Tag: legalized marijuana

Federal E-Cigarette Ruling Highlights Danger Of Not Preparing For Sensible Cannabis Regulations

A recent Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals opinion on vaping sheds light on why federal cannabis legalization must be accompanied by a sensible regulatory framework that is administered and enforced by the right agency.

The court’s opinion in Wages and White Lion Investment LLC v. Food and Drug Administration excoriates the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its handling of flavored e-cigarettes and underscores the dangers to the public and industry that result from ideological, rather than logical, regulation.

The threat of not plotting out a viable federal regulatory landscape—we know the feds already have their eye on this space—is worrisome for all cannabis businesses and consumers, and particularly the vape sector, which now makes up nearly 25 percent of the market. And the need to set the cannabis industry on a sensible federal regulatory path has only grown more urgent in light of the recent Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommendation to move marijuana to Schedule III, a move that increases the likelihood of new federal oversight.

Keep reading

Justice Department Issues More Marijuana Pardon Certificates A Month After Biden’s Expanded Clemency Move

The Justice Department has already started issuing pardon certificates for certain marijuana offenses covered under an expanded proclamation that President Joe Biden issued last month.

Chris Goldstein, a cannabis activist who was arrested over possession of marijuana on federal land while protesting for reform in 2014, shared the certification he received from DOJ’s Office of the Pardon Attorney on Tuesday.

Goldstein was among those whose cannabis cases were omitted from Biden’s original mass pardon in October 2022, which only covered statutes related to the general offense of simple cannabis possession under federal or Washington, D.C. law. The president’s newly expanded pardon proclamation issued last month specifically added possession on federal property as an offense eligible for relief.

Keep reading

NY unveils first rules for growing marijuana at home: How you can cultivate cannabis

This will take home gardens to new highs.

New York State cannabis regulators on Tuesday unveiled the first rules for budding growers to legally plant pot at home.

Stoners with a green thumb — and over the age of 21 — will be able to cultivate a maximum of six mature marijuana plants and posses up to five pounds of flower or concentrate from those buds per household.

The state Cannabis Control Board was scheduled to discuss the rules Wednesday but postponed the vote for a later date.

Following their approval, there would be a 60 day public comment period before the rules can go into effect.

Keep reading

CDC Finds Youth Marijuana Use Fell In Washington State’s Largest County After Adult-Use Legalization

Marijuana use among teens in Washington State’s most populous county declined after legalization of cannabis for adults, according to a new federal study published on Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The prevalence of current and frequent use fell significantly among youth in grades 8, 10 and 12 between 2008 and 2021.

According to the study, published in CDC’s latest Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, current and frequent use of marijuana among teens in King County has fallen significantly since state voters legalized adult-use cannabis by initiative in November 2012.

Researchers said legalization and related regulations and age controls could have have fueled the trend by making marijuana harder for teens to access, though they also said the COVID pandemic may have contributed to more recent declines.

Between 2008 and 2021, current use—defined as having used marijuana at least once in the past month—fell from highs of 20.4 percent among males (in 2010) and 15.5 percent among females (in 2012) down to 7.7 percent and 9.0 percent, respectively, in 2021.

“The legalization of nonmedical cannabis for adults aged ≥21 years in Washington with licensed dispensaries requiring proof of age might have affected availability of cannabis to younger persons as well as their opportunities to engage in its use,” the CDC report says. “This, in turn, might have had an impact on use prevalence.”

Keep reading

New York Governor Proposes Repealing Marijuana Potency Tax To Reduce Costs And Combat Illicit Market

The governor of New York is calling for the elimination of a THC potency tax as part of her executive budget, aiming to reduce costs for consumers in a way that could make the regulated market more competitive against illicit operators.

Gov. Kathy Hochul’s (D) budget proposal for the 2025 fiscal year would repeal the potency tax and replace it with a wholesale excise tax of 9 percent in a way that “simplifies, streamlines, and reduces the tax collection obligations and burden for cultivators, processors, and distributors.”

Cannabis would also still be subject to the existing 9 percent state retail excise tax and four percent local retail excise tax. The changes are estimated to effectively drive down the total tax rate on marijuana from an average 38 percent to 22 percent.

For vertically-integrated medical cannabis operators and microbusinesses, the new wholesale excise tax would accrue on the final retail sale to consumers and be imposed on 75 percent of the final retail sales price, the governor’s proposal says.

The briefing book for the budget says the tax changes would “promote and support the expansion of the legal adult-use cannabis market” and also result in a “net positive impact” of $6.5 million for localities.

But by reducing costs for consumers and businesses, the tax policy reform could also help the administration and regulators address one of their top priorities: driving out the illicit market.

While licensing of legal marijuana businesses has rolled out slowly amid litigation, New York has been dealing with a proliferation of hundreds of unregulated cannabis shops with prices that are generally lower because the operators don’t concern themselves with excise taxes and abiding by other regulations that increase costs.

Keep reading

Minnesota Officials Form Interagency Plan To Rein In Sales Of High-THC Marijuana Being Sold As Legal Hemp

Minnesota’s cannabis regulators say they have a plan to fill a gap in state law that could be letting some hemp retailers sell marijuana flower without consequence.

Charlene Briner, the interim director of the new Office of Cannabis Management, said Thursday that she is working with other agencies to provide a temporary method to inspect and test raw cannabis flower to make sure it does not violate current law.

She said the agency will look into using inspectors from the Office of Medical Cannabis and the Department of Agriculture to exercise the Office of Cannabis Management’s authority to stop the sale of cannabis flower that is illegal marijuana masquerading as legal hemp.

“OCM is evaluating how to leverage existing enforcement capacity at the Office of Medical Cannabis to act on OCM’s behalf and how we can develop capacity to test raw cannabis flower,” Briner said.

“We’ll be sharing more about those plans as we put them in place,” she said.

To be legal to sell now, hemp flower must contain only 0.3 percent delta-9 THC or less. Such hemp plants do not have enough THC to be intoxicating when eaten or smoked. But by processing the hemp for edibles and beverages, the THC content can be enhanced to produce an intoxicating effect.

Some hemp retailers and smoke shops have been selling raw cannabis flower that might or might not exceed those legal limits. Hemp inspectors have not acted against such sales—or even to test the flower—because while the Office of Medical Cannabis regulates hemp sales, the law doesn’t give it any authority over unprocessed flower.

The loophole became public late last year when former Office of Medical Cannabis director Chris Tholkes discussed it on the national podcast Weed Wonks. She said her inspectors have seen sales of raw cannabis flower that the stores claim is legal hemp but that the inspectors suspect is not.

Keep reading

Illinois Supreme Court To Rule On Whether Smell Of Marijuana Alone Is Cause To Search A Vehicle

“Even the claim of smelling cannabis can be discretionary. Honestly, it can be made up sometimes when officers are being less than honest because there’s no way to challenge it.”

The Illinois Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday as to whether the smell of cannabis alone is grounds for police officers to search a vehicle, marking a test of the state’s 2020 recreational marijuana legalization law.

The court heard two consolidated cases of individuals who were in vehicles that were searched after an officer used the smell of cannabis as probable cause.

In People v. Redmond, defendant Ryan Redmond was pulled over by Illinois State Police for an unsecure license plate and driving three miles per hour over the speed limit, court records show. Upon smelling cannabis, the officer searched the vehicle and found about one gram of cannabis in the center console. He later charged Redmond with a misdemeanor for failure to transport cannabis in an odor-proof container, according to court documents.

The other case, People v. Molina, involved defendant Vincent Molina, who was a passenger in the vehicle when an Illinois State Police trooper smelled cannabis and searched the car, finding a small box of rolled joints, according to court records. Molina told the trooper he had a medical marijuana card prior to the search, the records state. Molina was charged with unlawful possession of cannabis by a passenger in a motor vehicle for not storing the cannabis in an odor-proof container.

Lawyers for Molina and Redmond argued the smell of cannabis alone should not be probable cause to search a vehicle given that the substance is no longer illegal in Illinois.

But Attorney General Kwame Raoul’s office argued the law requires drivers to transport cannabis in an odor-proof container. Thus, the presence of cannabis odor is grounds for a search, even if the passenger is possessing an amount under the legal limit or has a medical marijuana card.

“It remains illegal to use cannabis in a vehicle and to transport cannabis in a vehicle in a container that is not odor-proof,” a November brief filed by Raoul reads. Thus, “the odor of cannabis—whether in raw or burnt form—continues to provide police with probable cause to search.”

Mitchell Ness, assistant attorney general, continued the argument before the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

“Cannabis is no longer contraband in every circumstance, but that doesn’t absolve the person from following the laws that are in place,” he said.

Chief Justice Mary Jane Theis said the central matter of the cases was roadway safety.

“The concern here is the safety of the public driving down the highway and impaired drivers,” Theis said at the oral arguments. “We’re concerned about drunk drivers, and we’re concerned about high drivers.”

Nationwide and state-level chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed a brief in support of Molina and Redmond, writing that allowing the odor of cannabis as cause for searching a vehicle will lead to biased enforcement against Black and Latino Illinoisans.

“There is a decades-long pattern of police in this state using pretext like cannabis odor to disproportionately stop and search Black and Latino drivers,” the brief reads. Illinois’ stop and search policy “unfairly subjects (Black and Latino drivers) to at-will intrusions of their privacy and relegates them to second-class citizenry.”

The organizations argued the legalization of cannabis means its presence is not indicative of contraband or crime.

Keep reading

Why Some Activists Fear Marijuana Rescheduling: Responding To Former FDA Official’s Dismissal Of Our Concerns 

Politico recently published an extensive Q&A with Howard Sklamberg, a former top Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official who currently works at the law firm Arnold and Porter. Many advocates for legalization and restorative justice have concerns about the rescheduling of cannabis to a Schedule III substance—fears that Sklamberg believes are “alarmist and misguided.”

As a longtime advocate, I have to say that I don’t share that view. Honestly, I can’t believe Sklamberg said some of the things that he said—and I think the fears that we have are well-informed, reasoned and practical, if for no other reason than the worrying lack of transparency coming from regulatory agencies since rescheduling was recommended last year. We advocates are not always right, but our track record on drug policy is better than that of the policymakers and regulators who campaigned for, created and continued the so-called war on drugs.

Regulators, elected officials and their surrogates could benefit from hearing and taking seriously the other side: the concerns that advocates have about cannabis rescheduling. I’ve done my best to capture some of them below.

Keep reading

After Several Failed Efforts, Washington Lawmakers Introduce New Bill To Legalize Home Marijuana Cultivation

Washington State lawmakers are again trying to allow adults in the state to grow their own marijuana, having introduced a new bill that would allow the cultivation of up to six plants at home.

Washington voters legalized marijuana through a ballot measure in 2012, but the law still makes it a felony for anyone but medical patients to grow the plant. And though several bills have been introduced to allow home cultivation over the years—stretching back to 2015—so far each has failed to find traction.

The latest bill, HB 2194, is an update to a homegrow proposal introduced last year, which passed out of one House committee before being pulled from consideration in a second committee. In addition to the six-plant-per-adult limit, it would cap the total number of plants grown by any one household at 15.

Notwithstanding the state’s personal possession limit of one ounce of marijuana flower, adults would also be able to keep the cannabis produced by their legal plants.

“I just see it as a fundamentally illogical thing that we’re doing,” lead sponsor Rep. Shelley Kloba (D) told Marijuana Moment. “We’ve made it criminal to grow a plant whose products you can walk into a retail store and purchase.”

She noted that beer and wine are also both legal, “and those things are legal to produce in your home as a hobbyist. It doesn’t make sense that you can’t do that with cannabis.”

Under Kloba’s plan, it would be a civil infraction for an individual to grow between six and 15 plants, while growing 16 or more plants would be a class C felony—the current penalty for growing any marijuana at home. The felony charge carries a maximum five years imprisonment and up to a $10,000 fine.

Keep reading

California Lawmaker Revives Bill To Legalize Marijuana Cafes Months After Governor’s Veto

A California lawmaker is renewing his push to legalize cannabis cafes in the state, with a newly introduced bill and plans to work with the governor and regulators to address concerns that resulted in the last version being vetoed.

Assemblymember Matt Haney (D) is again sponsoring the proposal, which would allow on-site marijuana consumption at licensed businesses, which could also offer non-cannabis food and drinks and host live events such as concerts if they get permission from the local government.

Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) vetoed the prior version, saying that while he appreciated that the intent was to “provide cannabis retailers with increased business opportunities and an avenue to attract new customers,” he felt “concerned this bill could undermine California’s long-standing smoke-free workplace protections.”

“Protecting the health and safety of workers is paramount,” the governor said at the time. “I encourage the author to address this concern in subsequent legislation.”

Accordingly, Haney says he’ll be exploring ways to resolve those concerns in collaboration with the governor’s office and the state Department of Cannabis Control (DCC).

As filed last week, however, it seems the basic provisions of the bill were kept the same as those discussions continue. The sponsor told The San Francisco Standard that the legislation will be amended to address the governor’s concerns “in the coming months.”

Keep reading