All Activity

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. Folders mega.nz

Massachusetts officials have formally certified that an initiative to roll back that state’s marijuana legalization law will appear on the November ballot. The Elections Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s Office on Thursday informed organizers that they had turned in enough valid signatures during a second round of petitioning to put the measure before voters—but just barely. Under state law, Massachusetts ballot campaigns must turn in signatures in two waves. After the first submission, the legislature gets a chance to enact proposed ballot measures after organizers submit an initial round of petitions. Lawmakers in May declined to act on the anti-marijuana measure, however, and so organizers needed to submit additional 12,429 certified signatures by July 1 to make the November ballot. “I am pleased to inform you that 12,551 certified signatures of the 12,889 received by this Office on or before July 1, 2026, have been allowed,” Michelle K. Tassinar of the Elections Division wrote in a letter to one of the initial signers. “The remaining signatures have been disallowed for not being certified, not in conformance with the interpretation of [state law] or in excess in the allowed number per county.” “Therefore, the initiative petition will be printed on the November 3, 2026 state election ballot as required by the Constitution,” she said. Meanwhile, a coalition of Massachusetts marijuana business leaders, healthcare professionals and other advocates have launched a campaign to defeat the measure, which if enacted would repeal laws allowing the regulated commercial sales of recreational cannabis and home cultivation while maintaining legal possession and continuing the medical marijuana system. In June, the campaign behind the legalization rollback measure, the Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts, fired a signature gatherer it says was shown appearing to engage in “wholly unacceptable” conduct in a recent video. As Marijuana Moment reported, a man petitioning for the Massachusetts initiative as well as a similar anti-cannabis proposal in Maine was depicted in recent social media posts seeming to argue that voters who support legal marijuana access should sign the petitions in order to advance or protect reform. The campaign later said it has “zero tolerance for any circulation tactics that would mislead petition signers.” “The identified canvasser was immediately terminated, in coordination with our vendor, upon being made aware of the alleged conduct,” the group said. “The conduct apparent in the video would be wholly unacceptable and does not reflect how this campaign operates. We demand honesty, transparency and professionalism from everyone associated with our effort.” A video posted to Reddit of the signature gatherer shows the man collecting signatures outside a retail store in Massachusetts next to a sign that says “keep cannabis legal.” When confronted by a marijuana reform supporter who recorded the petitioner’s interactions with voters, he appeared to be trying to convince them that it is important to qualify the anti-cannabis measure for the ballot in order to then defeat it. “This is what we’re fighting against right here. That’s why we vote no,” he said. “If we can get this to the ballot right here, we vote no.” The person who captured the video pointed out that Massachusetts voters already approved marijuana legalization years ago, and that the only way it could be imminently repealed is if the new ballot measure qualified for the November election. If the initiative does not get enough signatures to go before voters, the state’s laws will remain the same. “It’s my job,” the petitioner insisted, however. “I know what I’m talking about.” “It’s a group of rich folks from out of state that want to basically take marijuana to when it was a medical marijuana card,” he said. “We don’t want that to happen.” The same man also appeared to also be gathering signatures for a separate measure in Maine that would similarly repeal laws allowing regulated adult-use marijuana sales and home cultivation rights for adults while keeping possession legal and adding new testing requirements for medical cannabis. A staffer for the prohibitionist organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), whose affiliated group SAM Action is largely funding the anti-cannabis ballot campaigns in both states, declined to comment about the petitioner’s conduct when reached by Marijuana Moment. The campaigns have previously been accused of misleading petitioning tactics. In Massachusetts, some voters reported that the campaign used fake cover letters for other ballot measures on unrelated issues like affordable housing and same-day voter registration. Legal cannabis supporters filed a formal complaint about the prohibitionist effort’s tactics, but the State Ballot Law Commission rejected the challenge. The measure faced a legal challenge from cannabis industry operatives who argued it contains “impermissibly unrelated subjects,” and that the state attorney general’s official summary is “misleading and deficient.” The state Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments on the litigation challenging the anti-marijuana initiative but it ultimately ruled against the challenge. Read state officials’ letter on certification of the anti-marijuana ballot initiative: The post Massachusetts Initiative To Roll Back Marijuana Legalization Officially Qualifies For November Ballot appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“A lawful medical cannabis patient should not be automatically presumed unfit. A constitutional right should not be denied by stereotype. A permit decision should be based on the person, the facts, and the law—not prejudice.” By Jim Berg, Greener Healing Ways For many years, lawful medical cannabis patients in Hawaiʻi County have lived under a painful contradiction. On one hand, the State of Hawaiʻi recognizes their right to use cannabis as medicine. On the other hand, those same patients have often been treated as if their patient status automatically disqualified them from exercising another lawful right: applying for a firearm permit. That contradiction has finally begun to change. A June 29 letter from the Hawaiʻi Police Chief Reed K. Mahuna confirmed that the department has reviewed the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision concerning firearm rights and marijuana use and will ensure its firearm-permitting policies conform to the ruling. Most importantly, the letter states that possession of a valid medical cannabis license “will not be treated as an automatic disqualifier for a permit” and that decisions will be made under applicable law through individualized assessment rather than blanket disqualification. This is a major and welcome development for medical cannabis patients on the Big Island who are also gun owners, hunters, farmers, homeowners, veterans, elders or ordinary citizens seeking to be treated fairly. For years, patients who followed Hawaiʻi law were placed in an unfair and humiliating position. They could be responsible adults and law-abiding citizens, yet the mere possession of a medical cannabis card could be treated as if it proved they were unfit to apply for a firearm permit. Many of these patients use cannabis to manage chronic pain, cancer symptoms, insomnia, PTSD, seizures, anxiety or other serious conditions. Some use cannabis in order to reduce reliance on opioids, sedatives, alcohol or other medications. Their medical status alone should never have been treated as proof of dangerousness. That was never fair. It treated a medical patient as a suspect. It confused lawful therapeutic cannabis use under Hawaiʻi law with unsafe conduct. It imposed a stigma on people who were doing exactly what the State of Hawaiʻi allowed them to do: work with a physician, register legally and use cannabis as medicine. The recent Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. Hemani changed the legal landscape. The court rejected the federal government’s theory that marijuana use alone could automatically strip a person of the Second Amendment right to possess a firearm, without individualized proof of dangerousness, incapacity, intoxication while armed, addiction, violence or other disqualifying conduct. The decision was narrow, but its central message matters: broad automatic disqualification based only on marijuana use is constitutionally suspect. This does not mean firearm permits should be handed out automatically. No serious person is arguing that. Public safety still matters. Background checks still matter. Criminal history, violence, threats, unsafe behavior, intoxication while handling firearms, serious impairment and substance misuse still matter. The police still have a duty to evaluate applicants carefully, lawfully and responsibly. But what should no longer happen is automatic discrimination against a person simply because that person holds a valid Hawaiʻi medical cannabis card. That distinction is crucial. A medical cannabis license should not be a scarlet letter. It should not function as a permanent civic disability. It should not erase the difference between a responsible medical patient and a dangerous person. The proper standard is individualized assessment, not blanket prejudice. That is why HPD’s response is so important. HPD did not say that every medical cannabis patient will receive a firearm permit. It said something more modest, more lawful and more just: medical cannabis status alone will not be an automatic disqualifier. Each case will be reviewed according to applicable law and individual facts. This is exactly the kind of balance Hawaiʻi needs. Our community can respect medical cannabis patients and respect public safety at the same time. We can honor responsible firearm regulation without treating every cannabis patient as irresponsible. We can recognize that cannabis remains complicated under federal law while also acknowledging that constitutional rights should not be denied by broad stigma alone. For many patients, this change is more than a technical policy update. It is a restoration of dignity. It tells them that their medical choices do not automatically make them second-class citizens. It tells them that the law must look at who they are and how they behave, not simply label them by their patient status. Still, there remains an important federal problem that patients and firearm dealers must understand: ATF Form 4473. When a person buys a firearm from a federally licensed firearms dealer, the buyer must complete ATF Form 4473. The current ATF Form 4473 still asks whether the buyer is an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or another controlled substance. The current warning still states that the use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the buyer’s state. That means the county permit issue and the federal purchase issue are related but not identical. HPD may no longer treat a valid medical cannabis card as an automatic disqualifier for a county firearm permit. But a federally licensed dealer must still follow federal law, the current ATF form, and the NICS background-check process. If a buyer truthfully answers “yes” to the current marijuana question on Form 4473, the dealer may not complete the transfer. If a buyer answers falsely, that creates serious federal criminal risk. Patients should not be placed in the position of having to choose between honesty and the exercise of a constitutional right. ATF has posted a proposed draft revision of Form 4473. That draft changes the marijuana warning. Instead of the current broad warning that marijuana remains unlawful under federal law regardless of medicinal or recreational legality, the draft says that a person can be an unlawful user under federal law even if possession is legal under state law, and that federal law does not permit the use or possession of marijuana for recreational purposes. This wording appears to move away from the older blanket warning against medical cannabis patients, and it may signal a future change in federal treatment of state-legal medical cannabis. But the draft is clearly marked “DRAFT — DO NOT USE.” It has not replaced the current Form 4473. So the good news must be stated carefully. In Hawaiʻi County, possession of a valid medical cannabis license should no longer be treated as an automatic disqualifier for a firearm permit. That is a major step forward. But for a purchase from a federally licensed dealer, the current Form 4473 problem still remains unless and until ATF finalizes and implements a revised form or federal law changes more clearly. This leaves patients in a confusing and unfair bind. A person who already lawfully owns a firearm may now have a stronger constitutional argument after the Hemani ruling, especially if there is no evidence of dangerousness, impairment, violence, addiction or unsafe firearm conduct. But a person attempting to buy a firearm through a federally licensed dealer still encounters the current ATF form and its marijuana question. Local permit reform is therefore necessary, but it is not yet the whole answer. That is why the next step matters. ATF should promptly clarify how Hemani applies to Form 4473, to federal firearms dealers and to state-legal medical cannabis patients. Congress should also confront the federal contradiction directly. The law should not treat a responsible medical patient as dangerous simply because the patient uses a medicine allowed by the patient’s state. This is not about being “pro-gun” or “anti-gun.” It is not about being “pro-cannabis” or “anti-cannabis.” It is about fairness under the law. A lawful medical cannabis patient should not be automatically presumed unfit. A constitutional right should not be denied by stereotype. A permit decision should be based on the person, the facts, and the law—not prejudice. For that reason, this moment deserves recognition. It is a long-overdue correction and good news for medical cannabis patients across Hawaiʻi Island. It is also a reminder that the work is not finished. Hawaiʻi County has taken an important step toward fairness. Now federal forms and federal policy must catch up. Jim Berg, MD is a retired integrative family doctor on the Big Island of Hawaii who has practiced for over twenty years as a specialized authority on cannabis medicine through Greener Healing Ways. Read the Hawaii Police Department’s clarification of its policy on medical cannabis and gun permits below: The post Hawaii Police Department’s Recognition Of Medical Marijuana Patients’ Gun Rights Is Long Overdue (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Virginia lawmakers who led the fight to legalize recreational marijuana sales are seeking to clarify that the legislation they passed last month did not inadvertently erase all of the state’s cannabis-related penalties as police and prosecutors scramble to understand the impact of the bill’s various enactment provisions. Lt. Brandy A. Molinar of the Virginia State Police sent an internal email to law enforcement colleagues this week saying that “as of July 1, 2026, there are no Code of Virginia violations related to marijuana” and directing that any cannabis-related enforcement actions taken since the start of the month be reported to her. The message, first reported by Virginia Scope, said that state officials could coordinate with the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) on any cases involving more than five pounds of marijuana. Del. Wren M. Williams (R), who voted against legalization legislation this session, noted the police email in several social media posts, criticizing Democratic majorities in the Senate and House of Delegates and Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) for allegedly “creating a one-year gap before new laws take effect.” Democrats may have legalized marijuana via the budget, creating a one-year gap before new laws take effect. Virginia State Police have been ordered to stand down on marijuana enforcement, indicating a directive from the executive branch. #Virginia #Marijuana pic.twitter.com/lZwLkG7Wi9 — Del. Wren M. Williams (@WrenWilliamsVA) July 9, 2026 The dispute centers on when sections of the bill repealing prior marijuana penalties and replacing them with a new regulatory framework take effect. The budget legislation containing the overall cannabis reform repeals existing code criminalizing distribution and possession with intent to distribute as well as possession by people under the age of 21 without clearly specifying the effective dates for those changes. Meanwhile, the new regulatory framework doesn’t come online until July 1, 2027—opening the door to questions about whether the state effectively legalized large-scale distribution and underage possession for a period of a year when the budget took effect at the beginning of this month. The Virginia Association of Commonwealth’s Attorneys (VACA) said that the way the legislation was drafted “invites an argument” about what cannabis laws are now in force, and Nate Green, the commonwealth’s attorney for Williamsburg-James City and a former VACA president, said legislative staff “created a word problem, and word problems go against prosecutors.” “If it’s unclear, we lose. We only get to win when the words are clear,” Green said, adding that he though lawmakers might need to convene a special session to address the issue. “We are worried about it. We are trying to look at the language thoroughly and comprehensively to determine the best path forward.” State Police Superintendent Jeffrey Katz, for his part, said in a social media post on Wednesday that the agency would “continue to enforce existing laws, in line with the code of Virginia.” pic.twitter.com/qGiDCR3jeu — VA State Police (@VSPPIO) July 9, 2026 Del. Paul Krizek (D), who sponsored the House version of standalone legislation to legalize recreational marijuana sales this session that was later adopted into the enacted budget, said on Thursday that “the budget language passed by the General Assembly did not legalize cannabis possession by minors, did not legalize the distribution of cannabis to minors and did not eliminate Virginia’s criminal penalties protecting young people.” “Virginia law continues to prohibit underage possession and unlawful distribution of cannabis,” he said. “The enactment clauses included in the budget did not change those protections.” Sen. Lashrecse Aird (D), who led the push to legalize cannabis sales in the Senate this session, added that “unfortunately, misinformation spreads quickly, particularly when it involves complex legislation.” “Virginians deserve an honest conversation about cannabis policy based on the facts and what the law actually says—not on inaccurate interpretation based on political opinion,” she said. “The individuals peddling these falsehoods have never supported adult-use cannabis in our commonwealth, have never supported establishing a regulated marketplace that would address the harms of decades of cannabis prohibition and stood by while the illicit market flourished in our communities for years.” Misinformation spreads quickly, particularly when it involves complex legislation. Those peddling falsehoods have never supported adult-use cannabis, and have now turned to fear mongering. Their claims are unequivocally false.@KrizekForVA and my full statement is below. pic.twitter.com/9hfl3GoPjJ — Senator Lashrecse Aird (@lashrecseaird) July 9, 2026 Former Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares (R) criticized what he called “reckless governing” on the part of Democrats. “Because far left Democrats chose to legislate drug policy through a budget bill instead of a real bill with real hearings, prosecutors across this Commonwealth are now uncertain whether they can even enforce the law against selling marijuana to a minor,” he said. “I am calling on Governor Spanberger and the General Assembly to: immediately acknowledge this drafting failure and call a special session without delay to close this gap and restore certainty that distributing marijuana to a minor remains a crime in Virginia.” STATEMENT ON GOVERNOR SPANBERGER'S MARIJUANA BUDGET DEBACLE I warned that rushing marijuana commercialization through Virginia would lead to reckless governing. This week, that warning came true in the worst possible way. Governor Abigail Spanberger and the far-left majority in… — Jason Miyares (@JasonMiyaresVA) July 8, 2026 Former Del. Tim Anderson (R) claimed in a social media post that “selling marijuana to kids is now legal thanks to the nitwits in Richmond who have no idea what they are doing,” he said, referring to the state capital where the legislature meets. Selling marijuana to kids is now legal thanks to the nitwits in Richmond who have no idea what they are doing pic.twitter.com/ZKaTGaC5Gn — Tim Anderson (@AssocAnderson) July 7, 2026 The Virginia Code Commission on Wednesday updated the state’s website that list statutes to say that current penalties will stay in effect until July 1 of next year. Del. Marcus Simon (D), who chairs the Code Commission, said if the language in the bill was followed as written, “an absurd result would have happened.” “The Division of Legislative Services recommended to the Code Commission that this was an obvious error and so we used our authority to correct this,” he told Cardinal News, saying that the edits are “a fairly routine thing.” Late last month, the Virginia Senate and House of Delegates adopted the governor’s proposed amendments to budget legislation containing provisions to legalize recreational cannabis sales that they had given initial approval to previously. Because lawmakers accepted her suggested changes in full, the measure was immediately formally enacted into law and didn’t require any further action from the governor. Spanberger in May vetoed a previous measure to legalize recreational cannabis sales after lawmakers rejected her proposed amendments to the plan. She later negotiated with Aird and Krizek, who sponsored the earlier measure, on a compromise deal that was included in the budget legislation that passed. The new plan differs significantly in several ways from the earlier legislation. For example, it sets the launch date for recreational marijuana sales at July 1, 2027, which is what Spanberger proposed in contrast to the January 1 date in what lawmakers had passed. It also sets the legal public marijuana possession and per-transaction purchase limit at 2 ounces, an increase from the current legal limit of one ounce. The legislation lawmakers passed earlier this year would have allowed adults to possess up to 2.5 ounces. The bill also cedes to Spanberger on language to increase a marijuana excise tax from 6 percent to 8 percent after two years of legal sales. By way of compromise, the new agreement will make public consumption of marijuana punishable by a civil penalty of $250—a significant increase from the $25 in current law but less harsh than the class 4 criminal misdemeanor the governor sought in her proposed changes to the previous bill. Lawmakers passed the initial cannabis sales bills in March, but the governor then suggested changes to the legalization proposal—including delaying the start date for sales by six months, increasing taxes and instituting new criminal penalties for cannabis consumers. The legislature in April declined to take up the amendments during a one-day reconvened session, however, effectively rejecting them. Spanberger then issued a veto. Spanberger said in June that she was having “really productive” and “incredible” conversations with lawmakers about crafting a compromise approach to legalizing adult-use cannabis sales, and Marijuana Moment previously reported on the ongoing talks. The governor, meanwhile, has tried to publicly explain her veto—including by saying it is her view that “taking a little bit longer” to launch the market is not something she sees as “negative” because it is more important to get the details right than to do it fast. A recent survey found that bipartisan majorities of Virginia voters wanted Spanberger to sign the cannabis legislation into law, and that they specifically disagreed with her desire to slow the launch timeline for legal sales. The governor recently acknowledged in a separate interview that “a lot of people are not pleased” with her veto of the cannabis legislation. “Friends and family are displeased as well,” she said. Spanberger has repeatedly responded to criticism of her cannabis amendments from the bill sponsors and advocates by saying the suggested changes came after she spoke to the leaders of other states that have already implemented adult-use marijuana markets. A spokesperson for Spanberger declined to name any other governors she talked to about cannabis in response to a question from Marijuana Moment, however. The governor separately sought to explain her veto in an earlier interview, reiterating that she supports launching a legal cannabis market but worried about what she called a “rushed timeline” and “far more stores across Virginia” than she thinks are appropriate. Personal marijuana possession and home cultivation of marijuana has been legal in Virginia since 2021, but then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) twice vetoed bills to provide consumers with a way to legally purchase regulated adult-use cannabis. Marijuana, the Virginia Cannabis Control Authority (CCA) conducting a survey to gather input from the public and stakeholders as they work to implement the state’s newly enacted law legalizing recreational cannabis sales. Here are the key details of the new cannabis plan in the budget and how it compares to legislation that Spanberger vetoed—SB 542 and HB 642—as well as her previously proposed amendments to those measures: Adults will be able to purchase up to 2 ounces of marijuana in a single transaction, or up to an equivalent amount of other cannabis products as determined by regulators. That will represent an increase from the limit in current law of 1 ounce. Lawmakers previously proposed setting the amount at 2.5 ounces and the governor only wanted 2 ounces. Legal sales can begin on July 1, 2027. Lawmakers previously set the date for January 1, 2027, but the governor wanted it pushed back to July 1. There will be an excise tax of 6 percent on cannabis sales as well as a 5.3 percent retail sales and use tax, and municipalities will be allowed to set an additional local tax of up to 3.5 percent. Starting on July 1, 2029, the state excise tax will increase to 8 percent, in line with the governor’s previously proposed amendments. Revenue will be distributed to the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund, early childhood education, the Department of Behavioral & Developmental Health Services and public health initiatives. The earlier measure passed by lawmakers would have allocated specific percentages to each, but the new language doesn’t specify what portion of revenue will go to each program. The governor, in her amendments, wanted to put all revenue into the general fund while earmarking it “for purposes such as early childhood education, behavioral health, public health awareness, prevention, treatment, and recovery services, workforce development, reentry, indigent criminal defense, and targeted reinvestment in historically disadvantaged communities.” Her amendment also sought to eliminate support for the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund. The Virginia Cannabis Control Authority will oversee licensing and regulation of the new industry, and will also take on oversight of hemp, which is currently under the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The body will be governed by a five-member board of directors appointed by the governor, whereas the bill previously passed by lawmakers contemplated a seven-member body with four appointed by the governor, two appointed by the speaker of the House and one appointed by the Senate Rules Committee. The definition of what constitutes a legal hemp product will be narrowed by removing a provision from current law that allows those containing more than 2 milligrams of total THC per package if they also have a ratio of CBD to THC that is 25:1 or more. Up to 350 retail marijuana stores will be allowed to be licensed to operate across the state, the same number that lawmakers had approved and greater than the 200 the governor had proposed. Local governments will not be able to opt of allowing marijuana businesses to operate in their area. Delivery services will be allowed. Serving sizes will be capped at 10 milligrams THC, with no more than 100 mg THC per package. Public use of marijuana will be a civil violation punishable by a $250 fine. That is ten times more than the $25 fine under current law, but less harsh than the class 4 criminal misdemeanor crime the governor had proposed. Possession of cannabis by people under the age of 21 will be punishable by a $25 fine and mandatory participation in a substance abuse treatment or education program or both. The governor had suggested treating underage possession as a class 1 misdemeanor, punishable with a mandatory minimum fine of $500 or 50 hours of community service, as well as the suspension of drivers licenses for at least six months. Existing medical cannabis operators can enter the adult-use market if they pay a $10 million licensing conversion fee. Cannabis businesses will have to establish labor peace agreements with workers. A legislative commission will be directed to study adding on-site consumption licenses and microbusiness cannabis event permits that would allow licensees to conduct sales at venues like farmers markets or pop-up locations. That provision was also included in the earlier legislation lawmakers passed but was suggested for deletion by the governor. The governor signed several other reform bills this session—including measures to provide resentencing relief for people with past cannabis convictions, protect the parental rights of marijuana consumers and allow patients to access medical cannabis in hospitals. The post Did Virginia Lawmakers Accidentally Repeal All Marijuana Penalties? appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

North Carolina’s Democratic governor and Republican House speaker have a disagreement on marijuana legalization. Gov. Josh Stein (D), who supports legalizing cannabis, said in a new interview that “we need to have a well-regulated market that puts public safety and public health at its center.” “It protects kids, and it is available for adult use—because adults are using it, and we can’t put our heads in the sand any longer,” he said. House Speaker Destin Hall (R), however, said, “I know our caucus has no interest in doing any sort of marijuana, medicinal or otherwise.” Both leaders’ comments were reported by local news outlet The Assembly, which has been tracking efforts this session to pass legislation to regulate intoxicating hemp products. A commission that Stein empaneled last year recently issued a report recommending that rather than have separate frameworks for hemp and marijuana, the state should regulate THC as a molecule. “There actually used to be a distinction in the law,” the governor said in the new interview. “The two plants, naturally grown, had different THC levels. You’d smoke hemp, it would take a whole lot to get you high—and it might not. Once hemp was legalized, both growers and sellers realized you could genetically modify hemp plants and increase the level of THC.” “Cannabis is cannabis,” he said. “It doesn’t make sense to try to distinguish between two varieties of the same plant, and what we really care about is, is this product going to get you high or not? That’s why we must regulate the THC molecule.” The comments come as a bill to restrict hemp and kratom products that was recently approved by the Senate awaits potential action in the House. “Our caucus is looking at it,” Hall told reporters, The Assembly noted. “It’s a somewhat complicated bill.” “Generally, our caucus’ desire is to make sure that we’re keeping the bad products out and not letting people under 21 buy these products,” the speaker said. “Folks basically wanted some time to be able to review it. So we’ll see if it’s something that we do when we come back” later this month. It’s not clear if Stein would sign a bill that restricts hemp products and doesn’t contain provisions to more fulsomely legally regulate marijuana in line with the state commission’s recommendations. He acknowledged, however, that getting Hall and other Republicans to come around to backing cannabis legalization wouldn’t be easy—though he also pointed to how views can evolve over time,. “People change,” the governor said. “Society changes. I can remember when you couldn’t buy alcohol here in the supermarket on a Sunday, and you couldn’t buy wine in a supermarket at all, and you couldn’t get mixed drinks in the majority of the counties in North Carolina. What I’m trying to do is advance the conversation.” 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. “Some of the House members are not ready to pass a medical program because they believe that it will usher in recreational use, and that is not what the constituents in those districts want,” Rep. Jeffrey McNeely (R), told The Assembly. Meanwhile, 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 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, says in the new document approved in April 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 Governor And House Speaker Clash On Marijuana Legalization appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts. After all I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon! 가상계좌 임대

We are the agency who truly listens to our clients' needs and wants. Thousands of client feedbacks have shaped and developed Our Escorts in Laxmi Nagar in terms of improvement with every passing year; we are better with each feedback we have received.

Super-Duper site! I am Loving it!! Will come back again, Im taking your feed also, Thanks. bonus de démarrage

PA marijuana conviction gun ban faces lawsuit; VA housing law discriminates against cannabis; Study: Legalization reduces personal bankruptcy; TX hemp 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 Wyoming Attorney General Keith Kautz (R) is blocking the rescheduling of marijuana under state law that would otherwise be automatically triggered by the Trump administration’s reclassification of cannabis at the federal level. Pennsylvania officials are facing a federal lawsuit over a state law that denies licenses to carry guns to people with any drug conviction—including for possessing marijuana decades ago—with plaintiffs citing a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on cannabis consumers’ Second Amendment rights. A new poll shows that most marijuana consumers don’t believe the process of moving all marijuana—beyond just medical cannabis—to Schedule III will be completed by the end of this year. A new study found that “recreational marijuana legalization reduces personal bankruptcy rates,” and that “states with larger arrest declines exhibit larger bankruptcy declines.” “By reducing households’ exposure to criminal justice costs such as fines and legal fees, [cannabis legalization] may ease the acute financial shocks that can tip vulnerable households into insolvency.” Jeremy Tillem of GreenhouseRVA argues in a new Marijuana Moment op-ed that a new Virginia law enacted this year is “forcing legal medical cannabis patients out of stable, certified” recovery housing by refusing to recognize the legality of medical marijuana even in light of federal rescheduling. “Medical cannabis patients in recovery deserve the same opportunity for stable housing as any other patient managing a chronic condition with a lawfully prescribed medication.” Two Kansas Democratic gubernatorial candidates are campaigning on their support for marijuana legalization, with one filming a video outside a cannabis dispensary in neighboring Missouri. The Texas Senate Committee on Health and Human Services held a hearing on the societal impacts of THC consumption, with a GOP senator pledging a renewed fight to ban intoxicating hemp products in the 2027 session. / FEDERAL Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. tweeted that the Drug Enforcement Administration’s move to temporarily schedule 7-OH and related compounds is “an important step to protect Americans,” saying that “the Trump Administration is taking decisive action to get these deceptive products off the market, hold bad actors accountable, and protect American families from dangerous drugs.” The Drug Enforcement Administration is promoting “need-to-know info” for National Marijuana Facts Week. / STATES Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) tweeted, “When I first took office, they called me Governor Sunshine. And that optimism is what helped us:…Legalize cannabis. And more.” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) touted enforcement actions against illegal marijuana operations. Pennsylvania Republican gubernatorial candidate Stacy Garrity discussed her opposition to legalizing marijuana. New Jersey regulators published a cannabis guide for municipalities. Oregon regulators published guidance on cannabis trade samples. New York’s top marijuana regulator discussed steps to oversee the growth of the state’s legal market. — 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 Williamsburg-James City, Virginia commonwealth’s attorney claims that lawmakers accidentally legalized marijuana sales a year earlier than intended. The San Francisco, California Board of Supervisors gave initial approval to a proposal to let marijuana dispensaries serve food and nonalcoholic drinks and host entertainment. / INTERNATIONAL A South Korean lawmaker filed legislation to allow domestic production of cannabis-derived medicines. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study found that “cannabis consumers were enthusiastic about the introduction of a standard THC unit system, although a minority expressed some skepticism about how it would be implemented.” A study found that “partisanship has become a major factor in how Americans perceive progress in drug policy.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The ACLU of Michigan cheered a state Supreme Court ruling that judges cannot automatically bar people on probation from possessing or using marijuana. 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 Most cannabis consumers don’t expect full rescheduling this year, poll shows (Newsletter: July 9, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

This was really an interesting topic and I kinda agree with what you have mentioned here! code bonus événementiel

Learn to chain complex moves in Wacky Flip to boost your score multiplier. Click now to discover how to pull off epic combos!

Took me time to read all the comments, but I really enjoyed the article. It proved to be Very helpful to me and I am sure to all the commenters here! It’s always nice when you can not only be informed, but also entertained! bonus de pari gratuit

Wow, cool post. I’d like to write like this too – taking time and real hard work to make a great article… but I put things off too much and never seem to get started. Thanks though. 가상계좌 솔루션

Wyoming’s attorney general has determined that the state will not reclassify marijuana under state law in line with a federal rescheduling move by the Trump administration. “The Wyoming Legislature has not legalized medical marijuana, has not approved a state licensed medical marijuana regulatory scheme, or approved of recognizing any other state’s medical marijuana issued licenses,” Attorney General Keith Kautz (R) said on Tuesday. “Therefore, placing marijuana subject to a state medical marijuana license in Schedule III of the Wyoming Controlled Substances Act is inconsistent with the police powers exercised to date by the Wyoming Legislature.” “The question of whether to remove any type of marijuana from Schedule I of the Wyoming Controlled Substances Act is for the Wyoming Legislature and should not be done through the administrative rule making process,” he said. The legislature, however, previously enacted a law that says “if any substance is designated, rescheduled, or deleted as a controlled substance under federal law,” the commissioner of drugs and substances control “shall control the substance under this act in the same manner as federal law” within 30 days. Under state law, the attorney general serves as the commissioner of drugs and substances control and can formally object to the automatic state rescheduling to prevent it from taking place, subject to a public hearing allowing “all interested parties an opportunity to be heard.” Kautz convened a hearing in June to consider the issue, and also accepted public comments via email. “The Commissioner received eight email comments. Four of the comments expressed support of leaving medical marijuana and marijuana products on Schedule I of the Wyoming Controlled Substances Act. Four of the comments supported placing marijuana and medical marijuana on Schedule III of the Wyoming Controlled Substances Act. One person appeared in person at the hearing and provided testimony requesting that the Commissioner leave all marijuana on Schedule I of the Wyoming Controlled Substances Act. All of the comments—both email and in person—were rooted in the important policy considerations surrounding the legalization of marijuana and marijuana products.” The attorney general also noted that “all marijuana products currently approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration are already scheduled consistent with the federal Controlled Substances Act,” citing prescription medications such as dronabinol, Cesamet and Epidiolex. “The Commissioner will continue to appropriately control individual substances as they are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration.” “After considering all of the comments from interested parties, the Commissioner has determined that all marijuana products, including marijuana subject to a state medical marijuana license, shall remain on Schedule I of the Wyoming Controlled Substances Act,” Kautz’s announcement says. “This decision is final unless altered by statute.” Under an order issued by U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in April, marijuana products regulated by a state medical cannabis license immediately moved from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III, as did any marijuana products that are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). An administrative hearing now underway is considering broader cannabis rescheduling, including for recreational products. In Wyoming, activists have sough unsuccessfully to put initiatives to legalize medical cannabis and decriminalize marijuana possession on the ballot. State lawmakers have also considered legislation on the issue, but Wyoming remains one of only a handful of states without any legal medical marijuana access. In 2022 the Wyoming House speaker filed a bipartisan decriminalization bill to remove criminal penalties for possessing small amounts of cannabis and replace the state’s current misdemeanor charge with a $100 fine. But that legislation did not receive a vote despite support from top GOP lawmakers. A bill to legalize and regulate cannabis for adult use in Wyoming advanced out of a House committee in 2021, but it did not move further by the end of that session. A poll released in 2020 found that 54 percent of Wyoming residents supported allowing adults in the state “to legally possess marijuana for personal use.” Meanwhile, other states that also don’t have comprehensive medical cannabis programs are also grappling with changes to state marijuana laws that could be trigged by the federal rescheduling action. A GOP senator in South Carolina, for example, said that “medical marijuana is now legal” in the state under a trigger law. In May, the governing body of the Alabama Department of Public Health voted to object to federal rescheduling of marijuana after health officials said they need more time to determine how to implement a change on the state level. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee (R), meanwhile, signed legislation this session to block an automatic review that could have potentially legalized medical marijuana under state law following the federal rescheduling of the drug. Photo courtesy of Carlos Gracia. The post Wyoming Attorney General Blocks State Marijuana Rescheduling That Would Be Triggered By Trump’s Federal Reform appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

U.S. states that legalize recreational marijuana see personal bankruptcy rates decline—an effect that seems to be associated with reduced arrests that can create compounding financial problems, according to a new study. Researchers looked at data on personal bankruptcy cases, state cannabis laws and FBI crime data from 2001 to 2024, determining that ending cannabis criminalization is linked to improved financial outcomes. The study, published this month in the journal Finance Research Letters, found “evidence consistent with a legal-cost mechanism.” That is, adult-use cannabis legalization “sharply reduces marijuana arrests, and states with larger arrest declines exhibit larger bankruptcy declines.” “U.S. recreational marijuana legalization reduces personal bankruptcy rates. States with larger marijuana-arrest declines see larger bankruptcy declines.” “By reducing households’ exposure to criminal justice costs such as fines and legal fees, [legalization] may ease the acute financial shocks that can tip vulnerable households into insolvency,” the study authors, who are affiliated with Shenzhen University in China, wrote. The average reduction in arrests post-legalization stands at 87 percent “without affecting broader crime rates,” the study points out. Bolstering the study’s key finding, data showed that states where there were larger reductions in cannabis arrests were associated with “larger declines in personal bankruptcy.” “Furthermore, we find that economically stronger states experience more pronounced reductions in bankruptcy following legalization,” the study concluded. “Using state-year panel data from 2001 to 2024, this paper presents evidence that recreational marijuana legalization is associated with a reduction in the personal bankruptcy rate in the United States. This result is stable across a battery of robustness checks. Heterogeneity analysis reveals that the effect is stronger in economically stable states, specifically those with lower baseline unemployment and bankruptcy rate, and higher median household income.” A separate study from 2020 relatedly investigated the impact of legalization on the broader economy, with researchers at the University of Iowa analyzing 9,810 corporations between 1991 and 2017, finding “a multitude of positive effects” after a state enacts medical marijuana laws. “Firms headquartered in marijuana-legalizing states receive higher market valuations, earn higher abnormal stock returns, improve employee productivity, and increase innovation,” the authors said. Photo courtesy of WeedPornDaily. The post Legalizing Marijuana Reduces Personal Bankruptcy Rates As Arrests Decline, Study Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“We should allow adults who choose to buy cannabis to do it in Kansas, and use it safely and responsibly.” By Sherman Smith, Kansas Reflector Cindy Holscher and Ethan Corson on Tuesday both called for the legalization of recreational marijuana in Kansas, separating themselves from other gubernatorial candidates who only support using the drug for medicinal use or oppose legalizing it altogether. The two state senators are seeking the Democratic nomination for governor in the August 4 primary, alongside Overland Park Mayor Curt Skoog, who has said he would focus first on medical needs. Holscher on Tuesday released a video of herself speaking from the parking lot of a dispensary in Missouri, which she said was about 15 minutes from her house in Overland Park. She said the parking lot was full of vehicles with Kansas license plates. Marijuana has been legal for recreational use in Missouri for nearly four years. “That’s a lot of Kansas tax dollars going straight into Missouri’s pocket,” Holscher said. “Most Kansas voters think marijuana should be legal in our state, but because it isn’t, Kansans buy it out of state, and we miss out on the opportunity to raise more money for schools and public services. It’s time for that to change.” As your next governor, I’m ready to legalize cannabis in Kansas. Who’s with me? pic.twitter.com/qhiVM4VziR — Cindy Holscher (@cindy4kansas) July 7, 2026 Corson, meanwhile, issued a statement declaring it was time for Kansas to legalize both medical and recreational marijuana. He pointed out that Kansas is among the few states where marijuana remains completely illegal. “Kansas is falling behind while people suffering from chronic pain, PTSD, cancer, and other serious conditions are denied relief, and tax dollars that could be invested into education here are crossing the border into other states,” Corson said. “As governor, I will support thoughtful legalization, with commonsense guardrails that protect public safety while respecting personal freedom and increasing revenues.” Today, I’m announcing my support for legalizing both medical and recreational marijuana in Kansas. pic.twitter.com/avmlJlORWW — Ethan Corson (@ethancorson) July 7, 2026 On the Republican side, none of the leading candidates supports the legalization of marijuana for any purpose. That includes Senate President Ty Masterson, of Andover, who has blocked medical marijuana legislation from moving forward. The notable exception among the seven Republicans who will be on the primary ballot is Nick Reinecker, a longtime advocate for decriminalizing the drug. “As governor, I will fight to de-schedule cannabis and eliminate criminal penalties for possession and planting,” he said Tuesday. Holscher’s endorsement of recreational marijuana jibes with her willingness to embrace policies that have broad public support, even if they make her an outlier politically. She has called for a moratorium on building data centers, criticized the massive incentives used to lure the Kansas City Chiefs across state lines and voted against a new law that bans cellphones in schools. In the video she released Tuesday, Holscher said Missouri raked in $255 million in cannabis taxes last year. She said legalizing marijuana would help Kansas keep tax dollars that would benefit schools. “We should allow adults who choose to buy cannabis to do it in Kansas, and use it safely and responsibly,” Holscher said. “Legal cannabis is common sense, and it’s time to make it happen.” Last year, a survey conducted by the the Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University found that 64.8 percent of Kansas adults favor legalizing recreational marijuana, and 70.4 percent support legalizing medical marijuana. During a recent recording of the Kansas Reflector podcast, Skoog said one of his first moves as governor would be to deploy his running mate, Fredonia physician Jennifer Bacani McKenney, to work on a medical marijuana plan. The key, he said, was to regulate it “in a way that is driven by the medical need.” He said he “potentially” could support recreational marijuana sometime down the road. “If we decide to legalize marijuana, the state is in the marijuana business, just like the state is in the alcohol business, and we need to make sure that we have the rules and regulations in place to make sure that criminal elements don’t penetrate into that business, just like we do on the alcohol side,” Skoog said. This story was first published by Kansas Reflector. The post Kansas Democratic Candidates For Governor Campaign On Marijuana Legalization Support appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Thanks for a very interesting blog. What else may I get that kind of info written in such a perfect approach? I’ve a undertaking that I am simply now operating on, and I have been at the look out for such info. 79C

Nice post! This is a very nice blog that I will definitively come back to more times this year! Thanks for informative post. 78N

As a hearing on Trump administration’s federal marijuana rescheduling proposal proceeds this month, a new poll shows that most cannabis consumers aren’t optimistic that reform will be fully implemented by the end of the year. Acting 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 acting attorney general signed, the ongoing hearing is considering more comprehensively moving marijuana to Schedule III—but the new survey, conducted by cannabis telehealth platform NuggMD, shows that most consumers don’t think that will happen by the time 2026 is over. “In April, medical cannabis was partially rescheduled, moved to a less-restricted category,” the respondents were told. “Now, the federal government is weighing whether to extend that change to all other cannabis, which remained federally prohibited.” “Do you think that will happen by the end of the year?” they were asked. A majority—52.5 percent—said they do not think full cannabis rescheduling will happen by the end of the year, while 47.5 percent said they do expect to see the reform announced by then. The poll involved interviews with 1,063 cannabis consumers who live in state-legal markets from July 2-6 and has a margin of error of +/- 3.01 percentage points. Q: “In April, medical cannabis was partially rescheduled, moved to a less-restricted category. Now, the federal government is weighing whether to extend that change to all other cannabis, which remained federally prohibited. Do you think that will happen by the end of the year?” n: % Yes 505 47.5% No 558 52.5% The ongoing hearing overseen by a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) judge is set to conclude by July 15. It’s not entirely clear how long after that the judge will issue his recommendations to the agency—and what the recommendation will be—or how soon after that the DEA administrator will announce a final decision. “Like many, I had doubts when the DEA announced the participants, but early coverage is largely positive, and the testimony the DEA put on record has been more convincing than I think many consumers and stakeholders expected,” NuggMD CEO Charlie Russell told Marijuana Moment, referring to news that the agency has been focusing testimony on the medical benefits of cannabis and its relative safety compared to alcohol and other substances despite excluding reform supporters from participating in the hearing. “Early reports have increased my confidence that the hearing will result in full rescheduling,” he said. Marijuana Moment sent requests to DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius and to Terrance Cole, the DEA administrator, requesting they reverse a decision to prohibit the public from tuning into the cannabis hearing via livestream. A congressman and other journalists later joined in that request, but the agency maintained its ban on streaming. The post Most Marijuana Consumers Don’t Believe Trump Administration Will Complete Rescheduling This Year, Poll Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

I was reading some of your content on this website and I conceive this internet site is really informative ! Keep on putting up. 77Z

“THC is a weapon of mass destruction, causing chemical injuries to the brain from the body.” By Stephen Simpson, The Texas Tribune The Texas Senate Committee on Health and Human Services held a public hearing Tuesday to gather information that will shape future legislation on THC products sold in the state. Lawmakers made arguments against THC that harkened back to the days of the “Just Say No” campaigns of the ’80s regarding the risks of THC usage and its effects. Members of the committee used the frying-pan-and-brain analogy as an example of how these products cause mental health problems among young people. The purpose of the meeting was to address the societal impacts of THC product consumption. No decision was made at the meeting because it was meant to be just for analysis. “Nancy [Regan] is the one who started the war on drugs; she was made fun of, and still is today. But you know, she was right. She saw the big picture of how this stuff is so insidious and gets into every fiber of society and every element of family,” said Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, who confirmed he will once again file a bill to ban consumable hemp products at the next legislative session. A public comment period wasn’t allowed for the sake of time, lawmakers said, although invited members were allowed to speak. Five of the experts who were called to speak by committee members were those who have been vocal against THC products. Invited speakers included Allen Police Chief Steve Dye, who became the face of THC raids, and Aubree Adams, the director of Citizens for Safe and Healthy Texas, who actively campaigns against hemp-derived THC products, citing the risks to youth and mental health. Sen. Lois Kolkhorst, R-Brenham, chair of the committee, said data provided to the state by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services show that in fiscal year 2024, 1,559 children tested positive at birth for THC, and in 2025, the number increased to 1,896, underscoring the need for change. “I have faith that we can find solutions that will improve our state’s public health and safety, while also respecting the dignity of every Texan who has lost their way due to the fog of mental illness and substance abuse,” she said. “They call fentanyl a weapon of mass destruction. I disagree. Fentanyl is a weapon of mass death. THC is a weapon of mass destruction, causing chemical injuries to the brain from the body,” Adams told the committee. Medical experts and educators from across Texas were also called to speak on cannabis use disorder and the risk of frequent THC usage, with them citing the increasing number of THC-related calls to poison control. “When products became easier to obtain, more people used them, and when more people use them, more people are harmed by them,” said Dr. Matthew Rossheim, an associate professor at the University of North Texas Health Science Center. Katharine Neill Harris, a drug policy fellow at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy, said some comments from lawmakers conflated issues related to cannabis use with broader challenges related to mental illness, homelessness and youth learning. “For example, THC can increase the risk for psychosis or psychotic episodes in those who are predisposed to or have a history of such conditions. This is different from saying that THC causes psychosis in an otherwise healthy individual,” Harris said. Harris said there are real health concerns related to THC, but affordable treatment must be a topic of conversation if lawmakers want to see real change. “Prevention is ideal. When substance use disorders can’t be prevented, early treatment is the next best option,” she said. “The lack of affordable, accessible, high-quality treatment options in the state increases the likelihood that those with mild substance use disorders will progress to more severe addiction.” The committee meeting took the opposite tone from what state Sen. Nathan Johnson, D-Dallas, and Rep. Drew Darby, R-San Angelo, said earlier this year, when they told cannabis industry leaders at the Texas Cannabis Policy Conference that the attempted ban on consumable hemp opened their eyes to how passionate Texans are about these products. Now it’s time to find a safe and responsible way to regulate businesses that sell THC instead of prohibition, they said. Last year, the Texas Legislature voted to ban the products out of fear that these intoxicating products were consistently getting into the hands of children. But, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vetoed the decision last summer, before asking the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission and DSHS to increase regulations on the industry instead. The Texas Department of State Health Services released regulations on consumable hemp-derived THC products that went into effect on March 31. These new regulations include child-resistant packaging, a significant increase in licensing fees, new labeling, testing, and bookkeeping requirements. The rules also codify the legal purchasing age to 21, which went into effect last year as an emergency directive. Also, under the new rules, laboratory tests now measure the total amount of THC in a product. If THC levels exceed the 0.3% threshold, even if it’s only activated upon being smoked, the product will be noncompliant under state regulations. As a result, some of the most popular hemp products, like THCA flower and pre-rolled joints, have been banned. The rules also increase licensing fees for manufacturers of hemp-derived THC from $258 to $10,000 per facility and retail registrations from $155 to $5,000, which industry leaders say will fulfill the ban by forcing businesses to close. Supporters of the licensing fee increase said this is a necessary step to protect children from hemp products and want more enforcement of penalties on hemp stores that operate without a license. Perry, during the committee meeting, applauded the high licensing fees, suggesting that the goal is to close businesses. “The cost of doing business is going to get so high that most of them will go out of business, I hope,” he said. Perry said those who need these popular THC products need to seek the Christian God because he has reached his breaking point with the hemp industry and will do everything in his power to see them closed down. “Hopefully, you’ve got support, hopefully you’ve got people that have the faith. It’s the good Lord that created us, Christ that saved us, and a spirit that moves us,” he said. Disclosure: Rice University has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in The Texas Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here. This article first appeared on The Texas Tribune. The post Texas Senator Pledges Renewed Effort To Ban Hemp THC Products appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Pennsylvania police officials are being sued over a state law that blocks people with past convictions for possessing marijuana or other illegal drugs from obtaining licenses to carry guns. The new lawsuit, filed in federal court, cites a recent Supreme Court decision to uphold the gun rights of people who use cannabis. U.S. Air Force veteran Craig Philips is suing the acting commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police and the sheriff of Butler County in their official capacities in carrying out a state policy that denies people with drug convictions, including for simple possession, from obtaining a Pennsylvania License to Carry Firearms (LTCF). According to the complaint, which was filed in conjunction with the Second Amendment advocacy groups Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation, Philips was convicted of possession of a small amount of cannabis in 1994 and “has not used marijuana or other unlawful drugs” since then, nor has he ever been convicted of any other crimes. Yet under state law he is “permanently ineligible” for a LTCF. While Philips is not prohibited from owning or possessing firearms under state or federal laws, the inability to obtain a LTCF means he is “substantially restricted from carrying or transporting a firearm in a vehicle, carrying a firearm in Philadelphia, carrying a firearm for protection during a declared state of emergency, and exercising the right to bear arms in ordinary public life,” the complaint says. “The denial of Plaintiff Philips’ LTCF therefore burdens not only concealed carry, but the practical ability to bear arms outside the home for lawful self-defense,” it says. Under recent Supreme Court precedent, “historical tradition does not support permanently denying the right to bear arms to a person based upon the nonviolent offense of Possession of a Small Amount of Marijuana occurring over three decades prior,” the filing claims. “No current facts support any finding that Plaintiff Philips is dangerous to himself or others,” it says. “Defendants cannot historically justify that infringement based on a single marijuana conviction from 1994 where Plaintiff Philips has since lived as a law-abiding citizen and remains eligible to possess firearms.” The Supreme Court, for its part, has already started applying its finding in the marijuana and Second Amendment rights case to those involving other cannabis consumers who were prosecuted for possessing firearms. A recent poll, meanwhile, found that most Americans support the Supreme Court’s decision on gun rights for cannabis consumers—including majorities across party lines. Also, a federal agency that regulates guns says it is planning to provide guidance in the wake of the court ruling on the Second Amendment rights of people who use marijuana. Pennsylvania lawmakers, meanwhile, continue to debate whether to legalize recreational marijuana. Read the full lawsuit on gun rights and marijuana convictions below: The post Pennsylvania’s Ban On Gun Licenses Over Marijuana Convictions Is Being Challenged In A New Federal Lawsuit appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Experiencing a one-night stand with a stunning beauty leaves you completely speechless. Every Vasant Vihar Escort we represent possesses insatiable sensuality and flawless looks to die for. We ensure our glamorous companions adapt perfectly to your distinct moods. Choose a curvy hottie for hours of intimacy. Call our agency to schedule a fulfilling experience at affordable rates.

“Medical cannabis patients in recovery deserve the same opportunity for stable housing as any other patient managing a chronic condition with a lawfully prescribed medication.” By Jeremy Tillem, GreenhouseRVA Virginia’s recovery housing system is now forcing legal medical cannabis patients out of stable, certified homes—not because of any new public safety threat, but because a state law passed before cannabis was federally recognized as having accepted medical value refuses to catch up with reality. As of July 1, new certification mandates under Senate Bill 270, which was passed this year, require state-approved recovery residences to prohibit all cannabis use—including doctor-approved medical cannabis that the U.S. Department of Justice officially rescheduled to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) in April. This creates an immediate, unconstitutional conflict: certified homes for people recovering from substance use disorders must either demand that residents abruptly stop a federally lawful Schedule III medication or risk losing their ability to operate. As a result, residents are left to choose between their prescribed treatment for chronic pain, PTSD, anxiety or other conditions and a roof over their heads. This is not a minor regulatory technicality. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals using controlled substances are excluded from disability protections only when engaged in the “illegal use of drugs” under the CSA. Because the DOJ has rescheduled state-regulated medical cannabis to Schedule III, it is no longer an illegal drug when used pursuant to a valid state medical recommendation. Forcing cessation of this medication to access housing violates the ADA. The Fair Housing Act likewise prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in housing. Denying stable housing solely because of a doctor-prescribed, non-combustible medication is textbook discrimination. The inconsistency is glaring. Virginia does not bar residents from taking other Schedule III or Schedule II medications—such as Tylenol with codeine or prescribed opioids—in recovery housing. Selectively targeting only medical cannabis patients under SB 270 is arbitrary and legally indefensible. Virginia’s own code (§ 40.1-27.4) already protects certified medical cannabis patients from discrimination in hospitals, nursing homes and schools. But SB 270, which was sponsored by Sen. Schuyler T. VanValkenburg (D), passed by the Senate and House of Delegates and signed into law by Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D), carves out recovery housing as the sole exception, punishing the very people the system claims to help. The Virginia Association of Recovery Residences (VARR), in turn, has turned this conflict into a trap. Rather than processing applications under the standards that existed when they were filed, VARR slow-rolled reviews while backing and awaiting passage of SB 270’s prohibition language. At GreenhouseRVA, we submitted our complete application for state certification in late 2025. Our policies—which addressed medical cannabis only under strict medical supervision, with appropriate safeguards—were reviewed for months without objection. Then, with no advance notice and no guidance whatsoever on how to come into compliance, we were simply told to withdraw our application to avoid a formal denial, two days before the new law came into effect. VARR offered no advice, no pathway forward, and no opportunity to cure the issue. On our own initiative, we immediately revised every intake document, program policy and resident agreement to remove all cannabis-related language and resubmitted our application. We are currently awaiting their determination. The message to operators across Virginia is unmistakable: harm-reduction and multiple-pathways models have no place in the new certified system, regardless of national standards or federal law. The National Alliance for Recovery Residences (NARR), whose framework VARR purports to follow, explicitly permits certified homes to adopt medical cannabis policies. These include requirements for valid Virginia medical cards, secure lockbox storage, non-combustible administration, inventory controls and clear consequences for misuse. NARR recognizes a basic truth that Virginia’s current framework ignores: for many people in recovery, medical cannabis is a legitimate clinical tool that helps manage symptoms that might otherwise trigger relapse to far more dangerous substances. Instead of supporting evidence-based flexibility, the new certification regime is consolidating power around a single abstinence-only model—the very form of coercive control that recovery housing reform was supposed to prevent. At GreenhouseRVA, we have operated a structured residence since 2021 serving roughly 25 residents at a time, many referred by local court, probation officers and treatment providers. Residents are successfully using doctor-recommended medical cannabis to manage symptoms instead of—or while reducing reliance on—methadone, Suboxone, Xanax and other pharmaceuticals that carry their own serious risks of dependence, side effects and long-term complications. Forcing these individuals off cannabis does not promote recovery or abstinence; it removes a tool many are using to step away from more problematic medications and destabilizes the very progress they have made. Our retention has been strong precisely because we meet people where they are rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all ideology. We understand and appreciate the therapeutic value cannabis can have in a persons recovery process from addiction. Instead of supporting evidence-based flexibility, the new certification regime is consolidating power around a single abstinence-only model—the very form of coercive control that recovery housing reform was supposed to prevent. Forcing homes like ours to close down or abandon medical cannabis accommodations does not protect residents; it destabilizes them and increases the risk of homelessness and relapse. The fix is clear and urgent. The Virginia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services (DBHDS), which SB 270 charges with setting minimum certification standards, should immediately initiate an emergency regulatory review to align the state’s definition of allowable medications with the federal Schedule III reclassification. This would restore operator discretion consistent with federal civil rights law without weakening legitimate oversight. In the 2027 General Assembly session, lawmakers should enact clarifying legislation that explicitly permits NARR-aligned medical cannabis policies in certified recovery residences. Such a measured reform would advance public safety and recovery outcomes, honor federal law and prevent good-faith operators from being punished for following evidence rather than ideology. Recovery is not monolithic. Some paths require total abstinence from all substances. Others incorporate FDA-recognized medications—now including Schedule III medical cannabis—under medical supervision. Virginia’s policies should reflect that clinical reality rather than punish it. Medical cannabis patients in recovery deserve the same opportunity for stable housing as any other patient managing a chronic condition with a lawfully prescribed medication. We are not asking for unregulated or recreational use on property. We are asking for basic consistency with federal law and national best practices. Continuing down the current path will only produce more unnecessary suffering, more evictions from certified housing, and more Virginians forced to choose between their medicine and their home. Jeremy Tillem is the founder and operator of Greenhouse RVA, Virginia’s first structured, cannabis-friendly recovery residence. As a person in long-term recovery from opiate use disorder, he is a dedicated advocate for evidence-based plant medicine models that use cannabis as a tool to combat the opioid epidemic and the broader illicit drug epidemic. The post New Virginia Law Forces Medical Cannabis Patients To Choose Between Their Medicine And Their Housing (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Delhi is a city of dreams, and we're here to make those dreams a reality. Our Call Girls Service in Delhi brings you a curated collection of stunning companions who are passionate about making you happy. From the moment they walk in, you'll feel the chemistry. Our girls are trained in the art of seduction and are ready to explore your deepest desires with you. No judgment, no rush — just pure pleasure. With cash on delivery and free doorstep service, we've made it super easy for you. Call us now and experience the magic in Delhi.