafe’… and frontline officers should ‘do something about it’

Britain’s top police chiefs today urge their officers to crack down on cannabis.

The country’s longest-serving chief constable admits the smell of the drug is a ‘sign of crime and disorder’ which makes even him ‘feel unsafe’.

Sir Andy Marsh, who leads the College of Policing, said frontline officers should ‘do something about it’.

He is backed by Greater Manchester Police Chief Sir Stephen Watson and Merseyside Chief Constable Serena Kennedy.

In a joint intervention following recent calls for decriminalisation, they tell future police leaders they must listen to their communities and be prepared to take a tougher line.

Launching a new leadership programme for policing, they acknowledged forces were in a ‘foot race for public confidence’ and officers can no longer ignore what has traditionally been perceived as the ‘little stuff’. 

Sir Andy, who is the officer in charge of police standards, said: ‘In my community, my kids are too frightened to use the bus stop because it always stinks of cannabis.’

He told the Mail ‘policing is about creating an environment that people feel safe in’ and said: ‘I’m speaking from personal experience and people I talk to, if I walk through a town, city, or even village centre and I smell cannabis, it does actually have an impact on how safe I feel.

‘One definition of what police should be doing is – [if] something [is] happening which does not feel right, someone ought to do something about it.’

He added: ‘For me, the smell of cannabis around communities, it feels like a sign of crime and disorder.’

The call for action comes after figures on Sunday revealed that three in four people caught with the drug last year were let off with an informal warning or community resolution.

In the year to September 2024, 68,513 people were found in possession of cannabis, but only 17,000 were charged, according to data released under Freedom of Information laws.

Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan has called for the decriminalisation of possession when it involves small amounts of the drug. 

But recently judges have warned that cannabis is ‘not a benign drug’ after a series of horrific cases, including a samurai sword rampage in Hainault, east London, where a schoolboy was killed and four others seriously injured by a drug-crazed Brazilian who had a £100-a-day habit.

The head of Merseyside Police said of cannabis: ‘The public should absolutely expect us to take positive action around those things and hold us to account over it. 

‘We have to work with our communities, it’s no longer good enough to inflict priorities on them, we have to hear their voices and make them part of the problem-solving.’

Keep reading

Marijuana Users In Iowa Are Engaged And Active Citizens, Survey Shows—Smashing ‘Lazy Stoner’ Stereotypes

For many years, cannabis users were characterized as a cult of stoners: young, often unemployed, party animals. That sector still exists in some form, however, many of today’s cannabis consumers are “middle American” adults, employed, own a home, vote regularly, pay their taxes and are involved in their communities.

That is the general profile of adult cannabis consumers across the country and in Des Moines, according to a recent survey by Consumer Research Around Cannabis/The Media Audit.

The Media Audit, the parent company of Consumer Research Around Cannabis, is an international research company serving 80+ local markets in the U.S. and Canada for more than 20 years. It started gathering data about cannabis use and attitudes in 2016.

Although the sale of adult recreational cannabis is illegal in Iowa, the survey found 16.2 percent of all adults age 18+ in Des Moines said they used or bought cannabis during the past month, or the statistical equivalent of approximately 140,000 adults.

The smallest percentage in the following table, monthly usage in Des Moines, is still substantial—and suggests a pent-up market. Unleashing the recreational cannabis market in Des Moines and all of Iowa would likely generate jobs and significant taxes for the state—money now escaping across the borders.

Keep reading

Marijuana Use Is Tied To ‘Significantly Higher Sexual Desire And Arousal,’ New Study Shows

Marijuana use is associated with increased sexual desire and arousal, as well as lower levels of sexual distress, new research shows.

The report, a doctoral thesis out of Queens University in Canada, includes two separate studies: an online survey of 1,547 cannabis users as well as a 28-day diary analysis of 115 individuals—87 of whom were marijuana users, while 28 were infrequent users or nonusers.

“More frequent cannabis use was linked with greater daily sexual desire,” wrote author Kayla M. Mooney. “On sexual activity days, participants reported significantly higher sexual desire and arousal on days they used cannabis compared to non-use days.”

“Across all study days (regardless of sexual activity), participants reported significantly higher sexual desire and lower sexual distress on days they used cannabis compared to non-use days,” the study continues, noting the findings could help inform both both sex therapy and general psychotherapy.

As for the online survey, “Approximately half of the sample reported sexual motivations for cannabis use, most commonly to enhance aspects of the sexual response,” according to the abstract.

The new report—which itself calls the relationship between cannabis and sexual functioning “complicated”—adds to a growing body of research about the subject.

For example, late last year a study found that cannabis-infused vaginal suppositories seemed to reduce sexual pain in women after treatment for gynecological cancer. Combining the suppositories with online exercises in “mindful compassion” offered patients even more substantial benefits.

“The outcomes favoured the [combined] group,” that research said “in which sexual function, levels of sexual arousal, lubrication, and orgasm increased, and the levels of sexual pain decreased.”

Earlier research also found that administration of a broad-spectrum, high-CBD vaginal suppository was associated with “significantly reduced frequency and severity of menstrual-related symptoms” as well as the symptoms’ negative impacts on daily life.

As for sexual fulfillment, a separate study last year found that while alcohol might be effective to “facilitate” sex, marijuana is better at enhancing sexual sensitivity and satisfaction.

While alcohol increased some elements of sexual attraction—including making people feel more attractive, more extroverted and more desirous—people who used marijuana “have more sensitivity and they are more sexually satisfied than when they consume alcohol,” authors wrote.

Keep reading

8 In 10 Marijuana Consumers Use It As A Substitute For Prescription Drugs, New Survey Finds

A whopping eight in 10 marijuana consumers say they use cannabis, at least in part, as an alternative to traditional prescription drugs, according to a new poll.

The survey from the cannabis telehealth platform NuggMD, which was shared exclusively with Marijuana Moment, asked cannabis consumers a simple question: “Do you use cannabis as a replacement for prescription medication?”

Of the 485 respondents, 79.6 percent affirmed that they did, in fact, use marijuana as a substitute to pharmaceuticals, compared to 20.4 percent who said they did not.

“Pharmaceutical interests know the substitution effect cannabis has on their products is real,” Andrew Graham, head of communications at NuggMD, told Marijuana Moment. “Federal prohibition locks in a lot of demand for their addictive and potentially fatal drugs by depriving millions of Americans of legal access to the plant, and I can’t name a single interest aligned with Big Pharma that’s stated support for ending it.”

“Our newest poll shows the substitution effect may well be a lot higher than the pharma industry thinks that it is,” he said. “It estimates that around 40 million Americans use cannabis to some degree as a replacement for prescription drugs. That’s costing Big Pharma billions annually in lost profits.”

“I genuinely want Big Pharma to see this data and decide to spend yet more resources fighting against the plant. Because the more noise they make against cannabis, the more popular our movement becomes. They are that unpopular,” Graham added.

Notably, a majority of respondents in the survey sample did not report having a state medical cannabis card, indicating that the substitution effect extends beyond the registered patient population.

Keep reading

Letting Marijuana Users Have Guns Poses ‘A Clear Danger,’ Trump’s Solicitor General Tells Supreme Court

In a recent filing with the U.S. Supreme Court, the Trump-led Department of Justice (DOJ) is doubling down on arguments made under former President Joe Biden that users of illegal drugs—including marijuana—”pose a clear danger of misusing firearms.”

That risk, DOJ contends, justifies the longstanding federal prohibition on gun ownership by drug consumers—known as Section 922(g)(3)—despite the Constitution’s broad Second Amendment protections.

In a petition for review by the high court, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argues that despite recent appeals court decisions calling the constitutionality of the firearms ban into question, the restriction is nevertheless lawful.

“Section 922(g)(3) complies with the Second Amendment,” the government’s June 2 filing in the case, U.S. v. Hemani, says. “That provision targets a category of persons who pose a clear danger of misusing firearms: habitual users of unlawful drugs.”

Some lower courts have said the government’s blanket ban on gun and ammunition possession infringes on the Second Amendment—at least as applied to certain individual cases—because there’s no historical justification for such a broad restriction on an entire category of people.

But in the appeal petition in Hemani, Trump’s solicitor general said the ban is necessary and narrowly tailored enough to survive the legal challenge.

The federal statute “bars their possession of firearms only temporarily and leaves it within their power to lift the restriction at any time; anyone who stops habitually using illegal drugs can resume possessing firearms.”

Notably, while the government mentions “habitual” users of illegal drugs 40 times in its filing, that word does not itself appear in 922(g)(3). The language of the statute prohibits anyone “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” from purchasing or possessing firearms or ammunition.

A reply brief from Hemani’s lawyers is due to the Supreme Court by July 21.

While DOJ is asking the high court to take up the Hemani case, at least two other, similar cases are waiting in the wings: U.S. v. Cooper and U.S. v. Baxter both of which also hinge on the constitutionality of 922(g)(3).

In Cooper, an Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel dismissed a three-year prison sentence against a person convicted for possession of a firearm while being an active user of marijuana. Judges in that case ruled that government’s prohibition on gun ownership by drug users is justified only in certain circumstances—not always.

“Nothing in our tradition allows disarmament simply because [the defendant] belongs to a category of people, drug users, that Congress has categorically deemed dangerous,” their ruling said.

In Baxter, the Eighth Circuit ruled 922(g)(3) unconstitutional as applied to the facts in the case.

Judges in that case wrote that there were insufficient factual findings in the record “for this Court to review Baxter’s as-applied Second Amendment challenge.” Nevertheless, the they wrote, “We reverse the district court’s ruling on Baxter’s as-applied Second Amendment challenge and remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Keep reading

Nebraska AG Sends Threat Letters To Retailers Over Alleged Sales Of Illegal THC Products

The owners of 82 smoke and vape shops and other THC-friendly retailers in Lincoln are receiving cease and desist letters this week from Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R) about selling THC-containing products.

Hilgers, the state’s top prosecutor, ramped back up his push to get stores to stop selling delta-8, delta-9 and other products containing tetrahydrocannabinol that he argues offer people an unregulated, unsafe, illegal way to get high.

Store owners in several cities that Hilgers has targeted have argued state law is unclear about the legality of selling the products. Some have argued that federal law might have a loophole allowing it.

Hilgers had said he would pause his efforts to warn and then sue retailers still offering the targeted THC products if the Legislature in the 2025 session passed a bill to clearly make them illegal in the state, which stalled. The bill is likely to return in 2026.

His office, which also files civil cases to enforce state law, has sent the letters to 204 stores statewide alleging unfair business practices, deception and violations of safety requirements for food. That tally includes 104 stores in Omaha, four in Kearney and three in Nebraska City.

Keep reading

DEA Judge Shuts Down Cannabis Manufacturing Case Without Hearing, Company Plans Legal Challenge

The company behind the application, MMJ BioPharma Cultivation, is now preparing to challenge the ruling in federal court and call for the judge’s recusal.

The ruling was issued by DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge John Mulrooney II, who dismissed the company’s bid for a marijuana bulk manufacturing license after more than six years of delays. MMJ BioPharma said the decision came without warning and without any opportunity to present evidence or respond to agency claims—calling it a “procedural ambush.”

“This isn’t regulation—it’s an illegal ambush,” said MMJ CEO Duane Boise, who said the company had complied with all requirements under the Controlled Substances Act and FDA pathways.

MMJ, which is developing cannabis-based medicines for Huntington’s disease and multiple sclerosis, submitted a legally binding supply agreement in March 2024 with a DEA-licensed Schedule I facility. The agreement included specific sourcing protocols, defined volume, and DEA Form 222 compliance. Despite that, Mulrooney’s June 16 ruling ignored the document entirely and blocked it from being entered into the record.

Boise accused the DEA of demanding the agreement and then refusing to acknowledge it once submitted. “The agency cannot demand a document, receive it, then declare it irrelevant behind closed doors,” he said.

The order also reversed a previous determination by another administrative judge that certain disputed facts warranted a hearing. Instead, Mulrooney cited internal communications from a DEA investigator that MMJ was never allowed to challenge or respond to—raising concerns of ex parte communications and due process violations.

Keep reading

Why Is Texas Supporting Psychedelics Research While Criminalizing Cannabis?

Texas just announced it will invest $50 million into studying ibogaine, a powerful psychedelic drug that remains illegal at the federal level. The goal? To develop it into a potential Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for conditions like opioid use disorder, PTSD and depression; especially among veterans.

On the surface, this might sound like a bold and progressive move. But here’s the irony: at the very same time, Texas continues to criminalize cannabis and might soon even outlaw hemp-derived THC products.

Let’s break this down. Cannabis, a plant with centuries of use, decades of medical data and broad public support remains illegal for adult use in Texas. Despite overwhelming national support for legalization—a staggering 88 percent of Americans now back medical or recreational cannabis use)—the state has chosen to double down on prohibition, with lawmakers sending Gov. Greg Abbott (R) a bill that would outlaw consumable hemp products with any traces of THC. He has until Sunday to decide whether to allow that ban to take effect.

Even worse, prohibition isn’t stopping anything. The black market is thriving in Texas. Cartels and illicit operators flood the state with unregulated, untested cannabis. No taxes are collected, no consumer protections exist and legal hemp retailers are now being threatened. It is a misguided public safety argument deluded by a lack of facts and science, political conservatism, contradictory business objectives and outdated stigmas.

Meanwhile, ibogaine, a hallucinogenic alkaloid that can induce intense psychedelic experiences, is now the subject of a $50 million state-funded research push. The same lawmakers who claim cannabis is too dangerous and not well studied are throwing their support behind a compound with far less research and much more uncertainty with the intent of studying it.

This isn’t a critique of psychedelic medicine. Ibogaine may very well hold incredible therapeutic value. But if Texas is willing to support cutting-edge, controversial treatments for serious mental health and addiction issues, why not start with widely available data and access to cannabis? Cannabis has already been shown to help with chronic pain, anxiety, sleep, seizures and opioid dependency.

Keep reading