All Activity

“We have the FDA attempting to move forward a promising new treatment while the DEA is doing everything they can to obstruct its development.” By Jack Gorsline, Psychedelic State(s) of America Just one week after a historic public hearing on the future utility of psychedelic drugs at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is moving in the opposite direction. On Wednesday, 2026, DEA formally published a scheduling order to classify five obscure psychedelic tryptamine compounds as Schedule I substances under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), sparking immediate backlash from legal experts, researchers and mental health advocates. The scheduling order marks DEA’s second attempt to criminalize these specific compounds, following a heavily criticized effort that the agency was forced to withdraw in 2022. The renewed push highlights a potential fracture between federal agencies regarding the therapeutic viability of psychedelic substances, with DEA aggressively pursuing prohibition while FDA increasingly supports clinical exploration. The compounds targeted in the DEA’s latest filing are 4-Hydroxy-N,N-Diisopropyltryptamine (4-OH-DiPT), 5-Methoxy-alpha-Methyltryptamine (5-MeO-AMT), 5-Methoxy-N-Methyl-N-Isopropyltryptamine (5-MeO-MiPT), 5-Methoxy-N,N-Diethyltryptamine (5-MeO-DET) and N,N-Diisopropyltryptamine (DiPT). Currently unscheduled under U.S. federal law, these tryptamines belong to a class of psychedelics known for their hallucinogenic properties, though they remain relatively obscure outside of specialized clinical research settings. Historically, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, at least some of these compounds were previously classified as Schedule I drugs under the CSA. In 2022, DEA sought to broadly schedule all five substances, but a fierce public and legal pushback forced the agency to retreat and cancel a highly anticipated administrative hearing on the matter, giving scientists a temporary reprieve to continue their work. That 2022 resistance was spearheaded in part by prominent attorney Matt Zorn, who challenged DEA’s rationale and procedural maneuvers. In a notable shift of federal personnel, Zorn now serves as the deputy general counsel for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), having taken the role under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in 2024. DEA’s justification for the ban relies on statistics that critics argue fail to demonstrate a significant public health threat. According to the agency’s own filing, there have been “a cumulative total of 518 encounters of these tryptamines by United States law enforcement in several states and the District of Columbia.” Notably, DEA omitted any specific timeframe for when this cumulative total was gathered, leaving it unclear whether these encounters span recent months or several decades. To bolster its case, DEA cited data from the America’s Poison Centers’s National Poison Data System (NPDS). The data revealed 65 exposure cases involving one or more of the five tryptamines over an 18-year period, from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2021. Yet, the filing simultaneously acknowledges a critical caveat: “no single-substance exposure cases involving the five tryptamines resulted in death.” Furthermore, DEA acknowledged that per HHS’s own report on the five substances, “FDA is not aware of any diversion from research or legitimate manufacturing activities.” This admission effectively undercuts the narrative that these compounds are bleeding out of legitimate laboratories and into the illicit market. A Clash With Medical Innovation DEA’s pursuit of a Schedule I classification is particularly jarring given the recent clinical momentum surrounding one of the targeted compounds. Earlier this year, Reunion Neurosciences received a highly coveted “breakthrough therapy” designation from FDA for its 4-OH-DiPT drug candidate. The company is actively developing the compound as a targeted treatment for postpartum depression, a debilitating condition that affects millions of new mothers worldwide. For legal advocates and researchers, DEA’s timing feels like an intentional attempt to chill scientific progress. Robert Rush, Esq., a prominent psychedelic attorney and the founder of the Rights and Reason Project, did not mince words when evaluating DEA’s motivations. “Schedule I has become the default for the DEA for any substance that is not FDA-approved and has any sort of psychoactive qualities,” Rush stated. “Many people mistakenly believe that the DEA has a different attitude regarding psychedelics versus other drugs. The actions of the DEA to once again move to schedule these five tryptamines, which have important research potential and are involved in active research, reflect the true position of the agency.” Rush pointed to the DEA’s historical legal strategies as evidence of their disregard for scientific inquiry. “The DEA has been very explicit, though they do not consider research harm in decision-making. During our DOI/DOC scheduling challenge in 2024, they argued that harm to the research is irrelevant.” He further highlighted the glaring contradiction between FDA’s supportive stance and DEA’s prohibitive one regarding clinical research. “This is particularly poignant with this example now because one of the compounds, 4-OH-DiPT, the prodrug, is currently in development for postpartum depression and has been granted breakthrough status from the FDA,” he said. “We have the FDA attempting to move forward a promising new treatment while the DEA is doing everything they can to obstruct its development. One foot steps on the gas while the other steps on the brake, and the taxpayers are left to pay for this whole mess.” Rush views DEA’s maneuver as symptomatic of a broader ideological crusade within the agency. “It is also interesting that after four years, the DEA decided to drop its previous scheduling attempt then decided to revisit it less than two weeks after a very positive FDA hearing on psychedelics,” he noted. “The DEA believes in the prohibition of all drugs unless they’re coming from a pharmaceutical company, and even then, they are willing to put roadblocks in the way of promising compounds to address the mental health needs of Americans.” “We still have a crisis of mental health issues and deaths of despair in this country, yet the DEA seems to think that research to address these issues is irrelevant and not a public health issue,” Rush concluded. “The Rights and Reason Project thinks this use of taxpayer-funded resources harms public health and scientific research, and we will be fighting this to the greatest extent possible.” This article was produced in partnership with Psychedelic State(s) of America—a nonprofit-sponsored news organization dedicated to rigorous independent psychedelic journalism. Subscribe to PSA online and Follow PSA on Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter/X and Facebook. Learn more about PSA and donate to the PSA Media Fund here. The post DEA Moves To Ban Several Psychedelics As FDA Takes Steps To Accelerate Legal Access To Therapies appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“I’m asking this court to make findings as to the proper score for each of these applications.” By Rebecca Rivas, Missouri Independent The Missouri Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday challenging an appeals court’s decision in March directing the state to award cannabis company Hippos LLC 13 facility licenses after finding the 2019 application scoring process was inconsistent. It’s been five years since the Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission denied Hippos’s appeal over its applications for marijuana facility licenses, after the company argued identical applications received different scores from the same grader. That dispute has since worked its way through the state court system and landed Wednesday before the seven Missouri Supreme Court judges. At issue is whether the commission acted properly when it rescored Hippos’s applications by selecting the most common score given to answers the company was challenging—or whether that approach was “completely flawed,” as three appellate judges found in March, because the grader left no notes explaining the scores. The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, which oversees the state’s cannabis regulatory agency, argued Wednesday that the commission acted correctly and did a thorough investigation of the scores given to Hippos’s applications. The department also urged the court to focus on the commission’s decision and not to rehash the state’s controversial grading process of marijuana applications as part of the case. “The Administrative Hearing Commission’s decision is under review here, not the department’s initial decision,” said Sean McDowell, an assistant attorney general representing the state. However, Chief Justice W. Brent Powell challenged that distinction, saying state law requires the court to combine “how the agency acted” and the commission’s decision. “Isn’t that how the statute indicates we should review this?” Powell asked McDowell. McDowell agreed, saying the commission “steps into the shoes” of the department, conducts a review and “their decision becomes the agency decision.” In March—just weeks before the appellate judges’ unanimous ruling in favor of Hippos—Missouri State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick issued a scathing state audit of the Division of Cannabis Regulation. The audit examined, among other issues, the state’s 2019 marijuana facility licensing process, citing erratic scoring, poor documentation and a process so opaque it cast doubt on the integrity of the results. When the state was working in 2019 to build the framework of Missouri’s now multi-billion dollar industry, it hired Nevada-based company Wise Health Solutions to score the nearly 2,000 applications. “In each of Hippos’s applications, there were many instances in which identical answers to the same question received inconsistent scores,” wrote Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District Judge Jeffrey Bates in the March ruling. “That should never have occurred if Wise’s scorers had followed the instructions that they were given. Neither the department nor Wise did anything to correct this situation.” The three appellate judges found the commission’s approach to rescoring was flawed “because there are no notes explaining why the scores were given,” the ruling states. “The conflict in these unexplained scores cannot be reconciled by simply assuming the more common score for a particular answer is the correct one,” it states. Fitzpatrick’s audit found scorers were instructed by Wise Health Solutions to take limited notes while scoring applications in order to reduce the amount of documentation that could be produced in litigation. The appellate judges agreed with Hippos that the commission’s decisions affirming the state’s denial of the company’s applications were “arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable, and these decisions were not supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record.” McDowell argued Wednesday that the commission’s rescoring was valid because Hippos didn’t successfully “disprove the validity of the original scores.” Two witnesses for Hippos testified that the applications should have received higher scores, and the appellate judges noted that the state did not present experts to rebut their testimony. However, McDowell said the witnesses were cross-examined and one admitted that her interpretation of the grading system could be different than the graders. “It’s clear from the record the department contradicted Hippos’s expert witnesses,” McDowell said. Hippos’s attorney Austin Preston argued Wednesday that “simply asking cross-examination questions” wasn’t enough to rebut the witnesses’ testimony, and that the commission was required to make a finding about whether the witnesses’ information was credible or not. Supreme Court Judge Zel Fischer pressed Preston on that argument. “When cases are tried to the trial court, we do it all the time,” he said. “The assumption is that all facts not specifically found were found in accordance with the judgment. Are you suggesting that the administrative context provides a different presumption?” Preston said he believes case law requires it. The judges asked if Hippos is asking the judges to remand the case back to the Administrative Hearing Commission or to make a finding themselves. “I’m asking this court to make findings as to the proper score for each of these applications, which has been laid out, would satisfy the minimum cutoff and order those licenses be issued,” Preston said. McDowell responded that if the judges believe additional fact-finding is necessary, the case should go back to the commission. “I think the proper remedy would probably be to remand to the Administrative Hearing Commission,” he said, “because they were the fact finder in this case.” The court did not issue a ruling Wednesday. This story was first published by Missouri Independent. Photo elements courtesy of rawpixel and Philip Steffan. The post Missouri Supreme Court Hears Marijuana Business Licensing Case appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A new federal watchdog report is calling on agencies to improve their policies that govern the drug scheduling process—including how they evaluate substances and develop recommendations. The new U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report published on Wednesday comes as the federal government continues to consider whether to comprehensively reschedule marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III as was recommended by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In general, GAO found that the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) scheduling decisions usually aligned with HHS and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommendations during the period of six years that it examined—but that both agencies lack important procedures for carrying out their responsibilities and to ensure consistency in the process. “We found that DEA and FDA have some policies that address aspects of the scheduling process; however, these policies have gaps,” the report said. “For example, DEA does not have any policies or procedures regarding how its staff are to conduct evaluations or schedule substances. In addition, FDA does not have policies or procedures specifying how its staff are to conduct evaluations or develop scheduling recommendations for substances.” “DEA does not have policies that assign roles and responsibilities related to scheduling substances, and neither DEA nor FDA have policies that describe the specific procedures staff should follow for fulfilling their responsibilities related to preparing scheduling evaluations and recommendations.” GAO said DEA specifically is lacking policies that identify roles, responsibilities and procedures for collecting and analyzing data prior to initiating administrative rulemaking; carrying out responsibilities related to new drug application scheduling; conducting a three-factor analysis and making findings to issue a temporary scheduling order; conducting an eight-factor analysis and making findings to determine schedule placement; or considering HHS scientific and medical evaluations and scheduling recommendations and making final scheduling decisions. FDA, for its part, does not have policies or procedures that: outline how its staff are to conduct an eight-factor analysis or make scheduling recommendations; or clearly define the criteria and process for determining a substance’s “potential for abuse,” including its abuse potential relative to other substances. “These policies have gaps that may pose a risk to the consistency of DEA’s and FDA’s future operations in the event of staff turnover or any other disruption that could lead to a loss of institutional knowledge,” the report said. GAO noted that an FDA memorandum of understanding with the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) that describes procedures for consulting on scheduling recommendations is over 40 years old and, as such, is “outdated because it does not reflect the current entities involved or procedures.” GAO is making three recommendations to improve the drug scheduling process: The Administrator of DEA should develop policies and procedures that identify DEA’s roles, responsibilities, and procedures for evaluating and scheduling substances through administrative scheduling, new drug application scheduling, temporary scheduling, and international treaty scheduling under relevant statutes (including collecting and evaluating data, conducting three-factor and eight-factor analyses, and determining scheduling decisions). The Commissioner of FDA should develop policies and procedures that Center for Drug Evaluation and Research staff are to use to when completing eight-factor evaluations and developing scheduling recommendations, including the criteria and process for determining a substance’s “potential for abuse,” including abuse potential relative to other substances. The Commissioner of FDA and the Director of NIH should update their memorandum of understanding (MOU) concerning developing drug scheduling recommendations. The updated MOU should reflect the current entities involved and procedures and include a term clause to ensure the MOU is regularly reviewed. The watchdog said that the Department of Justice, DEA, HHS, FDA and NIH have all agreed with the recommendations. Depending on the process through which a drug is being scheduled—via administrative scheduling, new drug application scheduling, temporary scheduling, international treaty scheduling through domestic scheduling orders or legislation—DEA is sometimes required to consider recommendations and medical and scientific evaluations from HHS. During the period GAO examined—2020 through 2025—DEA was required to do so for 95 of the 208 substances for which the agency took scheduling actions, and it did so 100 percent of the time. The agency’s final scheduling decision aligned with HHS recommendations for all 84 substances for which it published a final scheduling decision, while the remaining 11 were still subject to extended temporary scheduling orders. DEA and FDA officials told GAO that “differences of scientific opinion between the two agencies about a substance’s schedule are rare, but they have occurred,” the report said. “In such cases, they typically discuss their differences, share data and other information, and resolve any differences before DEA solicits public comments.” GAO said that it conducted the new evaluation because “members of Congress have raised questions and concerns about how DEA considers scientific and medical evaluations and scheduling recommendations from HHS when making its decisions.” “A substance’s schedule and quantity control the extent to which criminal penalties under the Controlled Substances Act may be levied regarding its illegal manufacturing, distribution, or possession. In recent years, members of the public, interest groups, and elected officials have raised questions about how certain substances are scheduled under the act.” “For example, substances such as marijuana have been legalized in some states for medical use,” the report said, noting that Attorney General Todd Blanche in April issued an order immediately moving marijuana products regulated by a state medical cannabis license from Schedule I of the CSA to Schedule III, along with marijuana products that are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A DEA hearing that recently concluded testimony is considering broader marijuana rescheduling. The GAO report included an appendix focused on the ongoing cannabis rescheduling process, and noted that it involved a new two-part test to evaluate marijuana’s medical value was sanctioned by the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel. “In April 2024, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion related to questions on the potential rescheduling of marijuana. One issue addressed by the Office of Legal Counsel was whether a substance that satisfies HHS’s two-part inquiry was sufficient to establish a currently accepted medical use under the statute, even if the substance has not been approved by the FDA and does not satisfy DEA’s five-part test. According to the Office of Legal Counsel, DEA’s approach to determining whether a substance had a currently accepted medical use was an impermissibly narrow interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act and that satisfying HHS’s two-part inquiry was sufficient to establish a substance had a currently accepted medical use. This was still the case, even if the substance had not been approved by the FDA and did not satisfy DEA’s test.” That office, it noted, also determined that moving cannabis to Schedule III would not violate the U.S.’s international treaty obligations. A DEA administrative law judge is currently considering testimony in the marijuana rescheduling hearing. After he issues a recommendation, DEA Administrator Terrance Cole will make the final determination on whether cannabis is comprehensively moved to Schedule III. That said, the marijuana rescheduling process is being challenged with several lawsuits that have been consolidated by a federal appeals court. Those pieces of litigation against the cannabis reform have been filed by state attorneys general, marijuana legalization opponents and a cannabis-focused biopharmaceutical corporation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently rejected a drug testing industry association and a pharmaceutical company’s request to block the Trump administration from moving forward with cannabis rescheduling while the litigation is considered. The post Federal Watchdog Agency Says Drug Scheduling Process Has ‘Gaps’ As DEA’s Marijuana Review Continues appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A bipartisan pair of congressional lawmakers filed a new bill aimed at protecting consumers from online scams that includes a provision designating cannabis as a “high-risk” product that would require companies advertising it to undergo enhanced verification procedures. The Stopping Abuse and Fraud Enabled by Platforms Act, or the SAFE Platforms Act, introduced last week by Rep. Valerie Foushee (D-NC) and Del. James Moylan (R-Guam), would generally require online platforms to adopt safety features to prevent the posting of fraudulent content. The key provision of concern for the marijuana industry would mandate that covered online platforms require advertisers in so-called “high-risk categories” to meet enhanced verification criteria, including submitting additional documentation to validate identity and business operations and undergoing a review of their online presence and business history. They would also need to be periodically re-verified. The legislation, H.R. 10433, specifies a number of categories of high-risk products and services, including “tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, and other consumables restricted by age.” Other such industries include financial services and investment opportunities, health products and services, educational credentials and certification, housing and real estate, gambling and unregulated financial products, including cryptocurrency and non-fungible tokens. The Federal Trade Commission would also be authorized to designate other industries as high-risk though regulatory action. A covered platform subject to the requirements would be defined by the bill as a provider of an interactive computer service that enables users to view or interact with information provided by an information content provider and that has at least 100,000 monthly active users or generates annual gross revenue in excess of $25 million. The legislation in general includes a number of other provisions aimed at protecting senior citizens and other vulnerable populations from online scams, including requiring platforms to detect and prevent the creation of fraudulent profiles, implement a “Report Scam” button on all content that could contain advertising and institute accessibility and design requirements for ad content. “Online and AI-enabled scams are becoming more sophisticated and more devastating,” Foushee said in a press release. “Scammers often exploit platform features to target users—especially seniors, veterans and other communities—with few consequences for the platforms that enable and profit from this abuse.” “The SAFE Platforms Act sets clear guardrails and safety-by-design requirements so digital platforms verify advertisers, protect users’ privacy by default and take steps to prevent fraud,” she said. Moylan said that “online scams are becoming more sophisticated, and families should not be left to bear the consequences while the platforms being used to facilitate these schemes face little accountability.” “The SAFE Platforms Act puts commonsense safeguards in place to help prevent fraud before it happens, protect consumers’ personal and financial information, and give victims meaningful recourse when they are harmed,” he said. In July, the House of Representatives passed a separate bill aimed at protecting children online that could also create complications for advertisers trying to promote legal marijuana and other regulated substances. Under the Kids Internet and Digital Safety (KIDS) Act, online platforms would be prohibited from facilitating the “advertising of narcotic drugs, cannabis products, tobacco products, gambling, or alcohol to a user of or visitor to the covered platform who the provider knows is a minor.” The provision around drug use lists the “distribution, sale, or use of narcotic drugs, tobacco products, cannabis products, gambling, or alcohol” as risks that platforms would need to actively guard minors against. Meanwhile, in August, the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee advanced a similar bill, the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), that contains an additional provision specifically requiring video streaming services to “employ measures that safeguard against serving advertising for narcotic drugs, cannabis products, tobacco products, gambling, or alcohol directly to the account or profile of an individual that the service knows is a minor.” The post Cannabis Would Be Considered A ‘High-Risk’ Product With Additional Advertising Restrictions Under New Congressional Bill appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

An anti-drug group is seeking to mobilize voters to ask U.S. House and Senate candidates about their stances on hemp THC products as the November elections approach. The Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America (CADCA) included two questions about the issue in its 2026 Congressional Election Guide amid recent developments on Capitol Hill concerning the crop and its derivatives. Hemp derivatives with less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill that Trump signed during his first term in office. But late last year, the president signed new legislation containing provisions that redefined hemp to make it so only products with 0.4 milligrams of total THC per container would remain legal after November 12. Now, however, under provisions included in a funding bill Trump signed this month, the effective date of the ban for most products is being pushed back to December 11 to give lawmakers more time to craft regulations for hemp derivatives. There is a carve-out, however, to allow the recriminalization on November 12 of synthetic cannabinoids “that are not capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant.” CADCA’s election guide touches on a number of drug policy issues it wants candidates for federal office to be asked about—including prevention, treatment, e-cigarettes, kratom and more. The hemp-related questions it has for congressional candidates read: “1. Intoxicating hemp products include a rapidly changing range of cannabinoids and formulations that can be modified or reengineered as laws change, allowing the market to evolve faster than laws and regulations can respond. Many health and safety risks also arise from the cannabinoids themselves and therefore cannot be eliminated through age restrictions, labeling, potency limits, or licensing. Do you support excluding products containing intoxicating amounts of cannabinoids from the federal definition of hemp? 2. Congress enacted changes to the federal definition of hemp that are scheduled to take effect in November 2026. These changes would result in the removal of most intoxicating hemp products from convenience stores, smoke shops, grocery stores, and online. Do you support allowing these already enacted changes to take effect without further delays?” The second hemp question in the guide is somewhat moot now that Trump has signed the legislation delaying most parts of the ban past November, but the group may still be wondering whether candidates would support moving the effective date even further. This isn’t the first time that CADCA has advocated on the issue. It led a sign-on letter in 2024 pressing Congress to ban intoxicating hemp products. CADCA has also previously worked to oppose bills to federally legalize marijuana and to ease cannabis businesses’ access to banking services. On the other side of the hemp debate, advocates for convenience stores recently discussed their views that the retail outlets are an ideal place to continue to sell hemp products under any new regulations that are enacted. Members of Congress, meanwhile, are debating how—and whether—the crop’s derivatives should be regulated as an alternative to prohibition. Several Republican lawmakers recently spoke to Marijuana Moment about the kinds of rules they would like to see enacted to keep hemp THC products legal. A number of lawmakers from both chambers and both parties have filed or are circulating a growing number of bills to prevent the scheduled federal recriminalization of hemp THC drinks and other products. Until now, none of those proposals have gained traction with congressional leaders. For example, Reps. Beth Van Duyne (R-TX) and Greg Landsman (D-OH) filed a bill to keep hemp THC drinks legal while taxing and regulating them like alcohol. Rep. James Comer (R-KY), who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is circulating legislation that would delay a planned federal ban on hemp THC products and institute some regulations—including packaging requirements, testing rules and age limits. Separately, Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY), filed a lengthier proposal to prevent the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products and put in place a number of regulations for manufacturing, labeling, sales and taxation of hemp-derived products, including an age limit of 21. Trump and White House officials repeatedly pressed Congress to delay, alter or reverse the ban in recent months. In a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) in June, for example, White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought said the Trump administration wants lawmakers to “ensure the fair treatment of hemp products”—specifically citing Barr’s earlier amendment to keep many hemp products legal while adding regulations and taxes. The administration “welcomes the opportunity to work with the Congress to, at a minimum, update the statutory definition of final hemp-derived cannabinoid products to allow Americans to benefit from access to appropriate full-spectrum CBD products,” OMB separately said in June, “while preserving the Congress’s intent to restrict the sale of products that pose serious health risks.” Also in April, the president himself urged congressional lawmakers to again redefine hemp to avoid recriminalization of full-spectrum CBD products. “I am calling on Congress to update the Law to ensure that Americans can continue to access the full-spectrum CBD products they have come to rely on, and that help them, while preserving Congress’s intent to restrict the sale of products that pose Health risks,” Trump said in a Truth Social post. “We must get this done RIGHT and FAST, especially for those who saw that CBD helps them,” he said. “Plus, I am told it will also help our GREAT FARMERS, who we love, and will always be there for.” Industry advocates say that the law as enacted last year not only threatens to prohibit intoxicating and synthetic cannabinoid products but also stands to remove popular full-spectrum CBD products that many Americans use therapeutically from the market. “ONE in FIVE adults used it in the past year, and many say it improved their chronic pain enormously,” the president said in his social media post, adding that hemp-derived CBD “has made a HUGE difference for so many people.” He also referenced a new initiative the administration launched in April to cover up to $500 worth of hemp-derived products each year for eligible Medicare patients. The program being implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) focuses largely on CBD but also allows products to have up to 3 milligrams of total THC per serving. A federal judge granted the government’s motion to dismiss marijuana legalization opponents’ lawsuit challenging the initiative, but that is being appealed. “In December, I signed a very important Executive Order calling for Research and Innovation for Hemp-derived CBD,” Trump said. “Our wonderful Dr. Mehmet Oz moved fast to follow the directive in the Executive Order, and launched a model for some Seniors earlier this month. But more must be done!” “Please get it done, and SOON,” the president said in reference to a congressional fix for the broad recriminalization set to take effect in November. “Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Some members of the alcohol industry have also urged Congress to regulate, rather than ban, hemp products. The National Restaurant Association recently sent a letter urging congressional leaders to delay the federal recriminalization of hemp THC beverages and replace it with a regulatory framework that “ensures consumer safety while meeting growing market demand” for the products as an alternative to alcohol. Major retailer Target, meanwhile, recently moved to expand its sales of hemp THC drinks into more states. Photo courtesy of Philip Steffan. The post Anti-Drug Coalition Wants Voters To Pressure Candidates About Banning Hemp THC Products Ahead Of November Elections appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Should MI marijuana biz trust GOP gov candidate?; Insurance industry backs cannabis coverage bill; Study: Seniors & cannabis use; OR psilocybin rules Subscribe to receive Marijuana Moment’s newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. It’s the best way to make sure you know which cannabis stories are shaping the day. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Your support makes Marijuana Moment possible… BREAKING: Journalism is often consumed for free, but costs money to produce! While this newsletter is proudly sent without cost to you, our ability to send it each day depends on the financial support of readers who can afford to give it. So if you’ve got a few dollars to spare each month and believe in the work we do, please consider joining us on Patreon today. https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW A new federal study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that teen marijuana use has hit an all-time low as more states legalize cannabis for adults. A Michigan Democratic senator says the marijuana industry is wrong to trust Republican gubernatorial candidate John James to follow through on his pledge to cut cannabis taxes—citing the GOP politician’s opposition to the ballot initiative that legalized marijuana in the state in the first place in 2018. The American Property Casualty Insurance Association, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, American Council of Life Insurers and other trade associations are calling on Congress to pass a bill aimed at easing coverage for marijuana businesses that are legal under state law. A new federally funded study found that one out of ten senior citizens used marijuana with the past day, and that “cannabis was most often used to get high (60.0%), relieve tension (55.7%), sleep (52.9%), or relieve chronic pain (30.0%).” “Findings suggest that cannabis use among older adults may be more common and clinically significant than suggested by prior evidence.” The Oregon Health Authority is dropping an effort to significantly increase psilocybin business licensing fees that advocates said could have devastated the state’s legal psychedelic services industry. / FEDERAL Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins discussed the Trump administration’s steps to accelerate psychedelic research. The Drug Enforcement Administration is moving to place several psychedelics in Schedule I. Rep. Adrian Smith (R-NE) detailed his opposition to federal marijuana rescheduling, while Democrat Becky Stille and other challengers outlined their support for the reform. The House bill to keep hemp THC drinks federally legal got one new cosponsor for a total of four. / STATES California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed a budget bill that appropriates $4.7 million to support psychedelic research. The Virginia legislature’s Joint Commission to Oversee the Transition of the Commonwealth into a Cannabis Retail Market met. A Michigan House candidate spoke about his prior marijuana arrest. The Arkansas Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a dispute between medical cannabis regulators and a business on Thursday. Indiana officials published information about marijuana and maternal health and breastfeeding. The Rhode Island Cannabis Advisory Board will meet on Thursday. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / LOCAL A judge rejected a challenge to a Menominee, Michigan referendum concerning the number marijuana retail licenses. The Oshkosh, Wisconsin Common Council is considering a proposal to institute age limits on certain hemp products. / INTERNATIONAL Thailand’s Cabinet approved legislation to tighten controls on cannabis. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study highlighted medical cannabis’s “perceived utility in managing symptoms among [young adult] cancer survivors, alongside fragmented policies/systems impeding evidence-based information or healthcare provider input.” A study found that “students perceive cannabis-related discipline as harmful and disproportionate to the offense.” / BUSINESS Vireo Growth Inc. completed its acquisition of M3 Wellness. Trulieve Cannabis Corp. has been added to the S&P Total Market Index and S&P Completion Index. Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: The post Teen cannabis use hits all-time low, federal report shows (Newsletter: September 23, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

This guide makes heavy duty towing easier to understand The River Opus Dorset Gardens Clovelle of Woodlands Bedok Rise Residences Chencharu Central Residences One Chuan Grove

Shahdara is one of Delhi's oldest and most vibrant areas, known for its rich history, bustling markets, and lively streets. It's a place where tradition meets modern life. But even in such an energetic area, your evenings can feel empty without the right company. Our Shahdara Escort are here to make your stay truly special. These stunning women are friendly, warm, and know how to make you feel comfortable. Whether you want to enjoy a quiet dinner, explore the local markets, or just relax in your hotel room, they're perfect for any occasion. With verified profiles and quick delivery, your dream companion is just a call away.

The percentage of U.S. high school students who use marijuana is now at an all-time low—even as more states continue to legalize cannabis for adults—according to the latest results of a biennial survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The new federal data, released on Monday, shows that 12.9 percent of high school students currently consume cannabis, which is defined as having used it at least once in the past 30 days. That’s down from 23.1 percent in 2011—the year before the first U.S. states approved recreational marijuana legalization laws. In other words, the number of high school students who use marijuana has decreased by almost half—44 percent—since states started enacting adult-use legalization. The latest numbers also show a continued decrease from the prior version of the CDC marijuana use data in 2023, when 17 percent of high school students reported currently consuming cannabis. The ongoing decline contradicts claims from opponents of legalizing cannabis who have often argued that the policy change would lead to skyrocketing youth use rates. In fact, the opposite has occurred, according to the new federal report. “Sensational claims that adult-use legalization laws are linked with greater marijuana use by teens are simply not backed by reliable data,” NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano said. “These government findings ought to reassure lawmakers that cannabis access can be legally regulated in a manner that is safe, effective and that does not inadvertently impact young people’s habits.” Aside from the past-month measure, CDC’s 2025 Youth Risk Behavior Survey also shows that the number of high school students who have ever consumed cannabis has fallen from 39.9 percent in 2011 to just 25.5 percent last year. The results are consistent with those from another federal study, the 2025 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), which was released in July. It showed that 8.7 percent of people between the ages of 12 and 17 used marijuana within the past year—down from 14.2 percent in 2011. Prior research also suggests that marijuana use by young people has generally fallen in states that legalize it for adults. A report from the advocacy group Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), for example, found that youth marijuana use declined in 19 out of 21 states that legalized adult-use marijuana—with teen cannabis consumption down an average of 35 percent in the earliest states to legalize. The report cited data from a series of national and state-level youth surveys, including the annual Monitoring the Future (MTF) Survey, which is supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). The latest version of MTF, released late last year, found that cannabis use among eighth, 10th and 12 graders “remained stable” even as mort states enacted legalization. A separate federally funded study out of Canada found that that youth marijuana use rates declined after the country legalized cannabis. A Canadian government report similarly found that daily or near-daily use rates by both adults and youth have held steady over the last six years after the country enacted legalization. Another U.S. study reported a “significant decrease” in youth marijuana use from 2011 to 2021—a period in which more than a dozen states legalized marijuana for adults—detailing lower rates of both lifetime and past-month use by high-school students nationwide. Separately, a research letter published by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 2024 said there’s no evidence that states’ adoption of laws to legalize and regulate marijuana for adults have led to an increase in youth use of cannabis. Another JAMA-published study similarly found that neither legalization nor the opening of retail stores led to increases in youth cannabis use. In 2023, meanwhile, a U.S. health official said that teen marijuana use has not increased “even as state legalization has proliferated across the country.” The post Teen Marijuana Use Hits All-Time Low As More States Legalize It For Adults, Federal Data Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“OHA dropping this rulemaking is a win, but it does not mean we’ve won.” By Jack Gorsline, Psychedelic State(s) of America Following significant industry pushback, the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) announced on Tuesday that the agency has officially dropped its efforts to double licensing fees for the state’s psilocybin services program. In an email to industry stakeholders, the agency wrote that, “based on feedback OHA has received through the Oregon Psilocybin Advisory Board (OPAB), rule advisory committees (RACs) and rulemaking public comment period, the agency will not adopt final rules as a result of this rulemaking process.” The initially proposed changes came amidst a multi-billion dollar statewide budgetary shortfall in Oregon, and per OHA’s own language included in the now-dropped rule change acknowledged that if implemented, the fee hikes “may reduce the overall number of licensees and create a more significant program budget shortfall.” In the wake of the initial proposal, industry stakeholders across the Beaver State spoke out in force, arguing that such a substantial fee hike could potentially cripple the first legal, state regulated psychedelic access program in the United States. In response to news that the OHA was dropping the rule change altogether, Center for Psychedelic Policy Founder Sam Chapman noted that while psilocybin services are yielding positive results with few adverse effects, the work to refine the system’s financial structure will continue. “We asked Governor [Tina] Kotek to give the legislature time to get this right, and now they have it,” said Chapman in a statement provided to Psychedelic State(s) of America. State-licensed psilocybin facilitator, Rulemaking Advisory Committee member and military veteran Amy Charlesworth echoed Chapman’s sentiments, while highlighting future concerns over freedom of speech based on other rule changes previously proposed by OHA. “OHA dropping this rulemaking is a win, but it does not mean we’ve won,” Charlesworth said in a statement to Psychedelic State(s) of America. “Proposed OAR [regulations] would have restricted licensees from ‘promoting’ or ‘encouraging’ unlawful or unregulated activity,” Charlesworth noted, “including by ‘providing information or instruction related to home cultivation.’ “That is not regulation of what happens inside a licensed service center.” Charlesworth added, “It reaches what we write, teach, publish, and say in public.” “Under that language,” she expounded, “a facilitator could reasonably fear losing their license over a book, a class, a podcast, a harm-reduction conversation, or a social media post.” “If OHA brings these provisions back,” Charlesworth vowed, “we will be ready to challenge them.” As for the long game, Chapman noted in a press release that while “the program is working. The fee structure isn’t.” “Between now and the 2027 session,” Chapman added, “the Center for Psychedelic Policy is conducting an independent economic analysis to answer a simple question: can psilocybin therapy be just as effective as the treatments Oregon already pays for, if not more so, at a fraction of the cost?” “If the answer is yes,” Chapman concluded, “the question stops being how Oregon pays for this program and starts being why we aren’t investing more in it.” “Better outcomes for less, and real access for Oregonians who are struggling,” he said. “Now we have the time to prove it.” This article was produced in partnership with Psychedelic State(s) of America—a nonprofit-sponsored news organization dedicated to rigorous independent psychedelic journalism. Subscribe to PSA online and Follow PSA on Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter/X and Facebook. Learn more about PSA and donate to the PSA Media Fund here. The post Oregon Officials Drop Effort To Hike Psilocybin Business Licensing Fees appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A group representing Michigan marijuana businesses is endorsing the Republican candidate for governor due to his pledge to cut taxes on the industry, but a Democratic senator says the GOP politician can’t be trusted to follow through in light of his track record of opposing cannabis reform. Last week, the Michigan Cannabis Industry Association (MiCIA) said it supports John James as the state’s next governor, citing his promise to repeal or significantly roll back a new 24 percent wholesale cannabis tax that was enacted by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) and the Democratic-controlled legislature to raise funds for road and bridge repairs. Sen. Jeff Irwin (D), however, told Marijuana Moment that James “has not been a friend to legalization”—citing comments from 2018 when he said he would “personally be voting no” on the ballot initiative that ultimately legalized recreational cannabis in the state that year. While James also said at the time that “should it pass, I will respect the will of the voters,” Irwin argued that “actions speak louder than words, so I don’t believe these thin campaign promises.” James “has not supported our efforts in Congress and is in lock step with law enforcement lobby groups that oppose legalization and access,” Irwin told Marijuana Moment. No major cannabis-related votes have taken place under the U.S. House’s Republican majority during James’s times serving in the chamber since 2023. He hasn’t sponsored or cosponsored any bills to legalize marijuana under federal law or respect state laws on the issue, but he did sign on as a supporter of the Hemp Enforcement, Modernization, and Protection Act, which would federally regulate hemp-derived cannabinoid products. “That is his record of action,” Irwin said. “No assistance for the cause” of broader marijuana reform. “If he is making promises to regarding the 24 percent wholesale tax, but is also making promises to road builders, local governments and police groups, which promises do you think he will keep?” the Democratic senator said. “Ask him if he plans to cut road funds or how else will he replace these funds. I suspect he is counting on nothing passing; and, if it looks like it might, he could always kill the bill behind the scenes.” Irwin argued that while James has “not been an advocate in Congress,” his running mate for lieutenant governor, state Rep. Jay DeBoyer (R) “has been even worse on cannabis issues.” DeBoyer filed legislation this session to cut the number of Michigan medical cannabis caregivers can grow for patients in half, from 12 to six, while limiting the numbers of caregiver registrations per physical address to just one. Irwin acknowledged to Marijuana Moment that he is “mad at Governor Whitmer for signing this new tax.” James’s Democratic opponent for governor, Jocelyn Benson, meanwhile, has not taken a clear stance on the cannabis tax. It’s a “new and emerging issue,” she said this month. “There’s a lot of data yet to be determined on that particular tax… We need to know where the money is going and also the impact that it’s had on the industry,” she said. “At the same time, I want to make sure that any changes we are making to our tax code do not come at the expense of driving up costs for Michiganders.” James, for his part, said in a plank of his “Freedom Agenda” unveiled last month that the cannabis tax “drives up prices, gives illegal operators a competitive edge, and has already fallen far short of revenue projections.” “As Governor, I will work to repeal or sharply reduce it,” he said. A Republican state representative recently filed legislation that would reverse the cannabis wholesale tax. The tax was projected by state officials to raise $420 million, with the revenue aimed at funding road repairs and construction, though Rep. James DeSana (R), the sponsor of the repeal bill, says it is generating in less than half of what its supporters anticipated. The levy has been challenged in court through lawsuits filed by the cannabis industry. Meanwhile, earlier this year, the Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency announced it is distributing nearly $100 million in marijuana tax revenue to over 300 local governments and tribes across the state. The money is intended to support various local infrastructure, education and other programs and services in 313 municipalities, counties and tribal areas. Photo courtesy of Mike Latimer. The post Michigan Marijuana Industry Shouldn’t Trust GOP Governor Candidate’s Pledge To Cut Taxes, Democratic Senator Says appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

More than a tenth of senior citizens used marijuana within the past day, according to the results of a new federally funded study. The research also shows that among those who do consume cannabis, many use it to simply get high—but that medical reasons are also common. Researchers with the University of California San Diego and New York University conducted survey interviews with 315 adults over the age of 65, primarily in public parks or outside of older adults centers in New York City. Over half of respondents (56 percent) said they have consumed cannabis at least once in their lifetime, 22 percent used it within the past year, 16 percent reported past-month use and 11 percent said they consumed it within the past 24 hours. The most commonly reported reason for using marijuana was to get high (60 percent), though 56 percent said they consume cannabis to relieve tension, 53 percent use it as a sleep aid, 30 percent utilize it treat chronic pain and 29 percent use marijuana for another medical reason—”reflecting prior evidence that older adults commonly use cannabis to manage these symptoms or medical reasons and suggesting potential unmet clinical needs that physicians should be aware of,” the researchers wrote. “Cannabis was most often used to get high (60.0%), relieve tension (55.7%), sleep (52.9%), or relieve chronic pain (30.0%).” The relatively high usage rates in the survey “suggest that cannabis use among older adults may be more common and clinically significant than suggested by prior evidence,” the researchers wrote in the paper, which was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. They said, however, that the results may be skewed due to New York City’s urban setting and the relatively diverse participant demographic, or because of “possible reduced selection bias due to in-person, community-based recruitment and brief survey administration that improved completion rates.” Among those who do use marijuana recreationally within the past year, smoking was by far the most common delivery method, at 74 percent. Thirty-six percent consumed cannabis edibles and 16 percent vaped it. Older people and women were less likely to use marijuana than younger senior citizens and men, respectively, the study concluded. Another recent study found that medical marijuana helps 91 percent of older adults improve their pain, insomnia and mood or behavioral symptoms, a new study has found. A separate recent federally funded study published by the American Medical Association (AMA) found that “older adults are increasingly turning to cannabis for symptom management”—with many motivated to try marijuana “as an alternative to traditional pharmaceuticals due to concerns about adverse effects.” “As cannabis legalization becomes more widespread, older adults are increasingly turning to it not just for recreational use, but to manage symptoms associated with aging, including pain, sleep disturbances, and mental health concerns,” that research found. AMA separately adopted a resolution this year that recognizes both the risks and potential therapeutic benefits of marijuana use among older adults. Photo courtesy of Max Pixel. The post One Out Of Ten Senior Citizens Used Marijuana Within The Past 24 Hours, Federally Funded Study Says appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A coalition of trade associations that represent the insurance industry is backing recently filed congressional legislation that would provide a protect companies that provide coverage for state-legal marijuana businesses from federal punishment. “The insurance industry is potentially exposed to liability arising from the differences of the legal treatment of cannabis and cannabis products under federal and state law,” the groups wrote in a letter to the bipartisan House and Senate sponsors of the Clarifying Law Around Insurance of Marijuana (CLAIM) Act, which would provide a safe harbor for insurers, brokers and agents from being penalized by federal regulators for providing insurance services to state-licensed marijuana companies. “By resolving the legal uncertainty presented by the dueling state and federal treatment of marijuana, the insurance industry can serve both cannabis-related legitimate businesses (CRLBs) and other commercial lines consumers, as well as personal lines consumers who may have a direct or indirect relationship to state-legalized cannabis, and still be in compliance with the law,” the letter to the House and Senate sponsors of the legislation says. It was signed by the American Land Title Association, American Council of Life Insurers, American Property Casualty Insurance Association, Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers, Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, National Association of Professional Insurance Agents, Reinsurance Association of America and Wholesale & Specialty Insurance Association—which said that they “represent a majority of the companies, agents, and brokers offering property-casualty, life, title, and reinsurance in the U.S.” “Further, the CLAIM Act will enable those engaged in the business of insurance to be able to comply with a variety of state statutory and regulatory requirements,” the letter says. “Importantly, this legislation would help consumers, with direct or indirect contact with state-legalized cannabis, access insurance products and services and the protections they provide.” The House version of the bill was introduced last week, while a Senate companion was filed earlier this year. “The CLAIM Act is a comprehensive solution to provide legal certainty for our market while also preserving the states’ traditional role in regulating the business of insurance,” the letter to Sens. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) and Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) and Reps. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) and Warren Davidson (R-OH), who are the leading sponsors of the legislation, says. “Under the bill, insurers must still satisfy all applicable state statutory or regulatory requirements, such as those pertaining to consumer protections and claims payments.” “We appreciate your interest and effort to ensure our industry is not caught between conflicting obligations under federal and state law when serving our customers,” it concludes. This is the fourth Congress in a row that the cannabis business insurance measure has been introduced, and the text of the current bill, H.R.10471, remains largely the same as prior versions. Earlier this year, bipartisan House and Senate lawmakers filed related legislation to provide safeguards for banks that work with the cannabis industry. As it stands, cannabis firms are limited in their ability to gain property, casualty and title insurance coverage. The CLAIM Act would prohibit federal agencies from penalizing insurance providers for simply covering those businesses, and it would bar insurers from terminating or limiting policies for marijuana companies or ancillary businesses due to the nature of their enterprise. The legislation also includes a requirement that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) study and issue a report on “barriers to marketplace entry, including in the licensing process, and the access to financial services for potential and existing minority-owned and women-owned cannabis-related legitimate businesses.” It additionally provides protections for employees of insurers, affirming that they could not be held liable just because they work with a cannabis company. Supporters of the legislation have argued that providing insurance access to these businesses would mitigate safety risks and prevent the companies from being denied bank financing, which can occur when the businesses lack insurance coverage. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile, the Trump administration is moving forward with the process of rescheduling marijuana under federal law. Attorney General Todd Blanche in April issued an order that immediately reclassified state-licensed medical cannabis, as well as marijuana products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III. Under a separate order the attorney general signed, a hearing is considering more comprehensively moving marijuana to Schedule III. The post Insurance Industry Groups Endorse Bill To Ease Coverage For Marijuana Businesses appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

NC state-run marijuana store proposal; IL bill on cash payments to cannabis prohibition victims; PA legalization hearing Subscribe to receive Marijuana Moment’s newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. It’s the best way to make sure you know which cannabis stories are shaping the day. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Your support makes Marijuana Moment possible… Your good deed for the day: donate to an independent publisher like Marijuana Moment and ensure that as many voters as possible have access to the most in-depth cannabis reporting out there. Support our work at https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW California Department of Cannabis Control Director Clint Kellum said the Drug Enforcement Administration hasn’t shown “any sort of interest” in providing guidance to states about the Trump administration’s marijuana rescheduling move—while simultaneously requesting more information about California’s medical cannabis program. The North Carolina Advisory Council on Cannabis’s Market and Regulatory Subcommittee is considering recommending that lawmakers legalize marijuana sales through a system of government-controlled stores that could be supplied by a “central cannabis warehouse”—while leaving cultivation and manufacturing to private businesses. An Illinois representative filed a bill to issue “direct cash payments” to people “who have been disproportionately impacted by historical cannabis enforcement” under a new Illinois Freedom Program. The Pennsylvania Senate Democratic Policy Committee will hold a hearing on marijuana legalization on Friday—with a focus on “enforcement and safety needs, social and economic considerations, as well as how to ensure that meaningful criminal justice reform updates are included.” The Missouri Division of Cannabis Regulation announced a recall of pre-rolled marijuana joints after the products failed testing for aspergillus. / FEDERAL The Food and Drug Administration intends to award a sole-source contract involving cannabis public health message testing. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit heard oral arguments in a lawsuit challenging the Drug Enforcement Administration’s determination that HHC is a Schedule I drug and not a legal hemp derivative. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) posted photos of herself touring a hemp business. Rep. Mike Flood (R-NE) detailed his opposition to federal marijuana rescheduling, while Democratic challenger Chris Backemeyer outlined his support for the reform. / STATES Oregon’s attorney general met with law enforcement officials about efforts to combat illegal marijuana operations. California regulators announced a recall of marijuana products due to the presence of aspergillosis. Maine regulators issued an advisory about medical cannabis products with unsafe levels of butane. Michigan officials issued a public health bulletin about recreational nitrous oxide use. Colorado regulators published average market rates for retail marijuana. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / LOCAL The Los Angeles County, California Regional Planning Commission will hold a hearing about cannabis business zoning issues on October 21. / INTERNATIONAL The United Nations special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism said the Trump administration’s military strikes against suspected drug boats “plausibly constitute crimes against humanity.” / SCIENCE & HEALTH A review concluded that “phytocannabinoids may improve bone health.” A study found that “medical cannabis availability reduced past-month self-reported poor mental health days by nearly 15 %—3.77 percentage points—among adults 65 and above.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The Worcester, Massachusetts Regional Chamber of Commerce is opposing an initiative on the state’s November ballot to roll back marijuana legalization. Safe Affordable Cannabis for New York released a survey on marijuana industry employee pay as part of an effort to convince Gov, Kathy Hochul (D) not to sign legislation to create a Cannabis Wage Board. / BUSINESS Several psychedelic drug companies are sponsoring next week’s Make America Healthy Again Summit. Green Thumb Industries Inc.’s board of directors authorized the continuation of a share repurchase program for an additional 12 months, with up to $50 million available for share repurchases. LEEF Brands Inc. has a new board of directors member. Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis/Side Pocket Images. The post DEA keeps states in the dark about cannabis rescheduling, CA official says (Newsletter: September 22, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

133. What If Nothing Happened During Your Trip? Someone in the room had done everything right. Careful preparation, a trained guide, two booster doses of psilocybin. Nothing happened. No altered state. In this episode, learn what that means and what to do next.This is the audience Q&A from the Psychedelics and Seniors Salon at Town Hall Seattle, the companion to episode 129, with Abbie Rosner, Scott Paul Wright, and Dr. Emily Whinkin.What you'll learn- What a session that produces no visible shift does and does not tell you- Why expectation is treated as a clinical variable in psychedelic medicine, not a soft one- Why microdosing protocols build in days off, and what those days are for- How much psilocybin content varies between mushroom varieties and within a single grow- What a legal psilocybin session in Oregon costs and what the price actually covers- What Seattle's 2021 psilocybin resolution protects, and what it does notAbout the guests Abbie Rosner is the author of Psychedelics and the Counterculture of Aging, based on interviews with 36 older adults, and writes ELDEREVOLUTION on Substack. Scott Paul Wright is a filmmaker and screenwriter and the director of the documentary The Next Chapter, who took his first psychedelic journey at 68. Dr. Emily Whinkin is a naturopathic physician and integrative mental health specialist licensed in Oregon and Washington, and a board-certified Fellow of the Psychiatric Association of Naturopathic Physicians, who runs a monthly virtual integration circle for older adults.0:00 Introduction 1:30 Should family members journey together 2:20 Medical disqualifiers and cardiovascular risk 3:30 Intergenerational trauma and encounters with ancestors 5:30 Grief that does not resolve in one session 8:00 What microdosing does, and how many Americans are doing it 9:40 Microdosing for creativity, and the pause 10:40 Psilocybin research for Alzheimer's and dementia 11:40 Microdosing, decision making, and why protocols include days off 13:40 Adjusting a microdose for mushroom potency 14:50 Cardiac conditions, atrial fibrillation, and valve issues 17:50 When a journey feels unimpactful, even with booster doses 19:00 Expectations as a clinical variable 20:00 What a legal psilocybin session costs and what it covers 23:00 Seattle, cultivation, and what decriminalization means 24:00 Integration circles and the isolation data 25:20 LSD compared with psilocybin, and the MM-120 anxiety trial 27:00 Mental health contraindications 28:20 SSRIs, SNRIs, and psilocybin 30:00 Ketamine compared with psilocybin 31:00 Cognitive benefits, neuroinflammation, and telomeresFollow April Pride for trusted information on psychedelics for women Substack Instagram YouTube Psychedelic SalonLearn more about April's services, events, and more at aprilpride.com Catch the full episode here

I think this is an informative post and it is very useful and knowledgeable. therefore, I would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. jokispin login

This sounds absolutely fascinating! I love that Sway Blunts is breaking stigmas while offering such a high-quality product. The commitment to organic ingredients and supporting BIPOC/women-owned businesses really shines through. It reminds me how even in complex industries, simplicity and quality are key, kind of like how a game such as geometry dash lite can be so engaging despite its straightforward premise. Can't wait to check them out!

This piece beautifully highlights the importance of recognizing incremental progress. It's inspiring to see how cannabis entrepreneurs, like Lisa Snyder, are building momentum through these smaller victories, even launching international chapters. Celebrating these achievements, much like mastering each level in a Slope Game, propels them towards greater success. It's a powerful message for any industry.

Great article! It’s full of meaningful information and clearly well-researched. I found it very helpful and informative. call girl in Gurgaon

California’s top marijuana regulator says the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) hasn’t been cooperative in answering questions about the implications of the Trump administration’s rescheduling move—while the federal agency is simultaneously asking the state itself to share more information about its medical cannabis program. “We have received no formal updates from DEA headquarters on implementation guidance of the order,” California Department of Cannabis Control Director Clint Kellum said at a meeting of the Cannabis Advisory Committee on Tuesday. “We have been trying to communicate with DEA headquarters to get a better understanding of what their expectations rule set will be for operators under the guidance,” he said. “Unfortunately, to date, we have not been offered any information on that front.” Kellum said that there have been “national-level efforts” to contact DEA in conjunction with cannabis regulators from other states, but they “just really haven’t seen any sort of interest on that front, unfortunately.” The California official said that regulators are waiting for further guidance from the feds before they make further changes to state rules related to marijuana’s evolving federal legal status. “The last thing what we want to do is try to be guessing what they’re going to be doing, and then trying to make changes that have widespread effects across our market, and then ultimately to find out that there’s some sort of different path or vision,” he said. “I know that’s probably not sufficiently satisfying, but I think we want to sort of be methodical in our approach and make sure that we have the correct underpinning of information before we make wholesale significant changes.” In May, DCC adopted initial emergency rules changes for the state’s marijuana licensing process that are intended to make it easier for businesses to qualify for benefits in line with the Trump administration’s recent decision to move ahead with federally rescheduling medical cannabis. In April, Attorney General Todd Blanche issued an order immediately moving marijuana products regulated by a state medical cannabis license from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III, along with marijuana products that are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A DEA hearing that recently concluded testimony is considering broader marijuana rescheduling. Meanwhile, DEA launched a form for cannabis businesses to register for federal protections in line with rescheduling. Kellum, of DCC, said that “other states are starting to see DEA inspections” of marijuana businesses that registered, but that the agency has been “focused more in areas with clear state medical cannabis programs than mixed states like ourselves.” “There appears to be some regional variation in the approach to those inspections and some of their questions,” he said, in line with reporting from Marijuana Moment showing that DEA officials are posing differing sets of follow-up questions to cannabis business from state to state. California has “received data requests from the DEA in relation to medicinal production and dispensing figures in the state,” Kellum said. “We have asked questions in relation to what the data will be used for, and would like to spend some time with them, helping them understand California’s market and sort of the different incentive models and structuring,” he said. “In our market, someone identifying their medical use is is not really incentivized, and so not knowing how they would use that data, we kind of haven’t been able to sort of share information the way we would hope.” Kellum also noted that federal rescheduling could have implications for international and interstate cannabis commerce, saying that officials would be “spending some time this fall thinking about” the issue. Ultimately, the top California cannabis official said that there are four major things the state is tracking for “material changes.” Those are actual DEA guidance, the result of the agency’s broader rescheduling hearing, guidance from the Internal Revenue Service on cannabis business tax issues and litigation that has been filed to challenge the reform. In the meantime, Kellum’s comments about DEA’s lack of communication isn’t the first time that top state cannabis officials have complained about a lack of guidance from the Trump administration about the rescheduling process. “None of us really can effectively advise our licensees, which is just incredibly frustrating, especially with a ticking clock,” James Pepper, chair of the Vermont Cannabis Control Board, said earlier this year. Photo courtesy of Mike Latimer. The post DEA Hasn’t Shown ‘Any Sort Of Interest’ In Helping States Prepare For Marijuana Rescheduling, Top California Official Says appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A North Carolina government commission that was appointed by the governor is considering recommending lawmakers legalize marijuana sales through a system of state-run stores that could be supplied by a “central cannabis warehouse”—while leaving cultivation and manufacturing to private businesses. The North Carolina Advisory Council on Cannabis, which Gov. Josh Stein (D) convened last year, has been holding an ongoing series of meetings, including via subcommittees focused on specific aspects of marijuana reform. The body’s Market and Regulatory Subcommittee convened on Friday to discuss options for how to structure a legal marijuana industry, including its production, distribution and retail tiers. While the panel has not yet made a formal recommendation to the legislature, a document accompanying the subcommittee meeting agenda shows that it is weighing a model where the “state exclusively controls the retail channel while private businesses remain responsible for cultivation, manufacturing/processing, and wholesale distribution.” The approach, it says, is a hybrid that combines North Carolina’s current “regulatory architecture and experience with state-controlled liquor retail” and Quebec, Canada’s “exclusive cannabis retail channel” and “explicit objective of moving consumers into the regulated market.” For cultivation and manufacturing, there would be multiple license types, including one for small-scale craft farms, as well as a standard licensed for larger commercial operations. Another license would cover manufacturers and processors who purchase cannabis from cultivators. At the wholesale tier the panel is weighing several options. One would involve licensing private entities that compete for businesses from producers for the right to supply a state retail system. Another contemplates the state itself operating a “central cannabis warehouse” that would be analogous to one currently run by the North Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission (NC ABC). A third hybrid option would involve regulated private wholesale, an option state central warehouse and state-controlled retail. When it comes to retail, the panel is considering recommending that the state create a new North Carolina Cannabis Control Commission or assign retail control functions to an existing state entity with a separate state cannabis retail corporation/system, according to the document. The objective is “bringing consumers into and keeping them in the legal market without encouraging cannabis consumption,” it says. The document lists two options for how the state-controlled stores could work. The first involves centralized state retail with a state-run corporation and stores, and the other contemplates decentralized control, similar to how the state handles alcohol, with a state commission, local boards and stores. The document for the meeting, which involved a presentation from NC ABC’s Renee Metz, also lists several “important elements” for consideration. Those include protecting the three-tier system from vertical integration, requiring state product approval, craft farms, control of the retail footprint, a role for local governments and a closed-loop financial model. It also specifies that “state-controlled does not have to mean state-set pricing.” The document additionally lists a number of questions for discussion, including: 1. Should NC’s cannabis system use a three-tier structure modeled on the state’s alcohol system? 2. Should cultivation/manufacturing, wholesale distribution and retail ownership be separated? 3. Should retail cannabis be sold exclusively through state-controlled stores? 4. Should NC use a centralized state warehouse, private licensed wholesalers, or a hybrid? 5. How should the Craft Farm License be structured so small farmers can participate without creating regulatory loopholes? 6. What forms of vertical integration and common ownership should be prohibited? 7. How should the state determine retail prices and adjust them in response to the illicit market? 8. What role should local governments have in determining where state cannabis stores operate? The panel’s consideration of state-run cannabis stores comes as a new poll shows that North Carolinians strongly support legalizing medical marijuana, and that a majority wants to go even further by legalizing cannabis for recreational use. Meanwhile, the governor is continuing to pressure the GOP-controlled legislature for marijuana reform. Last month, the governor called on lawmakers to legalize and regulate cannabis in a way that “protects kids” while lawmakers this week are considering a bill to restrict hemp THC products. In a social media post he noted that lawmakers are considering legislation that “aims to eliminate the Wild West that is North Carolina’s THC market.” The governor has repeatedly called on lawmakers to broadly legalize and regulate cannabis, though GOP legislative leaders have been more interested in focusing on the narrower hemp issue. A bill to restrict hemp and kratom products that was recently approved by the Senate now awaits potential action in the House. Meanwhile, lawmakers in North Carolina have been considering legislation to legalize medical cannabis for the last several sessions—with the Senate approving several proposals and the House refusing to follow suit. North Carolina’s Senate president pro tempore recently said that lawmakers will take a more serious look at legalizing medical marijuana following the Trump administration’s move to reschedule cannabis at the federal level. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — The governor-appointed cannabis commission in North Carolina issued a report in April initially recommending that the state move away from a criminalization-based approach to the plant and toward a system of “robust” regulations that provide for adults’ legal access to THC products. The North Carolina Advisory Council on Cannabis, which Stein convened last year, said that the current “absence of regulation for North Carolina’s intoxicating cannabis market raises numerous concerns,” noting that hemp products are readily available yet largely unregulated and that marijuana remains prohibited altogether in the state, even for medical use. “Compared to regulated marijuana frameworks in other states, this environment presents identifiable risks,” the interim report says. “While some operators voluntarily implement consumer protection protocols, these safeguards are not required under state law.” Stein, for his part, thanked the group for its “expertise, hard work, and thoughtful deliberation” in a press release and reiterated his support for legalizing marijuana. Members are tasked with developing and submitting initial recommendations on a “comprehensive cannabis policy, including any proposed legislation,” with a final report due by December 31 of this year. During his time as the state’s attorney general, Stein led a separate task force under then-Gov. Roy Cooper (D) that examined racial injustice issues and ultimately recommended decriminalizing marijuana and studying broader legalization in response to racially disparate enforcement trends. A tribe in North Carolina, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, launched the state’s first marijuana dispensary in 2024—despite the protests of certain Republican congressional lawmakers. Democratic lawmakers recently filed legislation to allow voters to decide whether to legalize marijuana for personal or medical use at the ballot box this November—though Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger (R) said the bill is unlikely to advance. Meanwhile, bipartisan North Carolina lawmakers have been stepping up the push for psychedelics reform legislation. Photo courtesy of Mike Latimer. The post North Carolina State Panel Considers Government-Run Marijuana Dispensaries And Centralized Warehouse appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Everybody’s being held to the same standards as far as testing is concerned.” By Rebecca Rivas, Missouri Independent State cannabis regulators issued a recall Wednesday after random testing found mold in pre-rolled joints sold in the state. The product, Juicy J’s cherry limeade infused pre-rolls, failed testing for aspergillus, “a common mold that can be tolerated in small amounts by healthy individuals but may cause adverse health effects in high amounts or in individuals with compromised immune systems,” the recall notice states. No adverse reactions have been reported, according to the Missouri Division of Cannabis Regulation. The division said it is working with the Ellisville-based manufacturing facility to address the problem. The Independent did not immediately receive a response from the company. Last year, regulators began double checking the work of licensed testing labs to catch potential problems with mold, pesticides and other contaminants. Mold, in particular, has been a concern raised by cannabis testing experts. During an MJ Unpacked cannabis conference panel in 2024, testing experts discussed information obtained through the Missouri Sunshine Law that showed 82 percent of Missouri’s cannabis testing is conducted at one licensed lab, Greenway Magazine reported. The data showed the laboratory detected mold problems far less frequently than other Missouri labs and laboratories nationwide. The lab, identified in the data as “Lab D,” reported an aspergillus failure rate of just under 0.5 percent—roughly one-eighth the national average. The state’s other labs had a failure rate of 3.3 percent, compared with the national average of 3.8 percent. The disparity raised questions about whether cannabis products were being adequately screened for mold. However, Ryan Bernard, the division’s testing and research unit manager, told The Independent last year that those results didn’t raise any alarm for him. “Everybody’s being held to the same standards as far as testing is concerned,” Bernard said. The manufacturer of the recalled Juicy J’s products is owned by CCMRB Processing LLC, whose owners also lead Michigan-based cannabis company Common Citizen. The group also owns a Fresh Karma dispensary through CCMRB Retail LLC, which was named in a lawsuit against Good Day Farm filed in May. Wednesday’s action is the second cannabis product recall Missouri regulators have issued this month. The division also issued a recall earlier this month for several products made at a manufacturing facility in Cuba whose parent company is GF Extraction Lab LLC. The ownership group also owns five Root 66 Dispensary locations. According to that recall notice, “The recalled products contain cannabinoids produced through chemical modification, conversion, or synthetic derivation of cannabinoids.” In previous recalls in which regulators cited the same issue, the products involved hemp or cannabinoids that did not originate in Missouri. Asked whether the recalled products were properly entered into Metrc, Missouri’s statewide marijuana tracking system, the division’s spokeswoman Lisa Cox said, “We cannot comment at this time due to it being an ongoing investigation.” The Independent repeatedly sought comment from the owners of GF Extraction Lab but did not receive a response. This story was updated to correct the location of the CCMRB Processing LLC manufacturing facility. This story was first published by Missouri Independent. The post Missouri Marijuana Officials Announce Recall Of Pre-Rolled Joints Following Mold Testing Results appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Democratic lawmakers in Pennsylvania’s Senate are stepping up the push to legalize marijuana in the state by scheduling a hearing focused on the issue for this week. The Pennsylvania Senate Democratic Policy Committee will host the meeting on Friday to “examine modernizing the commonwealth’s adult use cannabis laws,” according to an announcement. The committee’s chair, Sen. Nick Miller (D) will lead the hearing, alongside Sen. Sharif Street (D), who has long championed marijuana reform and has sponsored several bills to enact legalization. “The focus will include enforcement and safety needs, social and economic considerations, as well as how to ensure that meaningful criminal justice reform updates are included,” the committee’s announcement said. The hearing, titled “Adult-Use Cannabis: Criminal Justice, Safety & Economic Impacts,” will be held at the DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel in Philadelphia and is set to follow a separate summit event that is part of the 9th annual Cannabis Opportunities Conference that’s also being held at the hotel. The event comes as Democratic lawmakers in Pennsylvania continue to push for marijuana legalization, including with a discharge resolution that Street filed seeking to bring a bipartisan cannabis legalization bill out of committee. The measure, which was signed by every Democratic senator, aims to increase pressure on the chamber’s Republican majority to allow a vote on legalizing cannabis. The bill in question is sponsored by Street along with Sen. Dan Laughlin (R), who chairs the Senate Law & Justice Committee but hasn’t called the legislation up for consideration in the panel. The GOP chairman has instead focused on moving a separate bill to create a new Cannabis Control Board to regulate medical marijuana and hemp. That measure failed on the Senate floor in June amid partisan fighting about the best way forward for cannabis in the state. The marijuana legalization bill that Street wants to advance, SB 120, would allow adults aged 21 and older to possess up to 30 grams of cannabis flower, 1,000 milligrams of THC in edible products and 5 grams of concentrate. It would also create a process to expunge prior marijuana-related criminal records. If enacted, there would be an 8 percent excise tax on cannabis sales, alongside the state’s regular sales tax of 6 percent. The legislative maneuvering around the bill comes as a recent poll shows that Pennsylvania voters overwhelmingly support marijuana legalization—and that the largest share put the blame on Republican lawmakers for the fact that the state has not yet enacted the reform. Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) has repeatedly called on lawmakers to send him a marijuana legalization bill and for the last several years has included the reform in his budget requests to the legislature. Republican gubernatorial nominee Stacy Garrity, who is running against Shapiro, recently pledged to veto a marijuana legalization bill if lawmakers ever sent one to her desk—though she added that she doesn’t think the reform stands a chance of making it that far in the state. Her running mate for lieutenant governor, Jason Richey, claimed that legalizing marijuana would be “catastrophic” for the state, arguing it would increase the size of the illegal market, undermine job creation and harm public health. The governor earlier this year, as he has in past years, included cannabis legalization and the resulting expected revenue in his budget request. The House last year passed a bill to legalize marijuana and put sales in state-owned dispensaries, but the Republican Senate majority has criticized that plan while also not advancing a cannabis legalization model of its own. The state’s Independent Fiscal Office (IFO) reported in February that legalizing cannabis in Pennsylvania would generate nearly half a billion dollars in annual revenue by 2028, an estimate that is a significantly larger cash windfall compared to projections from Shapiro’s own office. A spokesperson in the governor’s office said the Trump administration’s federal marijuana rescheduling move is an “important step” that “adds support” to his push to legalize cannabis. A GOP senator also said that federal reform will make it easier to legalize marijuana in the state. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile, Laughlin is blaming the governor for the defeat of his bill to create a new Cannabis Control Board (CCB) to oversee the state’s medical marijuana program and intoxicating hemp products and that could also one day oversee recreational cannabis if it is legalized. Most GOP senators in the Republican-controlled chamber voted for the legislation from Laughlin, and all but two Democrats opposed it—with even some lawmakers who signed onto the measure as cosponsors ultimately voting against it. The measure would transfer regulatory authority for the state’s existing medical cannabis program from the Department of Health to a new seven-member CCB. The body would oversee cannabis permits, enforcement, seed-to-sale tracking, advertising, labeling, testing and other aspects of the legal industry. Moments after the bill’s defeat on the Senate floor, the chamber adopted a motion to reconsider—but it’s not yet clear when or if the legislation will get another vote. Laughlin’s legislation would also significantly restrict most hemp THC products, aligning the state with a new federal policy that is set to take effect later this year recriminalizing preparations with total THC content of more than 0.3 percent on a dry-weight basis or more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container. The action on the cannabis regulatory bill, SB 49, came shortly after the House of Representatives passed a bill to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities. The post Pennsylvania Senate Democrats Highlight Need To Legalize Marijuana With New Hearing appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Illinois would substantially expand its efforts to repair the harms of marijuana criminalization enforcement under a new bill that seeks to give cash payments directly to people impacted by prohibition laws. The legislation, filed on Thursday by Rep. La Shawn K. Ford (D), would create a new Illinois Freedom Program “for the purpose of issuing direct cash payments to eligible individuals who have been disproportionately impacted by historical cannabis enforcement.” The effort would supplement the state’s existing Restore, Reinvest, and Renew (R3) program, which uses marijuana tax revenue to support community reinvestment in areas harmed by the war on drugs. The cash payments would be administered through a new Illinois Freedom Fund, which the bill says would “consist of the incremental growth in cannabis tax revenue.” The legislation specifies that the existence of the cash payments program “shall not reduce, reallocate, or otherwise diminish” the amount of cannabis revenue distributed to grantees under the existing R3 program. “The Restore, Reinvest, and Renew Program Board shall ensure that the distribution of funds to R3 Area grantees is neither reduced below base year levels nor delayed as a result of the Illinois Freedom Program,” it says. That board, in cooperation with the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, would be authorized to adopt rules to implement and administer the new cash payments program under the bill. If HB 5815 is enacted into law, the program would take effect on July 1, 2027. Ford, the legislation’s sponsor, is running for a seat in Congress in the November elections to replace the retiring Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL). Meanwhile in Illinois, lawmakers and Gov. JB Pritzker (D) this year enacted omnibus cannabis reform legislation that doubles the amount of marijuana that adults can legally possess, allows drive-thrus and curbside pickups at dispensaries and lets them stay open for longer hours of operation, among other changes. The new law also allows existing recreational marijuana dispensaries to get permission to begin selling medical cannabis, which is taxed at a much lower rate than adult-use products. Regulators granted 37 such new medical marijuana approvals this month. Last month, Illinois officials separately added sickle cell disease and polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS) with chronic pain as new medical cannabis qualifying conditions. The governor held a signing ceremony for the cannabis expansion legislation at a marijuana dispensary, saying he is “proud that Illinois continues to lead the nation in showing what thoughtful, balanced cannabis policy can achieve.” In 2019, Pritzker signed the state’s initial marijuana legalization policy into law. The post People Harmed By Marijuana Criminalization Would Receive Direct Cash Payments From The Government Under New Illinois Bill appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

IA Democratic governor candidate: Legalize marijuana; Study: medical cannabis for lower back pain; AL withdraws objection to rescheduling Subscribe to receive Marijuana Moment’s newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. It’s the best way to make sure you know which cannabis stories are shaping the day. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Your support makes Marijuana Moment possible… Free to read (but not free to produce)! We’re proud of our newsletter and the reporting we publish at Marijuana Moment, and we’re happy to provide it for free. But it takes a lot of work and resources to make this happen. If you value Marijuana Moment, invest in our success on Patreon so we can expand our coverage and more readers can benefit: https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Zachary Nunn (R-IA) filed a bill to make it so past marijuana use could not be used to deny federal employment or security clearances. Iowa Democratic gubernatorial candidate Rob Sand said legalizing marijuana is a “no-brainer” move to raise revenue and help ward off a “fiscal time bomb” that could lead to cuts in funding for education and public safety. A new study that followed patients with chronic lower back pain for a period of 10 years found that “medical cannabis therapy was associated with reductions in opioid use (−89.8%), pain intensity (−84.2%), and functional disability (−30.4%).” “Substantial polypharmacy reductions and acceptable tolerability were observed.” The Alabama State Committee of Public Health unanimously voted to withdraw a previous objection to rescheduling marijuana under state law in line with the Trump administration’s federal move. The University of Maine’s Karyn Sporer and Robert Glover argue in a new op-ed that 25 years of data on Portugal’s successful drug decriminalization law shows that “reducing the harms of drug use requires painstakingly building and sustaining a system that connects people with treatment, healthcare and social support without making abstinence a precondition for receiving help.” “Although the Portuguese still hold negative views of substance use, problematic use increasingly came to be understood as a health and social problem rather than a moral failing warranting punishment.” / FEDERAL U.S. Tax Court is considering petitions from a cannabis business that is challenging taxes and penalties, arguing that its products aren’t controlled substances because of their low THC content. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration is proposing to revise some National Survey on Drug Use and Health questions to ask about “using” marijuana rather than “smoking” it in order to to “measure other ways of using marijuana that are common with youth, such as vaping or edibles.” The Drug Enforcement Administration is hosting a New England summit on Monday. Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE) expressed concerns about federal marijuana rescheduling, while independent challenger Dan Osborn discussed his support for the reform. / STATES An Idaho representative discussed his support for a proposed constitutional initiative to block voters from legalizing marijuana or other drugs through ballot initiatives. Texas state Senate candidates detailed their views on hemp THC product policy. Michigan regulators announced a recall of marijuana products after testing indicated they contain a banned chemical. New Mexico regulators granted the state’s first medical psilocybin producer permit. California regulators are proposing changes to rules on group tagging of cannabis plants. New Jersey regulators published guidance about marijuana business violation penalties. Kentucky regulators posted guidance for advanced practice registered nurses to renew their ability to recommend medical cannabis. Minnesota regulators sent a newsletter with various cannabis updates. The North Carolina North Carolina Advisory Council on Cannabis’s Market and Regulatory Subcommittee met. Colorado regulators will hold a hearing on proposed changes to marijuana tax rules on October 15. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / INTERNATIONAL New South Wales, Australia lawmakers approved legislation to protect medical cannabis patients from DUI charges. Canadian regulators published updated guidance on analytics methods in cannabis testing. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study found “no statistically significant impact of cannabis legalization on fatal THC-positive crashes or all crashes” in Canada. The findings of a study of dogs “support the potential of cannabinoids as safe adjuvants in multimodal anesthesia in veterinary medicine.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS Pacific Legal Foundation officials authored an op-ed arguing that a scheduled federal ban on hemp THC products will undermine the Trump administration’s plan to cover CBD through Medicare. / BUSINESS Smiling Bud workers in Ridgefield, New Jersey voted to unionize with United Food and Commercial Workers Local 360. Vireo Growth Inc. issued shares to Altmore and Altmore Debt I, LP in connection with a confidential settlement agreement with SHWZ Altmore, LLC. Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: The post Cannabis & federal employment bill in Congress (Newsletter: September 21, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net