All Activity

“Less than a year from now, you’ll be able to legally buy cannabis products for adult use, recreational, throughout Virginia.” By Markus Schmidt, Virginia Mercury Five years after Virginia legalized possession of small amounts of marijuana but failed to create a way for people to legally buy it, state lawmakers last week approved legislation establishing a regulated retail market for adult-use cannabis, potentially ending years of uncertainty over how cannabis could be legally bought and sold in the state. Late Friday, the Senate approved the conference committee compromise on House Bill 642 by a 21–18 party-line vote. The House of Delegates followed on Saturday, the final day of the 2026 General Assembly session, passing the measure 64–32 and sending it to Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s desk. If the Democrat signs it—as she said she would during an interview with The Mercury last summer—the bill would allow Virginians 21 and older to legally purchase cannabis beginning January 1, 2027. The vote marks a significant shift after years of failed efforts, after legislators legalized adults possessing up to an ounce of weed in 2021, and allowed people to grow up to four plants at home. Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin repeatedly vetoed legislation that would have allowed retail sales. The measure approved in the closing hours of the 2026 session would create a statewide licensing system, tax structure and regulatory framework overseen by the Virginia Cannabis Control Authority. The legislation lays out standards for cultivation, processing, distribution and retail sales of marijuana products through regulated businesses. Del. Paul Krizek, D-Fairfax, who sponsored the House version of the legislation, said it reflects years of negotiations and public input. “It’s been a long and arduous journey, but it’s also been good, because with that time, we were able to really get input from all walks of life, from all over the commonwealth, the stakeholders, individuals, constituents,” Krizek said in an interview. “It’s what Virginians have asked for, and we’ve spent the time, and had many, many hours of hearings where there was public input, and lots of emails, letters, texts and conversations with the general public, and this is the product from all of that hard work.” Conference negotiations shape the final bill Although both chambers supported establishing a retail cannabis market, lawmakers disagreed on several details, including the timeline for launching sales, the tax structure and regulatory oversight. Krizek’s House bill would have allowed retail sales beginning November 1, 2026, while the Senate version sponsored by Sen. Lashrecse Aird, D-Henrico, set a later launch date of January 1, 2027. The compromise adopted the Senate timeline. “Less than a year from now, you’ll be able to legally buy cannabis products for adult use, recreational, throughout Virginia,” Krizek said. “I guess it won’t happen exactly on January 1, but it will be legal at that point.” The legislation also blends competing tax proposals, establishing a 6 percent state cannabis tax while allowing local governments to adopt an additional tax between 1 percent and 3.5 percent. Combined with existing sales taxes, total taxation on cannabis products would typically fall between about 12 percent and 16 percent. Existing medical cannabis operators would be allowed to enter the adult-use market by paying a $10 million conversion fee, a compromise between the lower fee proposed in the House and a higher fee suggested in the Senate. The final proposal also caps the number of retail cannabis establishment licenses at 350 and increases Virginia’s legal possession limit from one ounce to 2.5 ounces. Under the legislation, businesses involved in cultivation, processing, wholesale distribution, retail sales and microbusiness operations must obtain licenses from the Cannabis Control Authority. Licensed establishments must display official decals showing they are authorized to sell marijuana products. The new state agency would oversee licensing, enforce regulatory compliance, collect cannabis taxes and monitor the supply chain. Krizek noted that the Cannabis Control Authority may conduct lotteries if the number of applicants exceeds available permits, and that retailers will need time to secure financing, obtain licenses and establish operations. Businesses would have up to two years to activate their licenses before losing them. Civil penalties for violations could reach up to $10,000 per day, including for operating without a license or displaying falsified licensing decals. The bill also creates enforcement provisions addressing underage possession, rules governing seizure or destruction of marijuana held by suspended or revoked licensees and mechanisms for collecting unpaid cannabis taxes, including liens or business closures. Selling marijuana without a license would carry escalating criminal penalties, starting as a Class 2 misdemeanor and rising to a Class 6 felony for repeated offenses. Statewide access over local opt-outs One provision removed from a previous proposal would have allowed local referendums for communities to opt out of cannabis retail sales. Aird said lawmakers rejected that approach after reviewing data from other states showing that patchwork systems often allow illicit markets to continue operating. “Honestly, I don’t have any emotion for a locality that feels upset that there is not a referendum,” she said in a phone interview Tuesday. “Because we did all of the research, it is simply not safe to have a patchwork of access relative to the retail marketplace.” Lawmakers concluded that inconsistent access across localities would undermine both consumer safety and enforcement goals, Aird added. “But when we met with law enforcement, when we met with health professionals, and we took just a really broad look at what would the state look like if you have some access here and no access there, it’s just not practical,” she said. Instead, local governments will be allowed to impose their own local cannabis tax within the range authorized by the bill. Aird also acknowledged concerns that illegal cannabis sellers could continue operating alongside the legal marketplace. She pointed to related legislation, Senate Bill 543, which strengthens enforcement tools for shutting down unlicensed sellers. “We have dropped in significant provisions to give law enforcement and localities a much stronger hand to shut down stores, these vape shops, these pop-up smoke shops, that are found to have illicit products being sold on site,” Aird said of that proposal. Those enforcement provisions would take effect July 1, well before the retail marketplace opens. Economic opportunities and equity provisions Advocates say the legislation is designed not only to regulate cannabis but also to address the long-term effects of drug enforcement policies. Aird said the bill includes provisions aimed at helping individuals disproportionately affected by past marijuana laws participate in the new industry. Supporters say those provisions are meant to address racial disparities in marijuana enforcement during the decades-long War on Drugs. A report by the American Civil Liberties Union found that despite similar marijuana use rates among Black and white Americans, Black people were 3.73 times more likely than white people to be arrested for marijuana possession nationwide. “I think that’s one of the most satisfying parts about this legislation,” she said. The proposal creates microbusiness licenses, partnership agreements and a Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund designed to support entrepreneurs historically affected by drug enforcement. “That will go in the hands of real people, to be able to launch their own entity within this marketplace,” Aird said. Forty percent of the state’s cannabis tax revenue would be directed toward early childhood care and education programs, while 30% would fund the equity reinvestment program. Industry groups say the legislation could unlock major economic opportunities. Rodney Holcombe, vice president of public policy at LeafLink, the nation’s largest cannabis wholesale platform, said the measure reflects lessons learned from other states. “Virginia is on the verge of taking a major step forward by establishing a responsible, well-regulated adult-use cannabis market,” Holcombe said. “Lawmakers clearly took the lessons learned from other states to heart, crafting legislation with a thoughtful licensing structure, a workable tax framework, and safeguards to ensure localities cannot opt out and undermine the stability of a statewide market,” he said. Holcombe said the industry hopes Spanberger will sign the legislation into law. “Doing so will unlock meaningful economic opportunity across the commonwealth and ensure Virginia’s cannabis market launches on a strong, stable foundation,” he said. Advocates see progress—and concerns Some advocates welcomed the legislation while raising concerns about implementation. Chelsea Higgs Wise, executive director of Marijuana Justice, said her group pushed lawmakers to strengthen equity and consumer protections as the legislation evolved this session. “The General Assembly took many steps to add positive provisions to the bill such as protecting small businesses from predatory contracts, including a labor peace agreement, adding a compact for tribal governments, adding education for vape shops and consumer protections, expanding equity opportunities,” Wise said. However, she said some issues remain unresolved, including zoning restrictions and potential supply chain bottlenecks if the market launches too quickly. “Even though we have been here before, we remain hopeful that (Spanberger) will listen to the stakeholders, sign the bill but also improve it,” Wise said. Unlike her predecessor, the Democratic governor has said she supports establishing a legal cannabis marketplace. She can sign the bill, propose amendments or veto it. For Aird, the legislation represents the culmination of years of debate following the state’s initial legalization vote—and a long wait for the retail market many Virginians expected to follow. “Now that it is real,” she said, “I think people feel like they’re going to be a lot safer. They’re going to have increased access, and it has been such a labor that is hard to believe. It is very surreal, but it is very satisfying to have arrived at this moment.” This story was first published by Virginia Mercury. The post Virginia Lawmakers Who Sponsored Marijuana Sales Legalization Bill Celebrate Its Passage appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

There’s no meaningful evidence that imposing higher taxes on marijuana would steer people away from using it—contrary to a claim recently made by the The New York Times editorial board—according to a new scientific analysis of cannabis consumption and tax data. In fact, raising the cost of cannabis sold at state-licensed retailers could lead people to return to the illicit market to obtain cheaper (and untested) marijuana that carries its own public health and safety risks. The new report, authored by Ohio State University (OSU) Moritz College of Law researchers Dexter Ridgway and Jana Hrdinová, drew on nationally representative survey data from federal sources and marijuana tax rates in states that have enacted legalization to test the idea that putting a higher premium on cannabis for adults could positively influence consumer behavior and deter heavy marijuana use. In its editorial, the board emphasized that while the federal government imposes taxes on alcohol and tobacco sales, it doesn’t do the same for marijuana—which is no surprise given that the plant remains federally illegal, as do the state-licensed shops that sell it. The board said “increases in tobacco taxes have been a major reason that its use has declined during the 21st century, with profound health benefits.” “The first step in a strategy to reduce marijuana abuse should be a federal tax on pot. States should also raise taxes on pot; today, state taxes can be as low as a few additional cents on a joint,” the editorial argued. “Taxes should be high enough to deter excessive use, on the scale of dollars per joint, not cents.” The idea that high marijuana taxes are causally associated with lower usage rates isn’t exactly settled science, the OSU report said, as states with varying tax rates for cannabis have seen disparate trends in consumer behavior. “More generally, at a time when the legal cannabis marketplace is a patchwork of ever-changing state laws and industries, the overall relationship between tax rates and marijuana use rates (and especially heavy use rates) is quite unclear,” the researchers wrote. They pointed out, for example, that marijuana is taxed at the highest rate in Washington State (43.5 percent), and the state has the sixth highest usage rate (22 percent) in the dataset. By contrast, New Jersey has the lowest tax rate (6.6 percent) and reports the lowest usage rate (14.4 percent), ranking in the bottom half nationally. “These patterns do not imply that taxes have no effect on consumption, but they do suggest that assuming marijuana users will respond to taxation like tobacco users is overly simplistic,” the report says. Via OSU. Ultimately, the OSU report—which assessed 2023-2024 survey data from the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)—concluded that “there is no apparent correlation between marijuana tax rate and marijuana usage rate.” “Merely looking at tax rates and usage rates ignores the myriad of other factors that can influence the rate of use, such as the maturity of the legal market, the ease of access to product affected by number of dispensaries per population, the price of the product in a given state (since marijuana cannot be traded across state lines, the way states regulate the number of licensed growers significantly affects availability/price of product) and many other factors,” the researchers said. “The New York Times editorial soundly stressed the importance, from a public health perspective, of limiting excessive or high potency marijuana use. Additional data is needed to assess the role of tax increases to deter the riskiest marijuana uses and users, and policy progress here will likely require a broader regulatory approach, besides taxation. These 2023 data suggest no simple inverse relationship between state tax rates and marijuana use, and effective policy must account for market structure, product availability and the wide availability of illicit product.” Via OSU. To be sure, where the editorial board, advocates and researchers seem to align is in their shared position that the federal government’s decades-long prohibitionist policies and the resulting lack of robust regulations is a problem. States have been passively permitted to participate in the cannabis experiment without federal safeguards in place or guidance on policy issues such as cannabis tax rates or potency limits for marijuana products, for example. The marijuana tax policy discussion has continued to play out in states and cities across the U.S. where marijuana laws are being considered or tweaked. There might not be consensus around the appropriate tax rate for cannabis, but there’s a general understanding that governments must balance revenue interests with the need to make regulated cannabis products cost-competitive with the illicit market. The Times editorial board further argued in its piece that an “advantage of taxes is that they fall much more on heavy users than casual smokers.” “If a joint cost $10 instead of $5, it would mean a lot of extra money for someone now smoking multiple joints a day and may change that person’s behavior,” it said in the editorial, which has faced scrutiny from multiple skeptical sources. “It would not be a big burden for someone who smokes occasionally.” But as the OSU analysis argues, there’s “reason to fear that significantly higher tax rates for marijuana products could shift use into unregulated and more dangerous illicit markets rather than to deter or reduce problematic cannabis use.” At the federal level, marijuana may soon be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), which wouldn’t federally legalize the plant but would free up certain research barriers and allow state-licensed cannabis businesses to take federal tax deductions they’ve been barred from under Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code 280E. That latter effect is expected to give the cannabis sector an economic boost, but because marijuana products would remain illegal to sell under federal law, rescheduling alone wouldn’t necessarily create a clear pathway for a new federal tax as the Times editorial board is proposing. Removing the 280E penalty could also potentially bring cannabis prices down if industry operators decide to pass any of their tax savings on to the consumer. “The federal government needs to be part of these solutions. Leaving taxes and regulations to the states threatens to create a race to the bottom in which people can cross state lines to buy their pot,” the board said. “Congress can set a floor, as it has done, however inadequately, with alcohol and tobacco, and states can build on it as they choose.” Various congressional bills to legalize cannabis have included federal tax provisions, with specific appropriations in mind for the revenue, but none of those have advanced in the current Congress. The post High Marijuana Taxes Don’t Effectively Deter Use, Study Shows, Contrary To NYT Editorial Board’s Claim appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Catching a market in motion is fundamentally harder than entering one that has not started yet.” By Max Jackson, Cannabis Wise Guys Imagine a race track. Five cars are already on it—tuned, tested, crewed and running laps at two hundred miles an hour. They have been on this track for years. Now imagine telling a new driver to enter that race. Not next season. Today. Except they do not have a car yet. They have not built it. They have not secured financing for the parts. Some of them have not gotten their license. That is Virginia’s cannabis market on January 1, 2027 under a sales legalization bill that lawmakers recently sent to Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D). The five pharmaceutical processors who currently run Virginia’s medical program will begin adult-use sales that day with inventory in their vaults, staff on payroll and retail locations already open. The independent businesses that were supposed to create competition in this market will not have broken ground. This is not a head start. It is a structural problem disguised as a calendar date. And the reason it matters is not just that incumbents go first—it is what happens to the market while independents are still building. Phase One: The Track Is Already Hot When adult-use sales begin, only the five existing processors can sell. That is the math of the situation; nobody else has product. Every day the market operates with five sellers is a day where pricing is set by five companies, where retailers build purchasing relationships with five companies and where consumers form brand habits around five companies. None of this requires bad actors. None of it is illegal. It is rational behavior in a market where the only participants are the ones who were already there. But there is a less visible advantage compounding underneath. Those five processors are generating revenue at prices that only a market without competition can sustain. Every dollar of that revenue pays down equipment, retires debt and builds a financial cushion that did not exist before the market opened. By the time independent competitors arrive, the incumbents’ cost structures have been subsidized by months (or years) of uncontested sales. The independent shows up with a brand-new mortgage on a brand-new facility, competing against an operator whose facility is already half paid off. That is not a gap in quality. It is a gap in math that widens every month that Phase One continues. Phase Two: New Stores, Same Suppliers Retail licenses get issued. Stores open. They need product on their shelves. Independent cultivators still do not have any. A cultivation facility takes 12 to 18 months to build. The plant itself requires four to six months from clone to a tested, packaged product that can legally sit on a dispensary shelf. A retailer who opens in month three or month six of the market has exactly one sourcing option: the five processors. Not because they prefer them. Because nobody else has a gram to sell. And the processors do not show up with one product. They show up with 10, 15, 20 brands—flower, concentrates, edibles, pre-rolls—plus displays, marketing support and a single point of contact who can stock an entire store in one phone call. A new dispensary owner with rent due and shelves to fill is not comparing suppliers. They are saying yes to the only supplier who can solve their entire problem at once. When independent cultivators eventually come online with a single strain and no marketing budget, they are not just competing against a brand. They are competing against a relationship that was built when they did not exist—a relationship where the retailer’s entire menu, supplier infrastructure and customer base was constructed around companies that showed up when nobody else could. That relationship does not dissolve because a better product arrives. It persists because switching costs are real, because shelf space is finite, and because the retailer already knows the processor’s delivery schedule, margin structure and product consistency. The independent offers none of that. Not because they are worse. Because they are new. Phase Three: Merging At Full Speed This is where the race track stops being a metaphor. When independent cultivators finally come online—18 months to 36 months after the market opened—they are not entering a market that paused to wait for them. They are entering one that has been accelerating without them. Pricing expectations are locked. Shelf space is committed. Wholesale relationships have a year of history behind them. Consumers already know what brands they buy. Entering a market at rest is hard. Entering a market at speed is a fundamentally different problem. Every month the market operated without independents is a month it accelerated away from them. The incumbents’ debt is shrinking while the independents’ debt is just beginning. The incumbents’ retail relationships are twelve months deep, while the independents have never made a delivery. The incumbents’ brands have years of consumer data, while the independents have a name nobody recognizes. The independent cultivator’s first harvest is not arriving into a competition. It is merging onto a track where every other car has been running for a year, at a speed the new entrant cannot match, with financing the new entrant cannot replicate and relationships the new entrant was never present to build. This is not a failure of effort or talent. It is a structural inevitability of the sequencing. If Phase One runs long enough before Phase Three begins, the market is not just shaped. It is in motion. And catching a market in motion is fundamentally harder than entering one that has not started yet. The Sequencing Is The Decision Almost every state that has launched adult-use cannabis has run this three-phase sequence. The outcome was not determined by the quality of the independent businesses. It was not determined by the licensing rules or the grant programs or the equity provisions. It was determined by one variable: how long Phase One lasted before Phase Three began. States where Phase One lasted months produced competitive markets. States where it lasted years produced concentrated markets that are now spending tens of millions of dollars trying to reverse structural damage that was baked in during the gap. Virginia has a bill on the governor’s desk. That bill sets January 1, 2027, as the start date—regardless of whether a single independent business is operational. But there is an alternative: tie each region of the state’s launch to a simple trigger. Adult-use sales could begin locally when at least one independent cultivator and one independent retailer (with no ownership or operational ties to an existing processor) are certified and selling product. That is not a delay. It is a launch sequence that makes Phase One as short as possible. Max Jackson is the founder of Cannabis Wise Guys and specializes in translating between cannabis operations, investment, and public policy. He has provided expert testimony to the Virginia Legislature on preventing market consolidation in emerging cannabis markets. Photo courtesy of Max Jackson. The post Virginia’s Cannabis Sales Legalization Bill Gives An Unfair Head Start To Existing Big Businesses (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

The dynamic environment of Punjabi Bagh encourages conversations about modern experiences where individuals sometimes refer to Escort Service Punjabi Bagh during lifestyle talks.

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is acknowledging that, even as more states have legalized marijuana, youth cannabis use has “declined” over the past several decades. As part of an online quiz on DEA’s “Just Think Twice” platform, the agency asked about a variety of drug trends, including questions about substance use disorder, drug overdose deaths, signs of a heroin overdose and cannabis use among youth. Notably, the answer to one question about past-year marijuana use by adolescents and teens directly contradicts a frequently debunked prohibitionist narrative about the risks of state-level legalization, with anti-cannabis organizations claiming the reform would drive more teens to use marijuana. That’s not the case, DEA said. “From 1995 to 2025, past-year cannabis use decreased among 8th, 10th, and 12th grade students,” reads one of the items, with respondents asked to decide whether the statement is “Fact” or “Fiction.” It turns out, contrary to prohibitionist fears, it’s a fact that teen marijuana use has declined since states began enacting laws to allow medical or recreational use. “Use of cannabis within the past year declined from 15.8 percent to 7.6 percent for 8th grade students, 28.7 percent to 15.6 percent for 10th grade students, and 34.7 percent to 25.7 percent for 12th grade students, from 1995 to 2025,” the quiz explains once the respondent makes their choice, citing data from the National Institute on Drug Abuse- (NIDA) backed national Monitoring the Future (MTF) survey. Via DEA. For those who’ve been closely following cannabis policy and research, the question was likely a no-brainer. Numerous studies have found that rates of youth marijuana use either declines or remains stable after states enact legalization, which advocates point to as evidence of the effectiveness of regulations over criminalization. When adults have legal access to cannabis at age-gated licensed retailers, many transition away from the illicit market, where sellers generally aren’t checking IDs or following other protocols ensuring product safety and quality. States with legalization laws also tend to incorporate public education initiatives into their programs to deter teens from misusing cannabis. Of course, DEA didn’t endorse marijuana legalization in the quiz answer. And in its answer to another question about cannabis—specifically quizzing people about whether states are legalizing because marijuana “has been proven not to have adverse effects”—the agency took the opportunity to link the plant to a variety of health issues and impaired driving, despite conflicting evidence on those claims. “While several states have legalized marijuana, the drug is still linked to mental health problems like anxiety and psychosis, can slow brain development, and is the substance most often found in the blood of drivers involved in and frequently responsible for car crashes,” DEA said. This is one of the latest examples of DEA using interactive online quiz formats as part of its effort to raise awareness about drug issues. Last year, for example, the agency DEA put out a five-question quiz to assess people’s drug slang knowledge for substances such as marijuana, MDMA and fentanyl. Not unlike its drug emoji guide that DEA recirculated last year, the test made several claims about the terminology used by consumers and sellers that might give those populations pause. DEA’s emoji decoding guide has been around, and somewhat updated, since 2021, drawing some criticism from consumers who’ve questioned the credibility of the agency’s interpretation of how people communicate about drugs in texts and social media. DEA, which is currently involved in a process to consider rescheduling marijuana—has long been considered out of touch with youth culture as it concerns drug use and sales. And it’s been partnering with other anti-drug groups recently that hasn’t done much to disabuse the public of that perception. For instance, to mark “National Prevention Week,” DEA promoted a campaign last May that encouraged people to share memes with dubious claims about the effects of cannabis—including the theory that it is a “gateway drug” to using other substances. In 2023, DEA also advised young people that, rather than doing drugs, they should focus on becoming Instagram influencers. The agency promoted tips on how to get a “natural high” as an alternative to drugs, sharing what it said were “7 Better Highs” such as becoming famous on Instagram, playing video games and going to a pet store to look at animals. In the background, cannabis advocates and stakeholders have been closely monitoring agencies including DEA as they await action on marijuana rescheduling—a process President Donald Trump in December directed the attorney general to quickly finalize. Moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), as proposed, would not federally legalize it, however. The post DEA’s New ‘Drug Quiz’ Admits That Youth Marijuana Use Is Declining As Legalization Expands appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Thanks For sharing this Superb article.I use this Article to show my assignment in college.it is useful For me Great Work. koitoto

CA gov’s marijuana legalization post; CO cannabis tax increase?; OH hemp THC lawsuit; SD psilocybin; RI hemp THC drinks 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 The Congressional Research Service published an updated report on the federal-state marijuana conflict, removing language from an earlier version that had said it is “likely” federal officials “will move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) declared that “cannabis is now legal” in a satirical social media post after President Donald Trump mistakenly referred to the California Democrat as “president of the United States.” The Colorado legislature’s Capital Development Committee is recommending the rejection of a bill that would put a measure on the state’s November ballot asking voters to increase marijuana and alcohol taxes to support mental health treatment. South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden (R) signed a bill to legalize a synthetic form of psilocybin if the psychedelic is federally approved. Ohio officials filed a brief defending Gov. Mike DeWine’s (R) veto of a provision that would have allowed sales of hemp THC drinks through the end of the year in response to a lawsuit from brewers. The Rhode Island Cannabis Control Commission is recommending that lawmakers pass a bill to ban the sale of hemp THC beverages in bars and restaurants with liquor licenses. / FEDERAL The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Oversight will hold a hearing about U.S. military strikes against suspected drug boats on Wednesday. The House bill to create psychedelic therapy centers of excellence got one new cosponsor for a total of 24. / STATES South Carolina’s Senate majority leader said he is “hopeful” lawmakers can pass legislation to regulate hemp THC products. A Pennsylvania senator tweeted about legislation to restrict hemp products, saying, “Protecting consumers and closing loopholes is just common sense. That’s why we aligned Pennsylvania law with new federal standards and give law enforcement the clarity they need to remove these harmful products from the marketplace.” A Texas representative tweeted, “Let’s treat THC like alcohol. Regulate it. Test it. Let Veterans use it rather than opioids. Let businesses that are currently prospering continue to prosper. We don’t need a nanny state. We need adults to be treated like adults.” Washington, D.C. regulators adopted changes to medical cannabis rules. Vermont regulators sent guidance on acceptable forms of ID for verifying the ages of customers purchasing marijuana. Colorado regulators issued guidance on cannabis vaporizer expiration dates. Massachusetts officials awarded $28.8 million to support marijuana businesses through the Cannabis Social Equity Grant Program. California regulators sent updates on various cannabis issues. New York regulators will host a series of listening sessions about cannabis rules next month. — 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 A German lawmaker criticized the lack of approvals for local marijuana sales pilot trials. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study found that “cannabis use was not linked to longitudinal cognitive decline or dementia risk.” A study of mice found that “cannabidiol attenuates methamphetamine-induced psychosis via anti-oxidative stress.” / BUSINESS Vireo Growth Inc. reported quarterly revenue of $104.5 million and a net loss and comprehensive loss of $20.4 million. Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. resolved pending litigation with PharmaCann Inc. 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 New congressional cannabis rescheduling report (Newsletter: March 18, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Our talented male and female Escorts in Delhi (and across many other countries) are sure to provide you with a truly Unforgettable Experience! The creativity and passion demonstrated by these talented individuals will create legendary memories of your time spent together. Make your appointment today for awe-inspiring results!

I admire this article for the well-researched content and excellent wording. I got so involved in this material that I couldn’t stop reading. I am impressed with your work and skill. Thank you so much. koitoto

The vibe shifts from handmade notes to wild exploits, as if a traveler stitched a map from hemp and curiosity. There is humor in the chaos, and a fearless steer toward the unknown. The tale invites readers to chase stories as if they were rare seeds. Crossy Road moments pop up in the narration, teasing a lighthearted detour. I once faced a puzzle where a small clue led to a larger mystery, and the path felt like a cat weaving through clutter, turning a dead end into an improvised route.

Wow, What a Excellent post. I really found this to much informatics. It is what i was searching for.I would like to suggest you that please keep sharing such type of info.Thanks situs toto

Enjoy a great time with the Escort in Shahdara. You will always be glad you connected with these girls. They are exceptional and consistently showcase themselves in the most alluring manners to arouse the desires of clients. Escorts have always been remarkable professionals who continuously display enthusiasm and vigor to provide the most enjoyable experience possible.

In the sex dolls industry, proper maintenance is a critical factor.

Our group of friends was looking for something beyond the usual parties to celebrate a reunion. We discovered that companions from Call Girls in Goa offer a unique kind of companionship that is both professional and deeply personal. They blended seamlessly into our circle, engaging in our jokes and adding a sparkle to our dinners. It felt like we had known them for years, proving that true connection can be found in the most unexpected and beautiful places.

“All retailers selling intoxicating hemp products should be held to similar high safety standards as cannabis retailers.” By Christopher Shea, Rhode Island Currant For a year, Rhode Island bars and restaurants had the opportunity to secure a license from the state’s former Office of Cannabis Regulation to sell intoxicating THC-infused beverages despite state regulations that prohibit them from being combined with alcohol, tobacco or nicotine. Over 100 licensed retailers obtained a license between August 2024 and July 2025 when the Cannabis Control Commission put the brakes on issuing any new licenses to establishments that allow onsite consumption of alcohol in “furtherance of public health and safety.” Now as regulators race to codify rules to catch up with the marketplace, the association representing the state’s hospitality industry is voicing strong opposition to the commission’s recommendation that lawmakers codify a ban on the sale of THC drinks at venues with a liquor license. “They’re assuming we’re not going to follow the law,” Farouk Rajab, president and CEO of the Rhode Island Hospitality Association, said in an interview Monday. Rajab said he was disappointed to see the commission recommend a ban in its final report submitted to the General Assembly on March 1. But he was not shocked that it still made the cut. “I think decisions are already made even before the listening sessions,” he said. “This is targeting an industry, that’s all.” The 11-page report details Rhode Island’s existing rules governing hemp-derived beverages, along with recommendations over labeling, testing and taxing the products. Carla Aveledo, chief of policy for the commission, said no one single industry was being targeted. “All retailers selling intoxicating hemp products should be held to similar high safety standards as cannabis retailers,” she said. Hemp became legal at the federal level after the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, with drinks hitting the market in Rhode Island as regulators were crafting rules for awarding licenses for retail cannabis establishments. Regulations allowing the drinks sale were approved by the former Office of Cannabis Regulation in 2024, rules that have since been adopted by the state’s Cannabis Office. But the proliferation of hemp-derived THC drinks led to a debate on whether they should even be legal at all in Rhode Island. Members of the state’s recreational cannabis industry have been largely opposed to allowing THC products to be sold outside the few existing licensed pot shops. Which is why the General Assembly last year tasked the Cannabis Control Commission to come up with suggestions on how to deal with hemp-derived drinks, most of which are produced out-of-state. Rajab said the association created training modules that “allow for safe handling” of the drinks. The online course details how the brain’s receptors react to cannabis, onset times, and how to prevent overconsumption of THC. The association’s module even instructs hospitality workers to never serve THC drinks with alcohol. “Mixing THC-infused beverages with alcohol can lead to unpredictable and unsafe situations,” it states. “As a server, it is your responsibility to discourage customers from consuming THC beverages alongside alcoholic drinks. Educate them on the risks and promote safer consumption practices to ensure their well-being.” Drinks are often sold in packs of four cans in liquor stores. State regulations limit the serving of 1 milligram of THC per drink and no more than 5 milligrams of THC “per package.” Rajab said rather than ban restaurants from selling drinks, the state should codify regulations to guide the hospitality industry. He pointed to Minnesota, which has allowed drinks to be sold at liquor stores, grocery stores, and bars since 2023. “It’s served safely there,” he said. The commission’s report similarly highlights how “Lower-Potency Hemp Edibles” are regulated in the land of 10,000 lakes. For a bar in Minnesota to serve hemp-derived products, it must obtain an on-site consumption endorsement, which is selected when completing the license application. But even Minnesota regulators admit there’s a big question mark as to whether drinks will continue to be sold after federal restrictions regulating hemp’s potency are scheduled to take effect in November. “That kind of threw the entire industry nationwide through a loop,” Jim Walker, a spokesperson for the Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management, told Rhode Island Current. “If we do get to November and there’s no safety net involved, we as an office would help to offramp a lot of these businesses.” Congress is considering legislation that would delay enforcement of the ban for two years, which could still allow THC-derived drinks to be sold. Aveledo said Rhode Island’s Cannabis Control Commission continues to monitor federal hemp policy and acknowledged it may impact regulators’ plans to update the state’s hemp rules. “The Commission intends to draft updates to the hemp regulations in 2026,” she said. “However, recent federal activity and future actions remain uncertain, which may delay the regulatory drafting to early 2027 to ensure our framework is fully informed and strategically aligned.” This story was first published by Rhode Island Currant. The post Rhode Island Officials Support Ban On Serving Hemp THC Drinks In Bars And Restaurants With Liquor Licenses appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Supporters say the psychedelic can help veterans with PTSD and those with treatment-resistant depression. By John Hult, South Dakota Searchlight A synthetic version of psychedelic mushrooms will be legal for use in mental health therapy in South Dakota if it’s approved by the federal government. Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden signed a bill into law last week that sets the state up to instantly legalize crystalline polymorph psilocybin if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approves its use and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration reschedules it from a drug of abuse to a drug with medical value. House Bill 1099 sailed through the House of Representatives 58-7 on the strength of testimony about the drug’s promise in clinical trials as a more effective option for post-traumatic stress disorder and treatment-resistant depression. Lobbyists for combat veterans testified in support of the measure. The bill met a bit more resistance in the Senate, where Rapid City Republican Sen. Greg Blanc pulled it from the chamber’s consent calendar—a list of noncontroversial bills passed with a single vote unless a senator asks to remove one—to decry the idea of using a psychedelic drug in therapy. Blanc pleaded with his fellow senators to resist the bill’s conditional legalization, but supporters returned repeatedly to the theme of hope for veterans and treatment-resistant depression and stressed that nothing would happen until the federal government green-lit the drug as safe and effective. The bill passed the Senate 21-12. This story was first published by South Dakota Searchlight. The post South Dakota Governor Signs Bills To Legalize Synthetic Psilocybin Following Federal Approval appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) didn’t waste much time seizing on President Donald Trump’s latest slip-up, when he mistakenly called the Californian “president of the United States” during Oval Office remarks in which the incumbent otherwise disparaged the Democrat. Playing into the gaffe, Newsom said legalizing marijuana was among the “many big announcements” his White House was making. Trump drew criticism on Monday when he said “a president should not have learning disabilities,” referring to Newsom’s much-anticipated run for the Democratic ticket in 2028 and the fact that the governor has been candid about his dyslexia, a learning disability that makes reading and spelling difficult. Newsom, who has taken to taunting Trump by assuming the president’s bombastic writing style on X, responded with another all-caps post where he accepted the designation as U.S. president and listed a variety of administrative actions he’d be taking. That included firing controversial figures in Trump’s White House, launching an investigation into the Trump administration, ending commercials for broadcasts of sporting events and reality TV shows and advancing a progressive policy agenda that involves cannabis reform. “HEALTH CARE IS NOW FREE FOR ALL AMERICANS (NO MEASLES!) AND ALL MOMS GET FREE CHILDCARE SO WE CAN HAVE MORE BABIES!!! ALSO CANNABIS IS NOW LEGAL AND ABORTION IS BACK FOR WOMEN WHO WANT IT,” Newsom said. “THE COUNTRY IS NOW RUN BY SOMEONE WHO CAN ACTUALLY COMPLETE A SENTENCE. AMERICA IS NOW ‘HOT’ BECAUSE YOU HAVE A DYSLEXIC PRESIDENT INSTEAD OF A BRAIN-DEAD ONE. BIG UPGRADE!!!” NOW THAT I, GAVIN C. NEWSOM, AM OFFICIALLY PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (THANK YOU DONALD!), I HAVE MANY BIG ANNOUNCEMENTS TO MAKE! FIRST, EVERY TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDER IS NULL AND VOID, STEPHEN MILLER AND EVERY TRUMP GOON IS FIRED, AND THE TRUMP CORRUPTION PROBE IS OFFICIALLY… — Governor Newsom Press Office (@GovPressOffice) March 17, 2026 After Marijuana Moment’s article about Newsom’s comments was published, it was shared by a “Newsom News” account, and that post was later quoted by the governor himself. “ENJOY, AMERICA!” Newsom said. ENJOY, AMERICA! https://t.co/ReKh2rOI0t — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) March 17, 2026 The governor similarly called for marijuana legalization in a separate post mocking Trump during a federal government shutdown last year, pledging to enact the reform as “leader of the free world.” Newsom was one of the first high-profile politicians to endorse legalization years before voters in his state moved forward with the reform. Trump, for his part, signed an executive order in December calling on Attorney General Pam Bondi to expediently complete the process of moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substance Act (CSA), but that hasn’t happened yet—nor would that federally legalize cannabis. Back in California, the governor last October vetoed a bill that would have allowed certain marijuana microbusinesses to ship medical cannabis products directly to patients via common carriers like FedEx and UPS, stating that the proposal “would be burdensome and overly complex to administer.” — 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. — Newsom did sign a bill earlier that month aimed at streamlining research on marijuana and psychedelics. In September, the governor also signed a measure into law to put a pause on a recently enacted tax hike on marijuana products. Meanwhile, California officials recently awarded nearly $30 million in grants for marijuana-focused academic research projects. Image element courtesy of Gage Skidmore. The post Newsom Declares That ‘Cannabis Is Now Legal’ After Trump Mistakenly Calls Him ‘President Of The United States’ appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A Colorado legislative committee is urging fellow lawmakers to reject a bill that would put a measure on the state’s November ballot asking voters to increase marijuana and alcohol taxes to support mental health treatment. At a meeting on Thursday, the bicameral Capital Development Committee (CDC) took up the proposal from Rep. Bob Marshall (D) and Sen. Judy Amabile (D) that aims to hike taxes on the substances and put the additional revenue toward the creation of a mental health fund overseen by the state Department of Human Services (DHS). Members of the panel voted unanimously (5-0) to send a letter to the House Health and Human Services Committee recommending that the panel reject the legislation, HB 1301, when it’s taken up at a hearing scheduled for Wednesday. If the bill is passed by the legislature, voters across the state would then decide on increasing the state retail marijuana sales and excise taxes by 0.42 percentage points each at the ballot this coming November. Alcohol taxes by volume would also increase for the first time in more than 30 years, by varying levels depending on the product type. “The bill requires the treasurer to transfer an amount equal to the tax revenue raised as a result of the bill to the hospital support account that is created in the capital construction fund,” a summary of the measure says. DHS would be able to expend the funds in “priority order,” starting with the creation of a mental health institute in Aurora, then going toward operational costs for the institute and “long-term civil commitment facilities” in Mesa County. During last week’s CDC meeting, Rep. Tammy Story (D), vice chair of the panel, asked House bill sponsor Marshall how he squares the proposal to hike marijuana taxes with the fact that the state has seen cannabis sales and resulting revenue slump over recent years. “We kind of threw marijuana in to spread the pain, so to speak,” Marshall conceded, adding that if there were additional “harmful substances” to tax at a higher rate, they could theoretically “drop marijuana” from the equation. “I’m a big believer in sin taxes, but the tax should go to ameliorate the issues and externalities of the sin,” he said. “So at least the way I justify this in my mind is, if you talk to a lot of mental health people, so many of the seriously mentally ill self-medicate with alcohol or marijuana. That’s how I’m able to justify taxing marijuana and alcohol for an excise tax.” “If we need to back off on marijuana, that’s fine,” he said, “but then the alcohol would have to take a larger load of the tax, or we find something else.” Marijuana industry representatives have criticized the bill’s marijuana tax provisions, in part by pointing out that the state already imposes significant taxes on cannabis sales compared to other states and commodities. Making it more expensive for consumers to purchase marijuana for licensed retailers could also undermine efforts to eliminate the illicit market, drawing buyers back to unlicensed sources where no tax dollars would be generated for the state. While the state has seen over $1 billion in marijuana sales in 2025—a milestone the governor touted in December—tax revenue from cannabis sales has gradually decreased over the past five years as more states have enacted legalization and as intoxicating hemp products have grown in popularity. Nonetheless, cannabis is still bringing in more tax dollars compared to alcohol or cigarettes. Adult-use marijuana is currently taxed at three levels in Colorado: A 15 percent excise tax, 15 percent special sales tax and 2.9 percent state general sales tax. As one of the first states to legalize marijuana for recreational use, Colorado saw revenue from those sales grow “consistently for the first eight years of legalization, peaking at $424.4 million FY 2020-21,” a report from the state that was released last month says. — 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 Colorado House of Representatives last week sent a bill to the governor that would allow terminally ill patients to use medical marijuana in healthcare facilities such as hospitals. Advocates have been critical about changes made throughout the legislative process—arguing, for example, that making it so hospitals would have the option—rather than a mandate—to allow medical cannabis use in their facilities fundamentally undermines the intent of the reform. Gov. Jared Polis (D) also said last month that his state should not have joined a lawsuit supporting the federal ban on gun ownership by people who use marijuana that recently went before the U.S. Supreme Court—and he personally opposes the state attorney general’s “legal position on this.” The post Colorado Legislative Committee Votes To Reject Bill To Put Marijuana And Alcohol Tax Hikes On November Ballot appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

In their lawsuit, the brewers said they face “potential criminal enforcement actions against them for possessing millions of dollars’ worth of inventory that they bought in good faith before the governor’s veto.” By David Beasley, The Center Square Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) had the legal authority to veto parts of an appropriations bill that would have allowed beer companies to continue selling hemp beverages until the end of the year, the state argued in a filing with the state Supreme Court. “The governor may veto any item in any bill making an appropriation of money,” the state said in its response to a lawsuit by brewers challenging DeWine’s veto. “For over a hundred years, everyone took the Constitution at its word: ‘any item’ truly meant ‘any item’ in an appropriations bill.” The brewers are asking the Supreme Court to “find a hidden limitation in the Constitution’s text that apparently went unnoticed by generations of legislators, governors, and litigants,” the state said. “So, this is an easy case, or at least, it should be.” A group of brewers sued the state, challenging DeWine’s “line item” veto of portions of Senate Bill 56 that would have given companies until December 31 to transition out of the hemp beverage business and sell their inventories in response to new federal legislation on hemp products. Even though Ohio voters in 2023 approved a measure legalizing the recreational use of marijuana, SB 56, passed late last year, placing new restrictions on the use and sale of hemp products. The legislation, including DeWine’s line-item veto of the one-year transition period for brewers to sell their inventory, takes effect March 20. “On that date, the manufacture and sale of hemp products like drinkable cannabinoid products will become illegal,” the state said in its brief to the Supreme Court. The state criticized the brewers for waiting more than two months after the veto to file a legal challenge. “Governor DeWine line-item vetoed S.B. 56 on December 19, 2025,” the state said. “[Brewers] inexcusably waited seventy-seven days, until March 6, to seek ‘emergency’ relief. Under this Court’s briefing schedule, any decision will issue no earlier than March 17, just three days before S.B. 56’s March 20 effective date.” In their lawsuit, the brewers said they face “potential criminal enforcement actions against them for possessing millions of dollars’ worth of inventory that they bought in good faith before the governor’s veto.” In addition, the veto will force them to “collectively, to lay off dozens of employees and will cost them millions of dollars in investments and lost sales,” their suit said. This story was first published by The Center Square. Photo courtesy of Max Jackson. The post Ohio Officials Defend Governor’s Veto Of Hemp THC Drink Provision From Brewer’s Lawsuit appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Congressional researchers are giving an update on the status of the federal-state marijuana law conflict, detailing the limitations of a pending rescheduling action, laying out options for lawmakers to address the issue and noting changes to hemp policy that are set to take effect later this year. Notably, the new report removes language from an earlier version that had said it is “likely” federal officials “will move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.” In an “In Focus” report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), analysts explained how it’s “increasingly common for states to have laws and policies allowing for medical or recreational use of marijuana” that remains in violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Federal agencies under the Biden administration recommended moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the CSA following a scientific review—and President Donald Trump in December issued an executive order directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to quickly complete that process—but that hasn’t materialized yet. If cannabis is reclassified, however, that “would not bring the state-legal medical marijuana industry into compliance with the CSA” without additional legal changes, CRS said. And while Congress has held hearings and introduced bills proposing a variety of marijuana reforms, it’s yet to enact legislation to alter the scheduling status of marijuana. The report serves as an update to an earlier 2024 analysis of federal-state marijuana laws in which CRS mentioned that rescheduling wouldn’t affect the legality of “the state-legal recreational marijuana industry,” and it’s unclear why that was amended to reference the “medical marijuana industry” instead (Emphasis added.) Also in its 2024 update, CRS said that “Congress could take several routes” to address the marijuana policy conflict, including by taking “no action, in which case it appears likely [the Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA] will move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.” The latest version still leaves open the possibility that Congress take no action, but it now avoids commenting on the likelihood that DEA completes the rescheduling process. Instead, the report says “DOJ may move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III” in response to congressional inaction. Both versions state that “Congress could also enact marijuana legislation before or after DEA acts on rescheduling.” The updated report, however, includes additional language noting that “concerns about the United States’ compliance with international treaty obligations in regard to marijuana control may remain.” Other changes in the report include basic statistic updates on the number of states that have enacted legalization and usage rates, with CRS acknowledging that underage marijuana use hit a low of 6 percent in 2023 and 2024, down from 7.9 percent in 2011 prior to the implementation of the first adult-use cannabis laws. It further updated a section on hemp laws, explaining how while the cannabis crop was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill, the definition of hemp is being revised under separate agriculture legislation the president signed last year. Rather than testing for THC content based only on delta-9 THC concentration, it will now be tested for total THC—a policy change that takes effect in November that industry stakeholders say will effectively eradicate the consumable cannabinoid market. The report also adds new language referencing the enactment of the HALT Fentanyl Act, which “contained provisions meant to streamline Schedule I controlled substance research, including marijuana research.” Overall, though “state laws do not affect the status of marijuana under federal law or the ability of the federal government to enforce it, state legalization initiatives have spurred a number of questions regarding potential implications for federal laws and policies, including federal drug regulation and access to banking and other services for marijuana businesses,” CRS said. “Thus far, the federal response to states’ legalizing marijuana largely has been to allow states to implement their own laws. DEA has nonetheless reaffirmed that marijuana growth, possession, and trafficking remain crimes under federal law irrespective of states’ marijuana laws,” it said. “Federal law enforcement has generally focused its efforts on criminal networks involved in the illicit marijuana trade.” “Congress could also enact marijuana legislation before or after DOJ acts on rescheduling. Such legislation might take the form of more or less stringent marijuana control, ranging from requiring federal law enforcement to dismantle state medical and recreational marijuana programs, to limiting federal marijuana regulation through means such as appropriations provisions, to rescheduling or de-controlling marijuana under the CSA. This last option would largely eliminate the gap with states that have authorized recreational and comprehensive medical marijuana; however, concerns about the United States’ compliance with international treaty obligations in regard to marijuana control may remain. As Congress considers these questions, states may continue to act on marijuana legalization. The report concludes by pointing out that “no state has reversed its legalization of either medical or recreational marijuana at this time.” The post Congressional Researchers Give Update On Marijuana Rescheduling And Upcoming Hemp THC Ban appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Feds not changing worker drug testing; FDA CBD policy; PA cannabis/hemp regs bill; NM psilocybin therapy funds; Study: Legal marijuana reduces crime 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 The Food and Drug Administration submitted a CBD products compliance and enforcement policy for review by the White House Office of Management and Budget. The Department of Health and Human Services said in a Federal Register notice that there will be no changes to federal workplace drug testing policies for now, as marijuana rescheduling remains pending. “The current authorized drug testing panels and required report nomenclature remain in effect.” A new poll shows that more Americans say using marijuana is morally acceptable—or not a moral issue at all—than those who say the same about gambling, watching porn, having an abortion or being gay, and that people with lower levels of education have more moral concerns about cannabis. The Pennsylvania Senate Law & Justice Committee amended a bill to create a Cannabis Control Board to oversee medical marijuana and intoxicating hemp by adding in a new definition for hemp that mirrors recently approved federal restrictions. New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) signed budget legislation allocating $630,000 to help low-income people access psilocybin therapy, with additional money supporting research on the psychedelic. A new study on the impact of legalizing marijuana found that “medical legalization reduces property crime, while recreational legalization reduces violent crime.” “We also document the interesting phenomenon that effects on crime, when they do occur, manifest themselves powerfully after several years.” The Missouri legislature’s Joint Committee on Administrative Rules approved proposed regulations targeting bad actors in the state’s marijuana microbusiness licensing program—with key changes. The Rhode Island Cannabis Control Commission delayed a decision on how to proceed with a lottery to award new marijuana dispensary licenses. / FEDERAL The U.S. Embassy in the Dominican Republic issued a warning about the country’s marijuana laws for U.S. travelers. Former Drug Enforcement Administration Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Crotty said in a op-ed that “states with strict limits on the number of [marijuana] plants individuals can grow for recreational or medical use often experience fewer regulatory, law enforcement and black-market diversion issues than states with higher or no limits, suggesting that even at the micro-level, supply reduction can have important implications for public health and safety.” / STATES West Virginia lawmakers sent Gov. Patrick Morrisey (R) a bill to allow psilocybin-based medicines following federal approval. The Massachusetts legislature’s Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions will hold a hearing on a proposed ballot measure to roll back the state’s marijuana legalization law on Monday. Colorado regulators launched an ad campaign about the dangers of driving under the influence of psychedelics. Michigan regulators published a monthly report on disciplinary actions taken against marijuana businesses. Minnesota regulators will begin accepting applications for lower-potency hemp edible retailer, manufacturer and wholesaler business licenses on April 1. Ohio regulators are urging people to use cannabis and alcohol responsibly on St. Patrick’s Day and during March Madness.. The Nevada Cannabis Compliance Board will meet on Thursday. New York officials will host a webinar about cannabis industry careers on March 25. — 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 San Francisco, California officials are launching a push to allow cannabis cafes. / INTERNATIONAL Colombian President Gustavo Petro suggested that former U.S. President Richard Nxixon “unleashed” marijuana prohibition to “attack his social and generational opposition,” including “the youth movements that opposed the Vietnam War.” / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study of rats found that “CBD, which affects early indicators of inflammation, has the potential to become a new and safe, promising supportive drug for hepatic inflammation and steatosis treatment.” A study found that “the observed increases in [cannabis use disorder] incidence and cohort-specific vulnerabilities in China suggest that prohibition alone may not fully prevent the emergence of cannabis-related disorders.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The Boston Globe editorial board weighed in on marijuana companies that don’t pay their bills. / BUSINESS Canopy Growth Corporation completed its acquisition of MTL Cannabis Corp. Dispensary 33 workers ratified a five-year contract with Teamsters Local 777. Cannabix Technologies Inc. began the commercial phased rollout of its Marijuana Breath Test system. Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc. declared a quarterly dividend of $1.90 per share. 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 is more morally acceptable than gambling, Americans say in poll (Newsletter: March 17, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Sounds like a fun and empowering event—great mix of art, community, and conversation! https://www.tampadockbuilder.com/custom-boat-lifts

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has submitted a proposed cannabis products enforcement policy to the White House for review that concerns regulatory issues specifically related to CBD. The White House Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) posted a notice that it received the submission from FDA, which falls under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), on Friday. While the update doesn’t include the text of the proposal that’s now under OIRA review, it’s titled “Cannabidiol (CBD) Products Compliance and Enforcement Policy.” The fact that the document is coming from FDA may shed light on its content, as the agency recently missed a congressional imposed deadline to publish a list of known cannabinoids as federal hemp laws are set to change later this year. Another possibility that’s being floated by industry observers is that it ties back to an executive order on marijuana rescheduling President Donald Trump signed in December that contained provisions on providing federal health insurance coverage of CBD for certain patients. But that rulemaking is being facilitated by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), which is not listed as the agency that submitted the proposal to OIRA. Marijuana Moment reached out to HHS and FDA for comment, but a representative was not immediately available. As part of appropriations legislation that Trump signed into law, many hemp products that were legalized during his first term in office under the 2018 Farm Bill will be prohibited once again starting in November. The spending measure included separate provisions, however, to have FDA and other relevant agencies study the cannabinoid marketplace and develop lists of cannabis components. After the bill was signed, FDA was given 90 days to publish 1) a list of “all cannabinoids known to FDA to be capable of being naturally produced” by cannabis 2) a list of “all tetrahydrocannabinol class cannabinoids known to the agency to be naturally occurring in the plant” and 3) a list of “all other know cannabinoids with similar effects to, or marketed to have similar effects to, tetrahyrocannabinol class cannabinoids.” Further, the agency was tasked with providing “additional information and specificity about the term ‘container’” with respect to hemp product THC serving sizes. In the bill, the term is defined as “the innermost wrapping, packaging, or vessel in direct contact with a final hemp-derived cannabinoid product in which the final hemp-derived cannabinoid product is enclosed for retail sale to consumers, such as a jar, bottle, bag, box, packet, can, carton, or cartridge.” The lists and information was due on February 10, but FDA did not follow through by the deadline. It’s possible, of course, that the new policy sent to OIRA is unrelated to FDA’s mandate to create the cannabinoid list. Others are floating the idea that this represents a next step toward expanding federal health insurance coverage in a way that would make CBD products available to certain patients. An executive of a hemp company that’s working with CMS on the CBD coverage issue said last month that the agency has already finalized a rule to provide the federal health insurance coverage option. That rule is advancing in accordance with an executive order Trump signed to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Mehmet Oz, administrator of CMS, spoke about the CBD components of the initiative at the signing ceremony for the order, crediting Trump and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for “pushing for change” and “relentlessly” pursuing an agenda rooted in a “deep passion for research.” The plan has been to create a pilot program enabling eligible patients to access hemp-derived cannabidiol that’d be covered under federal health insurance plans, projected to launch by April, according to Oz. While the broader rules on the CBD Medicare pilot program haven’t been publicized yet, CMS’s website briefly details how it’s navigating hemp-related issues as part of regulatory models under LEAD, the Accountable Care Organization (ACO) and the Enhancing Oncology Model (EOM). One outstanding question concerns coverage eligibility. As described by the administrator in December, it would affect those 65 and older who qualify for Medicare, but the specific qualifying conditions weren’t detailed. There were repeated mentions of chronic pain, specifically related to cancer, but it’s possible the CBD eligibility criteria includes additional conditions. While CMS implemented an earlier final rule last April specifically stipulating that marijuana, as well as CBD that can be derived from federally legal hemp, are ineligible for coverage under its Medicare Advantage program and other services, the agency is now revising that policy. CMS had already announced certain changes as part of a rulemaking process that was unveiled late last year, affecting “marketing and communications, drug coverage, enrollment processes, special needs plans, and other programmatic areas” for insurance programs it oversees. One of those changes dealt with cannabidiol coverage. The rule as proposed would amend regulations, which currently state that any “cannabis products” cannot be covered. The policy would prevent coverage for only “cannabis products that are illegal under applicable state or federal law, including the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.” Since hemp and its derivatives like CBD are federally legal, the change suggests patients in states where such products are legal could make valid insurance claims to pay for the alternative treatment option, as long as the product is also federally legal. Yet another possibility for the new submission under OIRA review is that it’s unrelated to either the FDA mandate or CMS health coverage developments. FDA has faced scrutiny for years after declining to establish regulations allowing for the lawful marketing of CBD in the food supply, and so there are any number of regulatory issues the proposal could address. The post FDA Submits New Cannabis Products Enforcement Policy For White House Review appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A Pennsylvania Senate committee has amended a cannabis regulation bill that members previously approved to add new provisions banning the sale of most hemp THC products to align state law with a pending federal policy change that’s set to take effect in November. As efforts to legalize adult-use marijuana continue to stall in the Keystone State, Sen. Dan Laughlin (R) announced on Monday that the Senate Law and Justice Committee he chairs voted to revise a bill he’s sponsoring to create a Cannabis Control Board (CCB) to oversee the state’s medical cannabis program and intoxicating hemp products. “As the federal government updates its definition of hemp, Pennsylvania needs to make sure our laws remain consistent and enforceable,” Laughlin said in a press release. “Amending Senate Bill 49 to mirror these federal changes helps close the same loopholes that allowed intoxicating hemp products to flood the marketplace with little oversight.” “The current system is fragmented and has struggled to keep pace with how quickly the hemp market has evolved,” he said. “A cannabis control board would provide clear oversight, ensure products are properly regulated and give law enforcement the tools they need to get illegal and potentially harmful products off store shelves.” The revised version, which cleared the panel last year in its original form, still contains the core provisions of the bill, and it has now advanced again with a 10-1 vote. I’ve amended SB 49 to align PA law with new federal hemp standards that close loopholes allowing intoxicating hemp products like Delta-8, Delta-10 and THCA to be sold with little oversight. The bill would also create a Cannabis Control Board. Read more: https://t.co/lGBs1LZa11 pic.twitter.com/PcRPCRVY7J — Senator Dan Laughlin (@senatorlaughlin) March 16, 2026 The CCB established by Senate Bill 49 would regulate medical cannabis and hemp, while preparing to eventually handle the adult-use marijuana market as well if that reform is ultimately enacted. The senator previewed the measure last May, writing that Pennsylvania should take initial steps to make sure the state is “ready to act when legalization becomes law” by establishing a CCB now. He also voiced concerns about the public health and safety implications of the loosely regulated hemp market that emerged after the crop and its derivatives were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill. Now that the definition of hemp under federal law is set to change in a way that stakeholders say would effectively eradicate the industry, Laughlin said a revision to SB 49 represents a timely solution. “Right now, there are too many gray areas in the law,” Laughlin, who is also sponsoring bipartisan legislation to legalize adult-use marijuana, said. “By aligning our statutes with federal standards and establishing a single regulatory body, we can protect consumers, support responsible businesses and help law enforcement crack down on bad actors in the marketplace.” In a cosponsorship memo circulated last year, Laughlin said his bill would “transfer regulatory control of the Medical Marijuana Program to the CCB, ensuring continuity, efficiency, and improved oversight of medical cannabis businesses and patient access.” It would further “establish uniform safety standards to protect consumers from untested and potentially harmful products.” The original bill text itself also doesn’t contain an explicit references to adult-use, or recreational, marijuana, and it would not enact legalization on its own. But the description indicates that the sponsors feel the current regulatory regime under the Pennsylvania Department of Health should be replaced with a more targeted agency that would ostensibly be suited to oversee an adult-use market if lawmakers move to end prohibition. “By consolidating oversight under a single regulatory board, we can eliminate inconsistencies, enhance transparency, and provide the structure needed to responsibly manage this industry,” the memo says. With respect to the new hemp language, that’s responsive to a major pivot in federal law that’s being enacted under a bill President Donald Trump signed last year. Since 2018, cannabis products have been considered legal hemp if they contain less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry weight basis. The provisions set to take effect later this year specify that, within one year of enactment, the weight will apply to total THC—including delta-8 and other isomers. It will also include “any other cannabinoids that have similar effects (or are marketed to have similar effects) on humans or animals as a tetrahydrocannabinol (as determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services).” The new definition of legal hemp will additionally ban “any intermediate hemp-derived cannabinoid products which are marketed or sold as a final product or directly to an end consumer for personal or household use” as well as products containing cannabinoids that are synthesized or manufactured outside of the cannabis plant or not capable of being naturally produced by it. Legal hemp products will be limited to a total of 0.4 milligrams per container of total THC or any other cannabinoids with similar effects. Within 90 days of the bill’s enactment, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other agencies were supposed to publish list of “all cannabinoids known to FDA to be capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant, as reflected in peer reviewed literature,” “all tetrahydrocannabinol class cannabinoids known to the agency to be naturally occurring in the plant” and “all other known cannabinoids with similar effects to, or marketed to have similar effects to, tetrahyrocannabinol class cannabinoids.” However, FDA appears to have missed that deadline. A spokesperson told Marijuana Moment last month that the lists would be posted in the Federal Register when they’re available. — 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, a Quinnipiac University Poll released last month found that a majority of Pennsylvania voters say they’re ready for the state to legalize adult-use marijuana. The results of that survey and the committee action on Laughlin’s bill come as state lawmakers once again consider proposals to replace marijuana criminalization with regulation. That includes a plan put forward by Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) as part of his latest budget request. Legalizing marijuana in Pennsylvania under that plan could bring in nearly half a billion dollars in annual revenue by 2028, according to a recent analysis from the state’s Independent Fiscal Office (IFO) that estimates a significantly larger cash windfall compared to projections from the governor’s own office. With a proposed 20 percent wholesale cannabis excise tax, 6 percent state sales tax for retail and licensing fees, IFO said Shapiro’s legalization plan that he unveiled earlier this month would generate $140 million in tax revenue in the first year of implementation from 2027-2028 and increase to $432 million by 2030-2031. That’s a much higher revenue estimate than what the governor’s office put forward in the latest executive budget. According to that analysis, legalization would generate about $36.9 million in tax dollars in its first year from a 20 percent wholesale tax on marijuana—rising gradually to $223.8 million by 2030-2031. Of course, the projections assume the legislature advances adult-use legalization in line with the governor’s budget request and sales begin on January 1, 2027. It remains to be seen whether lawmakers will follow through on the reform this year, but it wouldn’t be the first time marijuana legalization stalled out in the state if they don’t act this session. Meanwhile, in January month, a coalition of drug policy and civil liberties organizations urged Shapiro to play a leadership role in convening legislative leaders to get the job done on cannabis legalization this session. In a letter led by the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) and sent to the governor, the coalition noted that legalization has consistently made it into Shapiro’s budget requests, “reflecting both sound fiscal policy and the clear will of the people of the Commonwealth.” Pennsylvania House Democratic lawmakers have separately called on the GOP-controlled Senate to come to the table and pass a bill to legalize marijuana. At a press conference last month, three Democratic members of the House who have championed adult-use legalization stressed the need to move on reform, laying blame for inaction on the Senate where even supporters of the policy change have so far been unable to deliver on the issue. Reps. Rick Krajewski (D) and Dan Frankel (D), who sponsored a bill to legalize with state-run shops that advanced through the House last year, said they understand that the novel regulatory approach they envisioned may be “controversial” to some members, but that’s all the more reason for the Senate to bring their own ideas to the conversation to finally enact the reform. House Speaker Joanna McClinton (D) said in December that legalizing marijuana is one way to create a “very important” revenue source for the state—and that it’s an achievable reform if only legislators could find “the will to do it.” Bipartisan Pennsylvania lawmakers who’ve been working to enact adult-use legalization over recent sessions without success so far have also recently said that Trump’s federal marijuana rescheduling order could grease the wheels in 2026. For what it’s worth, another top GOP senator—Sen. Scott Martin (R), chair of the chamber’s Appropriations Committee—said in December that he was skeptical about the prospects of enacting legalization in the 2026 session, in part because of the federal classification of cannabis that’s now expected to change. Of course, marijuana would still be federally illegal under Schedule III, so it’s unclear if a simple loosening of the law would move the needle enough from his perspective. A top aide to Pennsylvania’s governor said in September that lawmakers should stop introducing new competing legalization bills and instead focus on building consensus on the issue—while emphasizing that any measure that advances needs to contain equity provisions if the governor is going to sign it into law. Laughlin, for his part, separately said recently that supporters are “picking up votes” to enact the reform this session. Meanwhile, bipartisan Pennsylvania senators in October introduced a bill that would allow terminally ill patients to use of medical marijuana in hospitals. Read the text of the hemp amendment to Laughlin’s cannabis bill below: The post Pennsylvania Senators Amend Cannabis Regulation Bill With New Provisions To Ban Most Hemp THC Products appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Our investigation found instances of licenses that were awarded to individuals who very clearly, through review of agreements and interviews, were not owning and operating the license.” By Rebecca Rivas, Missouri Independent Missouri lawmakers signed off on proposed cannabis rules Thursday meant to curb abuse in the state’s microbusiness licensing program, but not before stripping out a ban on people tied to denied or revoked licenses from holding interests in future microbusinesses. The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, made up of lawmakers from both the House and Senate, approved changes that would move regulators’ ownership review to before licenses are issued rather than after, a shift aimed at preventing another wave of revocations in the microbusiness program—sometimes called the social-equity cannabis program. But the committee rejected a proposed rule barring the “owners, agents or representatives” of denied or revoked applicants from controlling another microbusiness license. Republican state Rep. Ben Keathley of Chesterfield said the language was too broad and needed to be more specific. The microbusiness program was designed to boost opportunities in the cannabis industry for people in disadvantaged communities that have been most impacted by the war on drugs. It began in 2023, after passing as part of the constitutional amendment to legalize recreational marijuana in 2022. For the last two years, The Independent has documented a pattern of well-connected groups and individuals flooding the microbusiness lottery by recruiting people to submit applications and then offering them contracts that limit their profit and control of the business. Of the 105 microbusiness licenses issued so far, 35 have been revoked. “There’s really no question in many cases,” Amy Moore, director of the Missouri Division of Cannabis Regulation, said during a hearing with the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules this week. “Third parties used eligible individuals, names and circumstances to attempt to acquire licenses for themselves.” In order to prevent the continued cascade of revocations, the division is proposing to adjust when its extensive application-review period occurs. The state has held two lotteries for microbusiness licenses so far, Moore told committee members. After each lottery, she said the winners were issued licenses and then her team conducted an investigation into all contracts to verify the winner was eligible to hold the license. “Our investigation found instances of licenses that were awarded to individuals who very clearly, through review of agreements and interviews, were not owning and operating the license,” she said. Even after taking “very strong action” and revoking several licenses after the first lottery, it was not the deterrent her team expected. “In the second round, we had to revoke almost half of the licenses for this type of non compliance,” she said. “So that brings us to this set of amendments. We could have kept going with additional rounds of licensure, additional revocations. I’m not sure how many rounds we would have to go through to finally get to the minimum number of licenses that are required by the constitution, which is 144.” The proposed rules would change the point when regulators would review questionable contracts to take place before the license is issued, instead of afterwards as it is now. Also, under the new rules, “majority owned and operated” would be defined as the eligible individuals who are listed as having majority ownership must have a level of operational control that would be expected of an owner. The designated-contact role was envisioned as a way to ensure clear communication between the state and licensees. However, regulators found in their investigations that designated contacts have kept the actual eligible applicants in the dark about business and license dealings. The new rules would require the designated contact for a microbusiness applicant to be a majority owner of the microbusiness license. Eligible individuals must have the power to order or direct the management, managers, and policies of the license, enter into agreements on behalf of the license, and otherwise make decisions for the business. The committee approved these provisions on Thursday, but it put the brakes on a rule preventing decision-makers of a microbusiness license that regulators have denied or revoked from holding a voting or financial interest in any other microbusiness license. “If we have good reasons for those denials,” Keathley said, “let’s make those reasons the basis for the denial going forward.” The rule was removed from the proposed draft, and the committee agreed to approve the proposed rules and waive a 30-day review period. “We’ve taken that out,” Moore said, “but appreciated the support for the concept that those who choose to violate the constitution probably shouldn’t participate in any role where they could repeat that behavior.” Moore said there is another set of cannabis rules that deals with ownership that will come before the committee this year, and the division and the committee agreed that the language could be included in this set of rules. “We will continue to work with the committee and other stakeholders to better address that need,” Moore said. From this point, the division will need to file a new draft of the rules with the Missouri Secretary of State that will be published two more times before being enacted at the end of May or early June. This story was first published by Missouri Independent. The post Missouri Lawmakers Approve Marijuana Rules Targeting Bad Actors In Industry, With Changes appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net