Tag: legalized marijuana

Feds Say Marijuana Can Be ‘Summarily’ Seized From State-Legal Businesses—But Not If It’s Rescheduled

Federal agencies tasked with border security are contesting a lawsuit from New Mexico marijuana businesses that have had their state-legal products and other assets seized—arguing that, because cannabis is a Schedule I drug under federal law, it can be “summarily” taken.

But that might not be the case if marijuana was moved to Schedule III, the the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) suggested in a new federal court filing.

As a proposal to federally reschedule cannabis sits in limbo—with administrative hearings on the Biden administration-initiated reform effort delayed at the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)—the agencies indicated that the potential policy change could impact their own forfeiture authorities.

In a memorandum submitted to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico on Friday, DHS and CBP expanded on several previously voiced arguments on why the judge should support their motion to have the underlying lawsuit dismissed, challenging the idea that the marijuana-related seizures from state-licensed cannabis businesses is unconstitutional.

As they previously emphasized, marijuana remains a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and so seizing the property at border checkpoints within New Mexico is consistent with federal law, regardless of the state’s decision to legalize cannabis.

“It is beyond dispute that the Controlled Substances Act is a valid exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause” of the U.S. Constitution, it says.

It acknowledged that DEA is currently considering rescheduling. However, since “no reclassification has occurred to date, marijuana remains a Schedule I controlled substance.”

Notably, the memorandum suggested that the forfeiture process would be different if cannabis was classified as a Schedule III drug or lower.

Keep reading

California Supreme Court Rules Federal Prohibition Doesn’t Block Marijuana Businesses From Transporting Products

California’s Supreme Court delivered a victory for the state’s marijuana program, rescinding a lower court ruling in a case that suggested federal prohibition could be used locally to undermine the cannabis market.

The case in question concerns a lawsuit filed by a company in Santa Barbara County that objected to the use of an easement, which is a right to use another person’s property, for the transportation of state-legal cannabis products. A state appellate court sided with the company, ruling in January that federal law preempted the state’s and that the easement could not be utilized for marijuana transport.

But the highest court in the state has now reversed that decision, rescinding the ruling.

“We are pleased the Court agreed to address that Court of Appeal decision at the Department of Cannabis Control’s (DCC) request, supporting California law and its legal cannabis industry,” DCC Director Nicole Elliott said in a press release on Thursday.

While the case—JCCrandall v. County of Santa Barbara—was specific to the company and county, DCC said that the appeals court’s original decision “suggested more broadly that California’s cannabis regulations were unlawful because cannabis is federally illegal.”

Without an intervening decision from the state Supreme Court to rescind the opinion, that could have opened the state up to litigation challenging other parts of its marijuana laws.

Keep reading

Minnesota Judge Rules That Native American Man Can Be Prosecuted Over Marijuana Possession On Reservation Despite State Legalization

A Minnesota district court judge ruled that the state may prosecute Native Americans on most reservations for possessing large amounts of marijuana, allowing a felony case against a White Earth man to proceed.

The ruling is the first—though likely not the last—to address state law enforcement’s jurisdiction over marijuana in Indian Country since Minnesota legalized its recreational use in 2023.

Todd Thompson, a White Earth citizen, faces a felony possession charge with a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $10,000 fine for selling marijuana without a license from his tobacco store in Mahnomen on the White Earth reservation.

Mahnomen County sheriff’s deputies and White Earth tribal police raided his store on August 2, 2023, a day after recreational cannabis became legal in Minnesota, and seized about 7.5 pounds of cannabis, 433 grams of marijuana wax and $2,748 in cash along with Thompson’s cell phone and surveillance system.

Thompson asked Mahnomen County District Judge Seamus Duffy to dismiss the charge, arguing that the state doesn’t have the legal jurisdiction to prosecute him.

Under what’s called Public Law 280, Minnesota has the power to prosecute tribal members on certain reservations including White Earth’s for criminal acts but not civil or regulatory violations of state law. Thompson and his attorney, Claire Glenn, argued that after cannabis was legalized in Minnesota, possessing and selling the drug became a regulatory matter, not a criminal one.

The judge, in a ruling issued earlier this month, disagreed. He wrote that the possession of “non-personal, non-recreational amounts of marijuana in public is generally prohibited,” and that just because the state may issue licenses to businesses to sell marijuana, doesn’t mean it’s only a regulatory matter. He pointed to a case in which a White Earth man was convicted of possessing a pistol without a permit on tribal land.

Keep reading

Ohio GOP Lawmaker Files Bill To Revise Voter-Approved Marijuana Law With Less Sweeping Changes Than Senate-Passed Measure

A Republican Ohio lawmaker has introduced a rival bill to Senate-passed legislation that seeks to amend the state’s voter-approved marijuana legalization law. And the proposed changes in the House measure are less sweeping—for example, maintaining the current allowable amount of cannabis plans that can be grown at home by adults.

Rep. Brian Stewart (R), chair of the House Finance Committee, is sponsoring the new 120-page cannabis bill.

Unlike the Senate proposal from Sen. Steve Huffman (R) that moved through the full chamber late last month, Stewart’s legislation would not alter a provision of the current law allowing adults 21 and older to grow up to 12 plants for personal use by cutting that amount in half.

However, it would reduce the maximum THC limit for cannabis extracts from 90 percent to 70 percent, as News 5 Cleveland first reported.

The Senate bill would lower the maximum household plant limit for home cultivation from 12 to six, but it similarly calls for the same reduced THC cap. Both bills would also make it so only 350 dispensaries could be licensed in the state.

“While there will obviously continue to be good faith debate and disagreement over the pros and cons of legalization, a majority of our constituents have made it clear to us that they support legal adult-use marijuana that is taxed at a reasonable rate, that is regulated by the state to ensure products are as safe as possible and that can, if desired, be grown at home,” Stewart said during a press briefing on Thursday.

Keep reading

Federal Ban On Interstate Marijuana Commerce Helps The Illicit Market While Hurting Legal Businesses, California Report Finds

California officials have unveiled a new report on the current status and future of the state’s marijuana market—with independent analysts hired by regulators concluding that the federal prohibition on cannabis that prevents interstate commerce is meaningfully bolstering the illicit market.

The California Cannabis Market Outlook 2024 report—commissioned by the state Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) and carried out by ERA Economics—looked at consumer trends, industry data, regulatory enforcement actions and more.

Marketing conditions for licensed businesses “have been challenging since 2021,” the report says, noting declining wholesale cannabis prices and stagnation in transitioning adults to the regulated market. Just about 40 percent of consumers are buying from legal operators years into the implementation of legalization.

“Competition from the illicit market contributes to lower prices in the licensed market,” it says. “Some consumers still purchase cannabis from illicit operations and illicit cannabis production moves across state lines into different markets.”

“[C]annabis consumption has modestly increased and many of those consumers are purchasing cannabis from licensed cannabis businesses, but there is still a substantial illicit market in California,” it says. “Careful analysis of the data does not show an explosion of illicit market production.”

A key part of the problem is ongoing federal prohibition, according to the analysis.

“Federal legalization of cannabis and facilitation of trade between different states with licensed markets would reduce trade of illicit cannabis and could lead to more stable prices in California and other states,” it says.

The report says “wholesale prices showed that prices in the licensed markets in California, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington are related,” and this “link between the licensed cannabis markets in California, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington has increased over time.”

“The link is the unlicensed market,” it says.

“Prices in these states have converged, and statistical analysis confirms these markets are co-integrated. Market co-integration generally occurs as a result of trade between nations (or in this case, states). However, without any legal interstate trade, this result indicates that the illicit market is a driving factor that connects prices across states.”

That’s not to say that the lack of interstate commerce is the sole factor stymieing the industry, of course. The report also identifies the unregulated market for intoxicating hemp products—as well as local bans on marijuana businesses—as contributing factors.

Keep reading

Ohio GOP Leaders Claim Bill To Roll Back Marijuana Legalization Law Doesn’t Disrespect Voters

Ohio’s Senate president is pushing back against criticism of a bill that would scale back parts of a voter-approved marijuana legalization law, claiming that the legislation does not disrespect the will of the electorate and would have little impact on products available in stores.

“My definitive message is: If you want to go purchase marijuana products from a licensed dispensary, that is going to be unchanged by Senate Bill 56,” Senate President Rob McColley (R) said on a podcast posted on Friday. “The only difference you’ll notice is the packaging may not look as appealing to children, but you’ll still be able to buy the same products.”

McColley was speaking on a The President’s Podcast, produced and published by Ohio Senate Republicans. He and host John Fortney, the communications director for the Senate GOP caucus, spent the first half of the podcast defending SB 56, which would amend the cannabis law passed by voters in November 2023.

Among other changes, the bill would halve the number of plants that adults could grow, add new criminal penalties around cannabis conduct and remove select social equity provisions in the law.

The Senate approved the proposal on a 23–9 vote last week.

Critics, such as Sen. Bill DeMora (D), who spoke against the measures on the Senate floor, contend that the plan “goes against the will of the voters and will kill the adult industry in Ohio.”

Fortney began the podcast by acknowledging “a lot of controversy around Senate Bill 56,” asserting that “all it did was preserve access to what the voters approved in November of 2023, the initiated marijuana statute, and put some safety and security parameters around it for—of all things, Mr. President—children.”

“The far left, the Democrat narrative, the narrative of the legacy media, has been, ‘Republicans are trying to take away what the voters approved,’ which is patently false,” Fortney continued. “What a lie.”

Keep reading

Washington Lawmakers Once Again Abandon Effort To Allow Adults To Grow Marijuana At Home

Democrats in the Washington State legislature have once again given up on a plan to legalize home cultivation of marijuana for personal use, opting instead to keep the conduct classified as a felony.

Lawmakers in the House Appropriations Committee did not act on the homegrow bill—HB 1449, from Rep. Shelley Kloba—before a legislative deadline on Friday, meaning it’s now dead for the session.

If enacted law, the bill would have allowed adults 21 and older to grow up to six cannabis plants at home for personal use, with households capped at 15 plants regardless of how many adults reside on the premises. People could also lawfully keep the marijuana produced by those plants despite the state’s existing one-ounce limit on possession.

Kloba and other supportive lawmakers have worked for nearly a decade to pass a law allowing adults to grow a small number of cannabis plants for their own use, but each year, other lawmakers and executive agencies have stood in the way of the proposal.

Kloba’s staff on Friday confirmed to Marijuana Moment that the bill would not move forward this year, saying that the lawmaker “will continue pursuing this policy” but declining to comment further.

Last year, Kloba sponsored HB 2194, which similarly died after not being called for a vote in the House Appropriations Committee.

After last year’s proposal failed to advance, Kloba similarly said she would continue to pursue the reform.

“Every session has its own character and constraints, which so far have meant that the bill has not advanced to the Senate,” she told Marijuana Moment at the time. “But I am not giving up.”

Washington was one of the first U.S. states to legalize adult-use marijuana, passing a ballot initiative in 2012. Growing marijuana for personal use without a state medical card, however, remains a Class C felony, carrying up to five years in prison and up to $10,000 in fines.

Legislative efforts to allow personal cultivation stretch back to at least 2015, but so far each has failed.

Keep reading

Minnesota Lawmakers, Cities And Businesses Raise Alarm Over State’s Pending Marijuana Contracts With Tribal Nations

People interested in the recreational cannabis market who are not Gov. Tim Walz (DFL) or leaders of the state’s tribal nations have been asking when, where and how they can present their views on imminent state-tribal cannabis compacts.

The answer is: They can’t. The pending compacts that are now expected to allow the state’s tribal nations to enter the legal cannabis business outside of their reservations will not be made public until they are signed by Walz and the tribes. Once signed, they would be the first state-tribal cannabis compacts in the U.S. to allow tribal enterprises to operate outside of reservation lands, and they can’t be amended without mutual agreement.

That leaves lawmakers, local governments and potential cannabis business people to raise issues publicly with little expectation that they will be considered by state negotiators. Walz endorsed the basic tenets of the deal—that the tribes would get a large chunk of the off-reservation market and be allowed to open their stores well before non-tribal stores can open.

“They’re great partners in this. They know how to do this,” Walz said. “Many of them are ahead, obviously enough to set up for them and their sovereignty, to be cultivating. So I think we’re in good shape, and I think they’ll be executed in the near future. And I think that’s the first step in a broader market that is going to be big, and it’ll shake itself out over time.”

He said having tribal stores open first “lets us get out there.”

Keep reading

New Jersey Governor Proposes Marijuana Tax Hike

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (D) wants to hike a special tax on cannabis from $2.50 to $15 an ounce to fund social service and violence intervention programs with tens of millions of dollars in new revenue.

“In just five years, cannabis has gone from destroying lives—in the form of excessive criminal sentences—to helping save lives,” Murphy said in his budget address Tuesday.

Murphy’s plan comes about two months after the state Cannabis Regulatory Commission hiked the tax from $1.24 to $2.50 an ounce in December.

The tax, known as the social equity excise fee, is paid by cannabis cultivators. The money goes to a dedicated fund for social equity programs and investing in communities hurt by marijuana prohibition, and another portion is allocated to programs to divert youth from cannabis.

As of August 2024, the tax has brought in more than $6 million, which is all sitting unspent, according to the cannabis agency. That money must be allocated by the Legislature and governor under the state’s cannabis legalization law.

Keep reading