Tag: legalized marijuana

Legal Marijuana Access Reduces Suicide Rates For Older Adults, New Study Suggests

States that opened recreational marijuana dispensaries saw suicide rates decline among older adults, according to a new scientific analysis of more than two decades of nationwide data. Correlating state legalization to the decline, the researchers note a “modest yet statistically significant reduction” in states with legal access to cannabis.

The research, conducted by a team of public health economists, examined monthly suicide counts from U.S. states between 2000 and 2022. Their aim was to better understand whether easier access to marijuana, specifically through licensed retail stores, might have any measurable effect on mental health outcomes. Their working paper, published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, shows that may be the case.

The study found that in states where recreational cannabis dispensaries began operating, suicide rates among adults ages 45 and older declined. The effect was strongest among men, who historically have had significantly higher suicide rates and are more likely to use cannabis to manage chronic pain, a health challenge that increases the risk of suicide.

“Given that older adults are more prone to chronic pain and various physical and mental health issues, it is not surprising that this demographic is increasingly turning to marijuana for its medicinal properties,” the paper noted.

The researchers found no similar pattern among younger adults or in states that legalized recreational cannabis but had not yet opened retail stores. That distinction, they say, suggests that actual access to marijuana, rather than legalization via state law changes alone, may be the more influential factor.

Keep reading

Ohio Governor Says He’ll Sign Bill To Roll Back Marijuana Legalization And Restrict ‘Juiced-Up Hemp’ Products

Ohio’s Republican governor says he will sign a controversial bill to scale back the state’s voter-approved marijuana law and ban the sale of what he described as “juiced-up hemp” products that fall outside of a recently revised federal definition for the crop unless they’re sold at licensed cannabis dispensaries.

Just days after the legislature gave final approval to the marijuana legislation, Gov. Mike DeWine (R) said on Thursday that he intends to enact it into law.

“To me, it’s a major, major victory, and it’s a long time coming. But it’s a major victory, I think, for kids in the state,” he said, according to The Columbus Dispatch. “There’s going to be some regulation. They won’t be able to have juiced-up hemp gummies. They won’t be able to walk into a gas station and an 11-year-old buy this stuff.”

The governor did not respond to a question about whether the marijuana components of the legislation undermined the will of voters who approved adult-use legalization in 2023.

The bill on DeWine’s desk would recriminalize certain marijuana activity that was legalized under that ballot initiative, and it’d also remove anti-discrimination protections for cannabis consumers that were enacted under that law.

After the House revised the initial Senate-passed legislation, removing certain controversial provisions, the Senate quickly rejected those changes in October. That led to the appointment of a bicameral conference committee to resolve outstanding differences between the chambers. That panel then approved a negotiated form of the bill, which passed the House last month and has since cleared the Senate.

To advocates’ disappointment, the final version of the measure now heading to the governor’s desk would eliminate language in current statute providing anti-discrimination protections for people who lawfully use cannabis. That includes protections meant to prevent adverse actions in the context of child custody rights, the ability to qualify for organ transplants and professional licensing.

It would also recriminalize possessing marijuana from any source that isn’t a state-licensed dispensary in Ohio or from a legal homegrow. As such, people could be charged with a crime for carrying cannabis they bought at a legal retailer in neighboring Michigan.

Additionally, it would ban smoking cannabis at outdoor public locations such as bar patios—and it would allow landlords to prohibit vaping marijuana at rented homes. Violating that latter policy, even if it involves vaping in a person’s own backyard at a rental home, would constitute a misdemeanor offense.

The legislation would also replace what had been a proposed regulatory framework for intoxicating hemp that the House had approved with a broad prohibition on sales outside marijuana dispensaries following a recent federal move to recriminalize such products.

Last month, Sen. Stephen Huffman (R), the primary sponsor, defended the upheaval of the state’s marijuana law, saying voters approved an initiative that amended the state’s revised code, not its Constitution, so they “knew that the General Assembly could come at any time” and “pass a bill to get rid of the entire thing.”

“But we’re not,” he said. “I think overall, for the average person that does recreational or medical marijuana, this bill will make it better… It’s going to be reasonable for most Ohioans.”

Under the bill, hemp items with more than 0.4 mg of total THC per container, or those containing synthetic cannabinoids, could no longer be sold outside of a licensed marijuana dispensary setting. That would align with a newly enacted federal hemp law included in an appropriations package signed by President Donald Trump last month.

Keep reading

Minnesota Legalized Marijuana, But Thousands Of People Are Still Being Prosecuted For Carrying Cannabis In Their Cars

When Minnesota lawmakers legalized recreational marijuana in 2023, Democrats hailed it as the state’s most sweeping shift in drug policy in half a century and long-overdue relief for tens of thousands whose records were marred by low-level marijuana offenses.

What had been a felony—having two ounces of cannabis flower in a car, enough for about 100 joints—became legal overnight when the law took effect on August 1.

But legalization hasn’t ended marijuana prosecutions. Minnesota prosecutors have brought more than 3,500 charges and won more than 1,200 misdemeanor convictions against people with cannabis in their cars since legalization, according to a Minnesota Reformer analysis. Additionally, prosecutors have filed nearly 500 charges against people for consuming cannabis in vehicles, either as passengers or drivers.

That’s due to an important but unadvertised caveat: all cannabis products—including flower, vape pens, wax and edibles—must be in the trunk (or trunk area in the case of SUVs) unless they’re sealed in their original, labeled packaging from a dispensary.

The police stops and prosecutions have defense lawyers concerned about the threat of racial profiling and warrantless vehicle searches.

“Now there’s this whole entry point to all of these cars—officers are going to take it every time they get,” Amanda Brodhag, a Hennepin County public defender, said.

Law enforcement leaders and prosecutors say there’s an obvious public safety rationale for the law: driving under the influence of cannabis or any intoxicating substance is dangerous and they shouldn’t be easily accessible to the driver.

The packaging law has caught many consumers and even cannabis attorneys unawares.

“I’m surprised,” said Elliot Ginsburg, an attorney who helps marijuana growers, manufacturers and retailers comply with the new regulatory regime. “I suspect a lot of people don’t know that.”

The law prohibiting improperly packaged marijuana in vehicles isn’t mentioned on the state’s “need to know” page about adult-use cannabis, nor is it referenced anywhere in the chapter of laws governing recreational cannabis, including the lengthy section detailing limits on cannabis possession and the many things people may not do with it, like use it in a vehicle.

The rules are found in the lengthy chapter of traffic laws, next to the nearly identical section on open alcohol containers.

Violating the cannabis open package law is a misdemeanor, carrying a maximum penalty of $1,000 fine and 90 days in jail, although many people end up paying a few hundred dollars or less, according to the Reformer’s review of convictions.

Keep reading

Ohio Lawmakers Pass Bill To Roll Back Voter-Approved Marijuana Law And Impose Hemp Restrictions, Sending It To Governor

The Ohio Senate has voted to concur with a House-amended bill to scale back the state’s voter-approved marijuana law and ban the sale of hemp products that fall outside of a recently revised federal definition for the crop unless they’re sold at licensed cannabis dispensaries.

The measure from Sen. Stephen Huffman (R) was substantively revised in the House last month, but the originating chamber voted 22-7 on Tuesday to accept those changes and send the legislation to Gov. Mike DeWine’s (R) desk.

The legislation now pending the governor’s signature would recriminalize certain marijuana activity that was legalized under a ballot initiative that passed in 2023  as well as remove anti-discrimination protections for cannabis consumers that were enacted under that law.

After the House revised the initial Senate-passed legislation, removing certain controversial provisions, the Senate quickly rejected those changes in October. That led to the appointment of a bicameral conference committee to resolve outstanding differences between the chambers. That panel then approved a negotiated form of the bill, which passed the House last month and has now cleared the Senate.

To advocates’ disappointment, the final version of the measure now heading to the governor’s desk would eliminate language in current statute providing anti-discrimination protections for people who lawfully use cannabis. That includes protections meant to prevent adverse actions in the context of child custody rights, the ability to qualify for organ transplants and professional licensing.

It would also recriminalize possessing marijuana from any source that isn’t a state-licensed dispensary in Ohio or from a legal homegrow. As such, people could be charged with a crime for carrying cannabis they bought at a legal retailer in neighboring Michigan.

Additionally, it would ban smoking cannabis at outdoor public locations such as bar patios—and it would allow landlords to prohibit vaping marijuana at rented homes. Violating that latter policy, even if it involves vaping in a person’s own backyard at a rental home, would constitute a misdemeanor offense.

The legislation would also replace what had been a proposed regulatory framework for intoxicating hemp that the House had approved with a broad prohibition on sales outside marijuana dispensaries following a recent federal move to recriminalize such products.

“In short, this bill leaves the crux of Issue 2 and marijuana access intact, while providing for several important public safety concerns and also regulations that protect Ohio children,” Huffman argued on the Senate floor ahead of Tuesday’s vote.

Sen. Bill DeMora (D), however, said the legislation undermines the will of voters.

Keep reading

Ohio Senate Expected To Vote On Bill Recriminalizing Some Marijuana Activity That Voters Legalized

A new law that’s likely to pass at the Statehouse next week would establish a series of minor criminal penalties for people who improperly transport or possess marijuana in Ohio, while rolling back legal protections for users in venues like child custody or professional licensing disputes.

For that reason, NORML, the oldest marijuana advocacy organization in the U.S., is leading a quixotic effort to ask the Ohio Senate to reject Senate Bill 56 before a final vote next week.

With the Senate’s approval, the bill would go to Gov. Mike DeWine (R) for a signature or veto.

The marijuana changes come within a larger package that also imposes a comprehensive, new regulatory system on intoxicating hemp, a product that’s functionally similar to legal marijuana but sold without the age restrictions, taxes or quality controls. DeWine, a Republican who opposed relaxing Ohio’s marijuana laws, has made a public cause of the intoxicating hemp issue for more than a year now.

But perhaps out of a political compromise, marijuana users have found themselves caught in the crosshairs within the hemp crackdown, according to Morgan Fox, NORML’s political director.

“A lot of these things are completely nonsensical,” he said in an interview. “This is recriminalizing a lot of behavior that is relatively innocuous and has been legal for some time.”

House and Senate lawmakers negotiated a final version of the legislation in a conference committee, which means the bill can no longer be changed. The House passed it last month, with a late-night 52-34 vote, where a handful of Republicans joined Democrats in opposition.

Committee members described the final version as a compromise between a list of scrambled voting blocs: Democrats who don’t want new criminal penalties for run-of-the-mill users, libertarian-minded Republicans protective of the right to grow one’s own marijuana, religious conservatives who disapprove expanding the legal use of intoxicants, local governments who want their tax money, a governor seeking a crackdown on the gas station hemp retailers, and both the hemp and marijuana industries seeking market advantage. (All told, 153 lobbyists registered to work on the bill as of August, state records show.)

In 2023, Ohio voters passed Issue 2 by a 57 percent to 43 percent vote, allowing for adults to lawfully use, buy, sell and possess cannabis. Those rights remain broadly intact under the bill.

However, SB 56 imposes legal penalties for things like possessing marijuana in anything but its original container or buying legal marijuana in Michigan where it tends to be much cheaper.

What follows is a closer look at some of those rules.

Keep reading

Amid fraud claims, campaign to end Mass. adult-use cannabis claims win

The controversial bid to end Massachusetts’ $1.6 billion annual adult-use marijuana industry claimed yet another significant early victory.

Amid widening accusations of voter fraud, the Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts “is confident it has submitted enough signatures to put the question on the ballot” ahead of a Nov. 19 deadline, a campaign spokesperson told The Cannabis Business Times.

Ballot questions filed over the summer by lead sponsor Caroline Cunningham, a member of the state Republican Committee, seek to repeal Chapters 94G and 64N of the state’s General Laws.

If the “Act to Restore a Sensible Marijuana Policy” qualifies for the 2026 ballot and is approved by voters, adult-use cannabis retail sales would be outlawed in Massachusetts- though medical marijuana sales, home cultivation, and “gifting” between adults 21 and over would still be allowed.

Will Massachusetts vote to stop adult-use cannabis sales?

The campaign successfully collected a minimum of 74,574 signatures by Nov. 19 in order to qualify for a local vetting process ahead of another filing deadline Dec. 3, campaign spokesperson Wendy Wakeman told the Business Times.

Organizers have vowed to collect as many as 100,000 signatures.

And that’s despite mounting claims that signature-gatherers are using deceptive tactics to convince voters to sign the petition.

As MJBizDaily reported earlier this month, there are several accounts of campaign workers approaching voters while claiming the petition does something else, such as combat fentanyl or create housing.

Wakeman claimed in an MJBizDaily interview to have no knowledge or involvement with the alleged deceptive tactics. Campaign workers engaging in such behavior are volunteers and not paid signature gatherers, she said.

Cannabis industry advocates aren’t convinced.

Bid to stop Massachusetts adult-use marijuana sales accused of fraud

Such acts constitute voter fraud, according to the Massachusetts Cannabis Business Association, a statewide trade group.

It remains unclear what recourse cannabis advocates could pursue if the repeal campaign does indeed advance.

Using false claims to woo voters to sign is a protected free-speech activity under Massachusetts state law.

However, voters could petition local authorities to have their signatures removed and the petition disqualified if they feel they signed under false pretenses, elections observers have said.

Keep reading

Federal Appeals Court Deems Gun Ban For Marijuana Consumers Unconstitutional, Dismissing Conviction

A federal court has tossed a firearms conviction against a man because it determined that the underlying alleged crime—possession of a gun while being a user of marijuana—is unconstitutional.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth District on Friday said the crux of the case is “whether the Second Amendment protects a habitual marijuana user from being permanently dispossessed of a firearm based on our Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The ruling comes as the U.S. Supreme Court weighs the constitutionality of the federal ban on gun ownership by people who use marijuana and other drugs. Numerous federal courts have issued rulings on the issue in recent years, but the legal challenge has yet to be settled.

The case of Kevin LaMarcus Mitchell is somewhat unique, in that the appeals court made an assessment about the cannabis and firearms question in the context of a ruling to invalidate a conviction for general unlawful gun possession.

What the court ultimately determined is that the federal statute § 922(g)(3) doesn’t meet the standards of Supreme Court precedent in the case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which held that gun laws restricting the Second Amendment must be set in a way that’s consistent with the country’s founding.

The appeals court found that there was no “sufficient evidence of present intoxication” when Mitchell was prosecuted, and so “admission of being a habitual marijuana user is not enough to justify § 922(g)(1)’s permanent ban on his firearm possession.”

“The implication of a ruling to the contrary would be that Michell was always intoxicated from age nineteen onward based on his admission, and our historical laws could be applied to him at any point during that period,” the majority ruling said.

“Accordingly, we REVERSE the district court’s denial of Mitchell’s motion to dismiss and VACATE the judgment of conviction and sentence,” it said. “The government’s motion to supplement the record is DENIED as moot.”

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court recently granted a request from the Trump administration to extend the deadline to submit briefs in a case concerning the constitutionality of the federal gun ban on gun ownership for cannabis users.

After justices agreed to take the case, U.S. v. Hemani, last month, DOJ told the court there was mutual agreement between its attorneys and those representing the respondent in the case that the initial deadline for briefs and reply briefs should be revised because of the “press of other cases.”

Relatedly, a coalition of gun rights organizations recently urged the Supreme Court to expand its examination of the constitutionality of the federal firearm ban for cannabis consumers—telling justices that a recent case on the issue it accepted would not properly settle the question of the current law’s constitutionality.

With respect to Hemani, in a separate August filing for the case, the Justice Department also emphasized that “the question presented is the subject of a multi-sided and growing circuit conflict.” In seeking the court’s grant of cert, the solicitor general also noted that the defendant is a joint American and Pakistani citizen with alleged ties to Iranian entities hostile to the U.S., putting him the FBI’s radar.

Now that the Supreme Court has agreed to take up Hemani, if justices declare 922(g)(3) constitutional, such a ruling could could mean government wins in the remaining cases. The high court last month denied a petition for cert in U.S. v. Cooper, while leaving pending decisions on U.S. v. Daniels and U.S. v. Sam.

The court also recently denied a petition for cert in another gun and marijuana case, U.S. v. Baxter, but that wasn’t especially surprising as both DOJ and the defendants advised against further pursing the matter after a lower court reinstated his conviction for being an unlawful user of a controlled substance in possession of a firearm.

Keep reading

Rand Paul Slams Alcohol And Marijuana Interests Over Federal Hemp Ban, Announcing He’ll File A Bill To Reverse It Next Week

A GOP senator says he’ll be filing a bill next week to protect the hemp industry from an impending federal ban on most cannabinoid products. He’s also calling out alcohol and marijuana interests for allegedly “join[ing] forces” to lobby in favor of the prohibitionist policy change, which will restrict access to a plant and its derivatives that are often used therapeutically—including by members of his Senate colleagues’ families.

In an interview on “The Chris Cuomo Project” podcast that was posted on Thursday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) previewed his plan to push back against the hemp ban that was included in major spending legislation President Donald Trump signed into law last week.

Paul has been sounding the alarm for weeks about the potential consequences of the hemp recriminalization provisions, which he says would cause mass job losses and a $25 billion industry to be “wiped out.”

As he previewed during a separate webinar organized by the Kentucky Hemp Association on Wednesday, the senator told Cuomo that he intends to introduce legislation next week that would make it so state policy regulating hemp cannabinoid products—with basic safeguards in place to prevent youth access, for example—”supersedes the federal law.”

Keep reading

There’s No Reason To Increase The Legal Age For Marijuana Use To 25, New Scientific Paper Concludes

The theory that marijuana use can negatively—and potentially permanently—rewire the brain up until a person reaches the age of 25 is based on misleading science that neglects to account for key factors in cognitive maturity, according to a new research paper.

The study, published on Monday in the American Journal on Drug and Alcohol Abuse, examined the scientific literature around neurodevelopment. While most U.S. states prevent people under 21 to access adult-use cannabis products, some public health advocates are pushing to the legal age limit to 25.

But the researchers, who are affiliated with the advocacy group Doctors for Drug Policy Reform, concluded that those proposals would not meaningfully prevent adverse mental health outcomes for consumers.

“Invoking age 25 as a bright line for brain maturity is not supported by neuroscience,” they wrote. “Cannabis policy should reflect evidence and fairness, not mythology.”

The paper states that there’s “no empirically defined neurodevelopmental endpoint at age 25,” as brain maturation “is a nonlinear process, region-specific, influenced by sex and specific physiological processes.”

“Importantly, existing evidence does not demonstrate greater long-term cognitive or neurophysiological harm attributable to cannabis use in individuals aged 18-25 years compared to those older than 25,” it says.

The researchers reviewed data on the macrostructural and microstructural development of the brain, which shows that such maturation is “mostly complete by the end of adolescence, around age 18.”

“Other, more subtle developmental changes continue throughout the third decade of life. The often-cited claim that brain development ‘ends’ at 25 is not clearly supported by primary neuroscientific literature,” it says.

Keep reading

Nebraska Tribe Punches Back After State Officials Hint At Prosecuting People For Buying Marijuana On Its Reservation

A Native American tribe in Nebraska, as well as cannabis reform activists, are punching back against the governor and state attorney general over recent comments suggesting that people would be prosecuted if they buy marijuana from businesses on its reservation.

Gov. Jim Pillen (R) and Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R) both made controversial remarks about the tribe’s cannabis program this week amid negotiations over a compact on tax revenue from tobacco sales.

Hilgers said that people who buy marijuana under the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska’s planned legal market on its reservation within the state do so “at their own peril,” implying enforcement action against citizens for purchasing what he described as a “poison” if they take it beyond the territory’s borders.

In response, the tribe’s attorney general, John Cartier, put out a statement condemning the top state officials, emphasizing that the state “cannot dictate our internal licensing” and that “retaliation and misinformation do not serve patients or taxpayers.”

“We continue to act in good faith and are ready to work with the Governor to find agreement that benefits both parties, but we caution him: if he is relying solely on the Attorney General’s flawed interpretation of the law, personal crusades are clouding his legal judgment as they have before,” he said. “If the State continues to retaliate or attempts to block our lawful enterprise, we will defend our sovereignty through all available means.”

Cartier said the notion that the tribe can’t sell marijuana under its regulatory model to non-tribal members is “wrong.”

“Nebraskans overwhelmingly approved medical cannabis last November, yet the administration has pursued litigation and commission actions that frustrate voter intent and depart from Nebraska law and the sponsors’ stated purpose,” the statement says. “None of this alters the jurisdictional line that preserves the Tribe’s authority on tribal lands. The Tribe has moved forward, as is our right, with regulations that align with statute. The State’s reaction misstates the law and distracts from patient-focused solutions.”

The tribe’s attorney general said its members are willing to compromise on the tobacco tax issue and accept a compact deal previously offered by the administration. But if that compromise plan is also being withdrawn, he said that would “demonstrate direct retaliation against the Tribe, and we will respond accordingly.”

“We prefer to work directly with the Governor on a tobacco tax compact that benefits both parties and respects sovereignty. Any attempt to leverage an unrelated, lawful medical cannabis program against compact discussions is improper. We look forward to the administration’s written position and we will respond through the proper channels.”

The tribe’s attorney general previously claimed that the state is using its efforts to legalize marijuana as an excuse to suspend negotiations on the tobacco tax deal.

Keep reading