All Activity

Iowa’s governor has signed a bill that will double the number of medical cannabis dispensaries that are allowed to operate in the state. Under prior law, Iowa’s limited medical marijuana program allowed only five dispensaries. That will double to 10 under HF 990, which Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) approved on Tuesday. The measure was passed by the House of Representatives in an 88-5 vote in April and previously cleared the Senate in a tally of 42-5. Bridget Spiddle, public policy and communications coordinator for the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), wrote in an action alert to supporters last month that the reform will be “a vital step in expanding medical cannabis access for one of the most restrictive medical cannabis programs in the country.” “No other medication gets treated like cannabis does. Pharmacies are widely accessible throughout Iowa, while dispensaries are capped at five locations for thousands of patients,” she said. “Rural Iowans have to expend enormous amounts of time and resources on costly travel to receive their medicine.” In addition to doubling the dispensary allowance, the new law the governor signed will also allow out-of-state residents to register in the medical cannabis program if they have a certification from an Iowa healthcare provider. — 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 Iowa Medical Cannabidiol Board, which oversees the state’s medical marijuana program, recommended in a 2023 report that the state allow more licenses “in an effort to provide Iowans with greater geographical access to medical cannabis products.” Under the program, patients with certain conditions can obtain cannabis products containing no more than at 4.5 grams of THC every 90 days. Flower and smoking are not allowed. Healthcare practitioners can allow greater amounts of THC for patients who are terminally ill or who have experience with the program and for whom the provider believes 4.5 grams is not enough. Separately this session, Iowa lawmakers considered a bill to create a state-regulated therapeutic psilocybin program for patients with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Last year, the governor vetoed earlier legislation that would have allowed doctors in the state to immediately prescribe a synthetic form of psilocybin in the event of federal approval of the psychedelic substance by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), arguing that it “surrenders state authority to make an informed determination about classification to federal officials.” The post Iowa Governor Signs Bill Doubling The Number Of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries That Can Operate appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Pennsylvania lawmakers have approved a bill to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities. The House of Representatives passed the bill from Rep. Dan Frankel (D) in a 174-27 vote on Monday. It now heads to the Senate for consideration. If enacted into law, HB 2254 would require hospitals, long-term care nursing facilities, assisted living residences and personal care homes to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis on the premises, provided that doing so does not interfere with their broader treatment plan and that marijuana isn’t vaporized in a way that “could impact care to other patients.” Smoking cannabis is not allowed under Pennsylvania’s broader medical marijuana law. Within 180 days of the bill being enacted, covered healthcare facilities would have to “develop and disseminate written guidelines for the use or administration of medical marijuana.” That would need to include requirements that cannabis be stored in locked containers, safety measures to protect other patients and staff, specificity on the forms of marijuana that are allowed and procedures for documenting use. “Today we have the opportunity to come together to ease the suffering of patients at the end of their lives,” Frankel said on the House floor ahead of the vote. “In a few moments we will cast our votes to ensure that patients nearing the end of their lives are not denied access to medical cannabis simply because they receive care in a hospital—but what House Bill 2254 really does is give some very sick people the chance to spend their final days conscious, comfortable and connected to the people they love.” “Many of us in this chamber have sat beside the bed of a loved one in their final hours,” he said. “We know the value of one more conversation, one more squeeze of the hand, one more chance to say, ‘I love you.’ Today, with this vote, we can help give that gift to Pennsylvania families.” The legislation says that facilities are not required to administer medical cannabis to patients to to allow its use in emergency departments, but it also says that those that facilities violate the broader policy on allowing use can be assessed a civil penalty of up to $500 for each violation for each day a violation continues. The measure also provides that if the Department of Justice, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services or another federal agency takes action against a healthcare facility over the use of medical cannabis, facilities should suspend compliance with the law. Finally, the bill would require the state Department of Human Services to prepare a sample medical marijuana plan for healthcare facilities and to host at least five educational sessions about the issue. “The needs of terminally ill patients were a key consideration when Pennsylvania enacted the Medical Marijuana Act. The law includes provisions allowing patients in care facilities to access medical marijuana by designating a caregiver to administer and even permits facility staff to serve in that role,” Frankel wrote in a cosponsorship memo for the legislation prior to formally introducing it this session. “While some facilities in Pennsylvania have chosen to permit the use of medical marijuana, adoption remains inconsistent across the state. As a result, many terminally ill patients continue to face barriers to accessing medical cannabis during inpatient or end-of-life care.” “This measure will ensure patients have access to effective symptom relief while maintaining safety and compliance within care settings,” he said. The medical cannabis bill’s advancement comes as lawmakers in Pennsylvania continue to consider broader recreational marijuana legalization—a reform that a state senator recently said will be easier to achieve now that the Trump administration has rescheduled cannabis at the federal level. Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) has repeatedly called on lawmakers to send him a marijuana legalization bill and for the last several years has included the reform in his budget requests to the legislature. The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed a bill last year to end prohibition, but the Republican-controlled Senate has not followed suit. Republican gubernatorial nominee Stacy Garrity, who is running against Shapiro, recently pledged to veto a marijuana legalization bill if lawmakers ever sent one to her desk—though she added that she doesn’t think the reform stands a chance of making it that far in the state. “I don’t support legalizing recreational marijuana,” she said. “Recreational marijuana will not end up in the budget. They’re never going to pass it…not as long as Senate Republicans are in control of the Senate.” Her running mate for lieutenant governor, Jason Richey, claimed that legalizing marijuana would be “catastrophic” for the state, arguing it would increase the size of the illegal market, undermine job creation and harm public health. A spokesperson in the governor’s office said the Trump administration’s federal marijuana rescheduling move is an “important step” that “adds support” to his push to legalize cannabis in the state. The governor also used this year’s unofficial cannabis holiday 4/20 as an opportunity to press lawmakers once again to send him a bill to legalize marijuana. “Pennsylvanians who want to buy recreational marijuana are already driving across the border to one of our neighboring states who’ve legalized it,” Shapiro said in a social media post that day. “That’s hundreds of millions in revenue going out of state instead of being spent here in Pennsylvania.” In April, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed budget legislation proposed by Shapiro that relies on revenue that would be generated from recreational marijuana sales, which has yet to be legalized in the state. The governor earlier this year, as he has in past years, included cannabis legalization and the resulting expected revenue in his budget request. The $53.2 billion budget legislation, which doesn’t itself include provisions to actually legalize marijuana even as it contemplates allocating money that would result from it, now heads to the Senate for consideration. The House of Representatives last year passed a bill to legalize marijuana and put sales in state-owned dispensaries, but the Republican Senate majority has criticized that plan while also not advancing a cannabis legalization model of its own. Separately this session, lawmakers have advanced a bill to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities The legislative developments come as a recent poll shows that seven out of ten Pennsylvania likely voters support legalizing adult-use marijuana—including majority backing for the reform across party lines. When asked whether they “support or oppose the regulation and taxation of legal cannabis for use by adults 21 and older in Pennsylvania,” 69 percent of respondents said yes. Support was strongest from Democrats, at 72 percent, but also includes 67 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of independents. Meanwhile, Shapiro is continuing to pressure on lawmakers to send him a bill to legalize marijuana in the state, saying that doing so would generate new revenue that could be invested in key programs. “While some in Harrisburg claim we can’t afford to make bigger investments in our kids, public safety, and our economy, know this: If we legalized and regulated adult-use cannabis, we’d bring in $1.3 BILLION in revenue for our Commonwealth over the first five years,” the governor said in another recent social media post. “Those are dollars that can be invested back into our people and our communities,” he said. “Stop with the excuses. Let’s get this done.” The state’s Independent Fiscal Office (IFO) reported in February that legalizing cannabis in Pennsylvania would generate nearly half a billion dollars in annual revenue by 2028, an estimate that is a significantly larger cash windfall compared to projections from Shapiro’s own office. With a proposed 20 percent wholesale cannabis excise tax, 6 percent state sales tax for retail and licensing fees, IFO said the governor’s legalization plan 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 his office’s 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. In February, 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. The Senate Law and Justice Committee last month amended and approved a bill to create a Cannabis Control Board (CCB) to oversee the state’s medical marijuana program and intoxicating hemp products and that could eventually regulate adult-use cannabis if it is legalized in the state. The post Pennsylvania Lawmakers Pass Bill Allowing Medical Marijuana Use In Hospitals By Terminally Ill Patients appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Thank you very much for this useful article. I like it. เว็บแทงบอลออนไลน์

Most of the contenders for Wisconsin’s Democratic gubernatorial nomination appeared at a forum hosted by a cannabis reform group on Tuesday, making pledges to advance the cause of legalization if elected even in the face of potential opposition from Republican legislative leaders. The event, hosted by the Wisconsin Coalition for Cannabis Reform (WCCR), featured six candidates who spent roughly 80 minutes discussing their plans for both protecting the state’s legal hemp market amid looming federal changes as well as the push for broader marijuana legalization. Among other issues, the participants fielded a question submitted by Marijuana Moment about how they would plan to fight for cannabis reform if GOP Senate and Assembly leaders continue to oppose it as they have in recent sessions—including if they would pledge to take any unilateral executive actions on the issue to get around legislative roadblocks. Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez said “it’s a good question,” pledging to both put public pressure on lawmakers to advance legislation but also use her own powers as governor to grant relief to people with cannabis convictions and to direct state agencies to immediately begin building a regulatory framework for marijuana sales “so it’s ready to go when the bill passes, not a couple years for implementation.” “Here’s where I would start, which is the people of Wisconsin,” she said. “Their votes were already on the record when they’ve been asked directly” through nonbinding advisory ballot questions during past elections. “The first thing is to take those numbers into those purple districts, and I will stand in the backyard of every swing seat Republican blocking this, and remind their own voters that they’re being ignored,” she said. “That’s the bully pulpit. That’s what the governor’s office is for, and I will not be shy about using it.” The lieutenant governor also said that, like incumbent Gov. Tony Evers (D), she would put cannabis reform into her budget proposals to force lawmakers to at least perfunctorily consider the issue and would also call the legislature into special session to consider the issue. “Yeah, they can gavel in and gavel out like they’ve been doing, but then they’ve refused on the record in public in an election year that they don’t want to do this,” she said. “Explain that to the farmers and small business owners back in their own district.” Rodriguez noted that some Republican lawmakers are starting to come around at least on incremental medical cannabis legalization legislation, with a bill on that reform advancing through committee this session. “We can get them there when there’s movement, and then you build from that,” she said. State Sen. Kelda Roys similarly cited strong public support for cannabis reform, saying “there is the opportunity to build a broad coalition of stakeholders.” She noted that recent redistricting in the state could allow Democrats to capture at least one chamber of the legislature in the upcoming elections. “If we have a split legislature, we may have to bifurcate the issues to immediately help provide relief to cannabis businesses and our hemp producers, and then tackle the question of how do we go to full adult legalization in the coming months,” she said. “Of course, you can use the bully pulpit, but at the end of the day, it is about building relationships.” Roys noted the “real angst” being experienced by hemp industry operators who are “facing the death of their business this coming November” if a scheduled federal recriminalization of hemp THC products takes effect. “I will use my pardon powers and my clemency powers, not just to push for justice for those that have been convicted of cannabis-related crimes,” she said, “but to make sure that anybody who is continuing to try to operate their business can do so in that few-month period when they may be out of compliance with state law.” “Now, I can’t do anything related to federal law,” Roys said. “But I can give you some certainty that under state law we’re going to make sure that you are not faced with any kind of penalty or criminal, and I will do everything in my power to make sure that you can continue your business and continue making Wisconsin a place where every single person has the opportunity to thrive.” Mandela Barnes, who previously served as lieutenant governor alongside Evers, noted that there will be a change in legislative leadership regardless of which party has a majority, due to the fact that Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R), who has consistently opposed comprehensive medical cannabis reform, is retiring after this year. “This offers new negotiating opportunities and potential. We know full well that the current speaker was one of the biggest roadblocks” to marijuana reform. “Now we have a chance to change that.” Barnes said he would use the issue of marijuana reform as a “bargaining chip.” “If I am elected governor, we will use every single tool at our disposal to do so,” he said. “There are Republican legislative districts that have…been plagued with lack of resources, with stagnant funding, with deferred maintenance, be it the roads, with funding constraints. When it comes to education, we see school districts going insolvent.” “This is the way for us to do it, and I am happy to use this issue as a bargaining chip to ensure that all of our schools get the funding that they deserve when competing against backwards legislators, regressive legislators who don’t want to see this come to fruition. When it comes to fixing these roads, when their constituents are calling them, wondering when things are going to change, we have an easy answer. We have an easy fix, and it is irresponsible for them to continue to say no. It is a drain of resources on law enforcement and our court system, in addition to not being able to generate the revenue that we deserve.” “So I’m ready to go to the mat on this, along with several other issues that are high importance in the upcoming legislative session,” he said. — 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. — State Rep. Francesca Hong said reform can advance under “leadership that understands how to build power, how to be a community organizer, and ensure that our relationship building is front and center.” She said the state needs “executive leadership that is willing to wield the full power of the executive office to make sure that we are protecting people from the decisions from the Trump regime and make sure that for generations, our future generations here in Wisconsin, that we are creating a framework where the industry not only can continue to grow, but we are able to be a leader in this industry for other states as well.” Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley said reform supporters “cannot wait until after the governors election” to push the issue, arguing that they need to “organize in making this one of the top priorities in this upcoming election.” “If you can’t change minds, you have to change faces,” he said. “I want you all to know that we’re going to work directly with you and make sure that you have a seat at the table, because if you don’t have a seat at the table, that means you’re on it.” Joel Brennan, who previously served as secretary of the state Department of Administration, noted the possibility of changing the composition of the legislature in the November election. “We have an environment where we have opportunities to make things happen, but we’re going to have the thinnest of majorities, no matter what,” he said. “And I think what that requires are muscles that nobody in the legislature over the last 15 or 20 years have exercised, which is—how do you find allies that might be different on this issue versus that issue?” “If we have a trifecta, that makes things much easier. But even with that, it may be a one or two seat majority, and if the majority is in the on the other side, it will require relationships… I also think it’s going to require the governor to have the kind of relationships, and to be the kind of person who is going to be able to take some of those people in the legislature, some of them Democrats, some of them moderate Republicans, and bring them over the finish line. That’s the part of the job that I actually look forward to.” Jason Handal, a WCCR board member and vice president of the group, told Marijuana Moment after the event that the candidates’ comments—and that they appeared at the cannabis-focused group’s event—were significant. “I appreciate that we heard commitments to prioritize reform in multiple ways: directing agency action, establishing a transition team to ensure cross-agency coordination, building a single coalition across party lines, and otherwise using the full weight and authority of the governor’s office to ensure the right reforms are enacted,” Handal, who is also CEO of Kind Oasis, said. Democratic lawmakers filed legislation in the 2026 session to broadly legalize and regulate marijuana, and bipartisan legislation to simply decriminalize cannabis possession was also filed—but neither proposal advanced. A poll released last June by Marquette Law School found that two in three Wisconsin voters support legalizing marijuana. Evers, the incumbent governor, said last year that if his party can take control of the legislature, the state can “finally” legalize marijuana so that residents don’t have to go to neighboring Illinois to visit its adult-use market. A legislative analysis requested by lawmakers estimated that Wisconsin residents spent more than $121 million on cannabis in Illinois alone in 2022, contributing $36 million in tax revenue to the neighboring state. Meanwhile, the state Department of Revenue released a fiscal estimate of the economic impact of a legalization bill from then-Sen. Melissa Agard (D) in 2023, projecting that the reform would generate nearly $170 million annually in tax revenue. The post Wisconsin Democratic Governor Candidates Promise To Advance Marijuana Legalization And Protect Hemp In 2027 appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

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. togel 4d Super-Duper site! I am Loving it!! Will come back again, Im taking your feed also, Thanks. ราคาบอลวันนี้ Fabulous post, you have denoted out some fantastic points, I likewise think this s a very wonderful website. I will visit again for more quality contents and also, recommend this site to all. Thanks. wop slot Wow! Such an amazing and helpful post this is. I really really love it. It's so good and so awesome. I am just amazed. I hope that you continue to do your work like this in the future also เว็บแทงบอลออนไลน์

I wanted to thank you for this excellent read!! I definitely loved every little bit of it. I have you bookmarked your site to check out the new stuff you post. แทงบอลออนไลน์

This is my first visit to your web journal! We are a group of volunteers and new activities in the same specialty. Website gave us helpful data to work. เว็บแทงบอลออนไลน์

I am impressed. I don't think Ive met anyone who knows as much about this subject as you do. You are truly well informed and very intelligent. You wrote something that people could understand and made the subject intriguing for everyone. Really, great blog you have got here. สมัครแทงบอล

Virginia lawmakers are gearing up for a push to include provisions to legalize recreational marijuana in budget legislation this month despite the governor’s veto of a proposal to enact the reform just weeks ago. The effort was a topic of discussion at the first meeting of the legislature’s Joint Commission to Oversee the Transition of the Commonwealth into a Cannabis Retail Market since Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s (D) move to kill the previous proposal to regulate adult-use marijuana sales. Sen. Lashrecse Aird (D), who sponsored the Senate version of the legalization measure that Spanberger vetoed, noted that transitioning the state to a framework for legal cannabis commerce is the “primary goal” of the body. “To the millions of Virginians who support a safe, regulated cannabis market, to the small business owners who are prepared to participate in a legal industry, and to the adults who already use cannabis legally under Virginia law, we want you to know that that commitment remains our number one priority,” she said. “The conversation is far from over to moving us into that legal marketplace.” “The reality is that cannabis is already being bought and sold every day throughout the commonwealth,” Aird, who was elected chair of the commission on Tuesday after previously serving as vice chair, said. “We had legislation that I continue to state in this moment would have stopped that activity.” “It would have ensured that transactions occurred regulated, consistently—that would allow for testing, age restrictions, meaningful enforcement, and allow consumers with protections that they deserve. As we move forward with the interim meetings of the commission, not only will we continue to have conversations that speak to those shared goals and those shared priorities, we will consider continuing to allow public comments to really make it clear that the commonwealth needs to quickly transition to an adult-use marketplace in all the ways that not having one continues to bring harm to many categories of individuals.” Following Spanberger’s veto, top lawmakers have been openly discussing the possibility of including provisions to legalize adult-use cannabis sales in still-outstanding budget legislation that they are due to pass by July 1. Aird told reporters after the commission meeting that “it would be really irresponsible if we didn’t take this one final opportunity to try and get the legislation moved forward, but…we are not trying to ram anything through, we want it to be legislation that continues to address our shared concerns.” “There is a pathway to adopt a form of compromise,” she said. “There is so much fear and hopelessness from the public and business owners that Virginia will continue to keep them in limbo. And we don’t under any circumstance plan to stop fighting to move this forward.” Lawmakers passed the 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. Del. Paul Krizek (D), who sponsored the House version of the now-vetoed cannabis legislation, noted at the commission meeting that lawmakers have been working on the issue for “a long time.” “We passed legislation again to establish that retail market with licensing, product testing, enforcement, consumer protections and a timeline for legal sales,” he said. “The bill was vetoed in May, once again delaying our transition into a full legal marketplace. So, here we are.” “Cannabis is legal to possess, legal to grow in limited amounts, and legal to use, but the retail market remains illegal,” Krizek, who was elected vice chair of the commission at the meeting after having been its inaugural chair. ‘So that contradiction is kind of the central issue this commission will continue to confront, and our task is to keep doing the serious work of preparing Virginia for a regulated market—even while the politics remain difficult.” The delegate told reporters after the commission meeting that there’s room for compromise with the governor on the issue to find “a middle ground we think we can do.” “This bill, as opposed to any of the other vetoed bills, is really one that’s more urgent,” he said. “It’s about public safety.” A reporter for WRIC-TV asked the governor’s office about the idea of putting cannabis language in the budget. “Governor Spanberger has made clear that she supports setting up a legal retail marketplace for cannabis that prioritizes the health and safety of Virginians, protects communities and consumers, and operates with clear enforcement and regulatory authority,” a spokesperson said, without directly addressing the question of using the budget as a vehicle to enact the reform. When asked about @lashrecseaird and @KrizekForVA saying they would like language in the budget to create a legal recreational marijuana market, a spokesperson for @GovernorVA sent me the following statement: “Governor Spanberger has made clear that she supports setting up a… https://t.co/eLhQy9ZFEw pic.twitter.com/Kyzkra7cqr — Tyler Englander (@TylerEnglander) June 2, 2026 The legislation that lawmakers passed this session, and that Spanberger ultimately vetoed, was largely informed by a framework the joint cannabis commission recommended late last year. Members at this week’s meeting also heard a presentation from representatives of the National Conference of State Legislatures about the implications of federal marijuana and hemp policies for state like Virginia. They additionally discussed recently enacted changes to state cannabis laws in Virginia, such as measures to provide resentencing relief for past marijuana convictions and allow patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals. The governor, meanwhile, is continuing to try to 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. “If I’m going to be responsible for a monumental consequential change to how we do one type of business in Virginia, then do it right,” she said in a recent interview. “The devil’s in the details.” “The fact that we’re going to be talking a little bit longer about how do you set up a retail cannabis market correctly—I don’t see that as something that is a negative,” she said. “Do people want me to sign a bill or do people want me to get it right, and as the person doing the implementing, what’s most important to me is get it right.” At Tuesday’s meeting, Aird pushed back on the notion that the state is unprepared to quickly transition into an adult-use marijuana framework, citing the efforts of regulators who oversee the current medical cannabis system. “I don’t think enough credit goes to our already existing regulatory entity that has had the tools, resources and expertise in place to stand up this marketplace the moment we say that we are ready to go,” she said. “There has not been enough conversation about the fact that the things that have been asserted as being lacking are simply not factual. These entities that will be responsible for regulating here in the commonwealth, we have been playing start and go with them for a number of years, and so they have been ready. They are waiting on us.” 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 was not able to name any other governors she talked to about cannabis in response to a question from Marijuana Moment, however. The governor separately recently 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. Prior to vetoing the cannabis commerce bill, the governor did sign separate legislation to provide resentencing relief for people with past cannabis convictions. 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. Aird and Krizek, the sponsors of the legalization bills, had urged colleagues to vote against the governor’s amendments last month—even if that meant risking a veto from Spanberger when the legislation returned to her desk, which has now occurred. Here are the other key details of the cannabis bills—SB 542 and HB 642—as approved by lawmakers and with the governor’s suggested amendments: Lawmakers voted to allow adults to be able to purchase up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana in a single transaction, or up to an equivalent amount of other cannabis products as determined by regulators. That would represent an increase from the limit in current law of 1 ounce. The governor, however, wanted the amount increased to only 2 ounces. Under the legislature’s plan, legal sales could begin on January 1, 2027, but the governor proposed to push that back to July 1, 2027. Lawmakers voted to impose an excise tax of 6 percent on cannabis sales as well as a 5.3 percent retail sales and use tax, while allowing municipalities to set an additional local tax of up to 3.5 percent. The governor’s plan was largely the same, though it would have increased the excise tax to 8 percent starting on July 1, 2029. Under the legislation as approved by lawmakers, revenue would have been distributed to the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund (30 percent), early childhood education (40 percent), the Department of Behavioral & Developmental Health Services (25 percent) and public health initiatives (5 percent). The governor, however, 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.” The Virginia Cannabis Control Authority would have overseen licensing and regulation of the new industry, and would have also taken on oversight of hemp, which is currently under the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Local governments could not have opted out of allowing marijuana businesses to operate in their area. Delivery services would have been allowed. Serving sizes would have been capped at 10 milligrams THC, with no more than 100 mg THC per package. The governor proposed to make public marijuana use a class 4 criminal misdemeanor instead of civil violation punishable by a $25 fine as under current law. She also wanted to make possessing cannabis by people under the age of 21 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. Illegally selling or distributing 50 pounds or more of marijuana would have been a class 2 felony punishable by life in prison. The governor sought to eliminate support for the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund. Existing medical cannabis operators could have entered the adult-use market if they pay a licensing conversion fee that was set at $10 million. Cannabis businesses would have had to establish labor peace agreements with workers. As passed by lawmakers, the bill would have directed a legislative commission 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, but the governor proposed to remove that language. A coalition of cannabis reform organizations sent the governor a letter last month urging her not to veto the sales legalization legislation even though her amendments were rejected. “Together, these bills address the real issues surrounding cannabis in the Commonwealth today: an already-existing, unregulated marijuana market operating openly across the state while consumers, communities, and law enforcement are left without the protections of a legal framework,” the groups wrote. “Let’s be clear: these bills do not create a marijuana market in Virginia. That market already exists,” the letter said. “What these bills do is replace today’s predatory and unaccountable illicit operators with a regulated marketplace, enforceable rules, oversight, product safeguards, age verification, and the strict consumer safety standards already in use for Virginia medical cannabis.” The letter was signed by Virginia NORML, Marijuana Justice, Virginia Cannabis Association, Marijuana Policy Project and other groups. Separately, a coalition of hemp businesses that joined with a major alcohol retailer in asking Spanberger to veto the marijuana bill before she did so said the move presents an “opportunity” to craft better cannabis policy. Meanwhile, the governor signed several other reform bills this session—including measures to protect the parental rights of marijuana consumers and allow patients to access medical cannabis in hospitals. The post Virginia Cannabis Commission Holds First Hearing Following Governor’s Veto Of Bill To Legalize Recreational Sales appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Terrific put up, attended on top not to mention saved your web sites. I just can’t hang around to study further because of most people. สมัครแทงบอล

DEA sued over cannabinoid stance; VA gov talks marijuana veto; KY gov expands medical cannabis conditions; LA gov complains about marijuana smell 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 House Rules Committee blocked amendments to keep hemp THC products legal and avert their scheduled federal recriminalization later this year from advancing to floor votes. The Drug Enforcement Administration is facing two new lawsuits from hemp companies who claim the agency is improperly classifying the cannabinoid hexahydrocannabinol (HHC) as an illegal Schedule I substance and not as federally legal hemp—in defiance of Congress. Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) continued to defend her veto of legislation to legalize recreational marijuana sales, saying that “talking a little bit longer about how do you set up a retail cannabis market correctly—I don’t see that as something that is a negative.” Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D) signed an executive order clarifying that people with additional conditions can qualify for legal medical cannabis access—adding during a press conference that “it’s time” for broader marijuana decriminalization. Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) said he signed a bill to jail people who smoke cannabis near college campuses because he is “tired” of “being inundated with the smell of marijuana” when attending football games. A new survey from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine found that 64 percent of Americans who use marijuana say it helps them sleep significantly or slightly better. / FEDERAL The Drug Enforcement Administration promoted an article about the “ketamine crisis.” / STATES A Minnesota representative discussed a now-enacted bill to revise various cannabis rules. Colorado regulators issued a health and safety advisory about marijuana products due to the identification of non-botanically derived compounds. The Massachusetts Municipal Police Training Committee published guidance about recently enacted changes to marijuana laws. Utah regulators published the results of a survey of medical cannabis program participants. Vermont regulators launched a new tool for cannabis business owners or supervisors to validate employee ID cards. New Jersey regulators sent a newsletter with updates on various cannabis issues. The California Cannabis Advisory Committee will meet on Thursday. Minnesota regulators will host a cannabis policy listening session on Thursday. / LOCAL The Oakland, California Cannabis Regulatory Commission will meet on Thursday. / INTERNATIONAL The International Narcotics Control Board sent a little-noticed letter saying that CBD is not covered by international drug treaties, and that extraction of uncontrolled cannabinoids falls under the category of industrial hemp. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A review concluded that “adjunctive oral CBD provides a reproducible and clinically meaningful reduction in seizures in drug-resistant epilepsy, with an acceptable safety profile.” A study of rats found that “CBN and THCV may have potential in managing inflammatory pain.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS Americans for Safe Access published a guide about medical cannabis patient and caregiver rights under rescheduling. / BUSINESS AYR Wellness Inc. closed the transfer of its Florida, New Jersey and Nevada operations into wholly-owned subsidiaries of Arboretum Bidco LLC. Charlotte’s Web Holdings, Inc. has a new board of directors member. Glass House Brands Inc. completed its previously announced redemption of all remaining warrants. Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images. The post Amendments to save hemp THC from ban are blocked in Congress (Newsletter: June 3, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Wow, this event sounds amazing! It's great to see the Oregon cannabis industry coming together. Speaking of community and challenges, it reminds me of the slope game 2. Just like navigating the slopes in the game, the cannabis industry is all about overcoming obstacles and finding the right path to success.

A powerful congressional committee is blocking amendments to prevent a scheduled federal ban on hemp THC products from taking effect in November. The House Rules Committee on Monday determined that several separate proposals will not be allowed to advance to floor votes. One proposal, from Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY), would have kept many hemp products legal that are currently set to be recriminalized this year, add labeling requirements and institute new taxes on sales, among other regulatory reforms. Another amendment, from Rep. Russell Fry (R-SC) and Jim Baird (R-IN), would have simply delayed the planned recriminalization of hemp THC products for an additional two years. A third measure, from Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), would have similarly enacted a delay, but only for one year. A fourth proposal, from Rep. James Comer (R-KY) and Fry, sought to prevent federal officials from spending any funds to enforce sections of last year’s annual agriculture appropriations bill that significantly narrowed the scope of what constitutes federally legal hemp. The amendment was withdrawn, however, before the panel had a chance to decide on it. Hemp derivatives with less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill that President Donald Trump signed during his first term in office. But late last year, Trump signed new spending legislation containing provisions that will redefine hemp to make it so only products with 0.4 milligrams of total THC per container will remain legal after November 12. Barr’s 25-page amendment, titled the Lawful Hemp Protection Act, would have changed the definition of legal hemp again to allow concentrations of up to 1 percent delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis, “measured on the finished consumer product and not on raw, floral material or any work-in-process material, including an unfinished hemp ingredient.” Cannabinoids that are not capable of being naturally produced by a cannabis plant or that are synthesized or manufactured from any starting material other than hemp would not have been part of the revised definition of a legal hemp product. “Many Americans, including veterans and seniors, rely on consumer hemp products for wellness,” the legislation’s findings section says. “Ensuring that such products are consistently manufactured, accurately labeled, and domestically sourced is essential to maintaining public trust and protecting consumers. Clear provenance standards and the elimination of deceptive or look-alike products promote responsible industry growth, protect consumers, and reinforce confidence in lawful hemp commerce.” “Protecting minors and preventing children’s access to hemp products is central to the public interest and to the long-term credibility of the hemp industry. Strong age-control measures are necessary to prevent misuse and safeguard public health. Within 18 months of the proposal’s enactment, the secretary of health and human services would have had to “establish for each cannabinoid present in a hemp-derived consumable product a maximum allowable amount of such cannabinoid per serving of such product.” Those limits would have needed to be updated at least once every five years or “as soon as scientific evidence warrants reconsideration.” The legislation also proposed to set out labeling requirements for hemp-derived consumer products, including displaying per-serving and per-package THC content, as well as a statement specifying that they are only for people over the age of 21. Consumable hemp products would also have needed to include this text: “GOVERNMENT WARNING: (1) According to the Surgeon General, women should not consume hemp products during pregnancy because of the risk of birth defects. (2) Consumption of hemp products impairs your ability to drive a car or operate machinery and may cause health problems.” The labeling and maximum cannabinoid content provisions would have only applied to “products introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce on or after the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment” of the legislation. Sales of hemp-derived consumable products would have been subject an “in-person or virtual” age verification requirement to ensure customers are 21 or older, with a civil penalty of up $1,000 per violation and the threat of permit or registration revocation for “repeated or willful violations.” For most consumable hemp products sold in interstate commerce, excluding beverages, there would have been a user fee of 5 percent of the retail sale price. It would have been collected by retailers at the point of sale and remitted quarterly to the Treasury Department’s Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), with revenue earmarked to support hemp regulation and enforcement, consumer protection activities and assistance for state agencies. With respect to hemp drinks, there would have been a federal tax of 5 cents per milligram of THC in each beverage, with the tax determined as of the time of removal for consumption or sale from the premises of the producer. One percent of the revenue from hemp beverages would have gone to the Highway Trust Fund to support state-level enforcement, training and testing technologies related to standards on zero-tolerance for impaired driving. Within a year of the the law’s enactment, TTB would have needed to establish a three-tier system for hemp-derived beverages sold in interstate commerce, modeled on the current distribution framework for alcohol. The first tier would have included manufacturers, the second tier would have been for distributors and wholesalers and the third tier would have covered retailers. No entity could have held a permit or registration in more than one tier at a time, nor a “direct or indirect interest” in permittees or registrants in more than one tier—a separation the legislation said would be “strictly maintained.” Within 180 days of enactment, TTB would have needed to establish a mandatory retailer registration and licensing system for all people engaged in the sale of hemp-derived beverages in interstate commerce, and covered retailers would have needed to register within 30 days of the system’s launch. Hemp products would have been considered “adulterated” if they exceed the maximum allowable cannabinoid content established by the secretary of health and human services, if they don’t comply with packaging rules or if they are “not derived exclusively from hemp cultivated in the United States, processed within the United States, and finished, packaged, and labeled within the United States,” the legislation said. The proposal made clear that states, territories and Indian tribes could have enacted hemp product laws that are more stringent that the federal requirements under the bill, but it also said that they could not interfere with the “passage and delivery of a hemp-derived consumable product through the borders” of their jurisdictions. One section of the measure would have required the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to publish a list of all cannabinoids known to the agency to be capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant, as reflected in peer reviewed literature, as well as a list of all tetrahydrocannabinol class cannabinoids known to the agency to be naturally occurring in the plant, within 90 days. A hemp-derived consumable product would have been defined under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to include ingestibles, beverages, oral tinctures, sublinguals, capsules, tablets, inhalables, topicals and transdermals—all considered to be food for the purposes of the law. The legislation also contained a provision addressing hemp products covered under Medicare: “Notwithstanding any other provision…, any hemp-derived consumable product (as defined in section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321), as amended…) that is approved, authorized, or covered under Medicare Advantage Special Supplemental Benefits for the Chronically Ill (SSBCI) or Beneficiary Engagement and Incentives (BEI) under a program administered under title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.), including any model tests implemented under section 1115A of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1315a) and applied under such title XVIII, shall be administered and governed exclusively under the applicable CMS system, process, or program until such date that model tests are completed.” The Trump administration launched a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) program in April to cover up to $500 worth of hemp-derived products each year for eligible Medicare patients. A federal judge last week granted the government’s motion to dismiss marijuana legalization opponents’ lawsuit challenging the initiative. Under a provision of Barr’s proposal, states would have been at risk of losing out on certain federal funds if they do not address hemp-impaired driving using the “same field sobriety evaluation standards and protocols that law enforcement officers apply to determine impairment caused by lawfully prescribed pharmaceutical substances, including opioids, benzodiazepines, and other controlled medications” or subject hemp-impaired drivers to the “same penalties, fines, license suspensions, and other sanctions as apply to driving under the influence of alcohol or other impairing substances.” Industry advocates have been eagerly anticipating a standalone bill from Barr on the issue, but it’s not clear when that will be formally introduced. The congressman spoke at a meeting with hemp industry operators last month and previewed his hemp regulation bill—saying it faces opposition from a coalition of strange bedfellows including sectors of the alcohol industry, marijuana businesses and cannabis legalization opponents. Separately, White House officials recently provided Barr’s office with feedback on hemp regulatory legislation. In April, Vince Haley, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council and James Braid, assistant to the president for legislative affairs, sent hemp policy suggestions to the congressman’s office. “We appreciate your work to advance the policy of” an executive order Trump signed in December that included provisions seeking to protect Americans’ access to CBD products, the staffers wrote in a letter to the congressman. “We are transmitting for your consideration draft legislative text and comments to address the statutory definition of final hemp-derived cannabinoid products in order to allow Americans to benefit from access to appropriate full-spectrum CBD products while preserving the Congress’s intent to restrict the sale of products that pose serious health risks,” the White House officials said, according to a social media post containing a screenshot of the letter. “We are available for discussion and further technical assistance.” Trump himself recently pushed congressional lawmakers to take action to amend the currently scheduled hemp ban, which he suggested threatens to federally recriminalize full-spectrum CBD products. “I am calling on Congress to update the Law to ensure that Americans can continue to access the full-spectrum CBD products they have come to rely on, and that help them, while preserving Congress’s intent to restrict the sale of products that pose Health risks,” the president said in a Truth Social post on the same day his administration announced it is moving forward to reschedule marijuana. “We must get this done RIGHT and FAST, especially for those who saw that CBD helps them,” he said. “Plus, I am told it will also help our GREAT FARMERS, who we love, and will always be there for.” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said recently that it will be an “uphill path” to avert the scheduled federal recriminalization of hemp THC products this year. Leaders of the advocacy organization Marijuana Policy Project similarly said that they think it will be difficult to avert the ban on hemp THC products before November, though they left open the possibility that there could be a carve-out for beverages or some reforms to THC limits. The House of Representatives recently passed a Farm Bill with provisions aimed at aiding industrial hemp producers—but without any language to delay or alter the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products that’s scheduled to take effect in November. Barr had filed a similar hemp regulation amendment to that legislation but withdrew it ahead of a Rules Committee meeting, for unknown reasons. The Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America (WSWA) said the House’s failure to include provisions to delay or alter the ban on hemp THC products was a “missed opportunity.” “A ban will not remove these products from the market—it will push consumers toward unregulated, online channels with no age verification, no product standards and no accountability,” Dawson Hobbs, executive vice president of government affairs for WSWA said. Meanwhile, the White House Office of Management and Budget recently held a series of meetings about a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) CBD products enforcement policy. FDA also issued guidance making clear that it does not intend to interfere with implementation of the Medicare hemp-derived products coverage plan. CMS separately finalized a rule that will allow coverage of some hemp products as specialized, non-primarily health-related benefits through Medicare Advantage plans. Major retailer Target, meanwhile, recently moved to expand its sales of hemp THC drinks into more states. The post Amendments To Keep Hemp THC Products Federally Legal Won’t Get Votes After Congressional Committee Blocks Them appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

The governor of Kentucky has signed an executive order to expand the list of health conditions that make patients eligible for medical marijuana—adding that he thinks “it’s time” for broader cannabis decriminalization. At a press conference on Tuesday, Gov. Andy Beshear (D) announced that he was taking executive action to “clarify” that the current law permitting medical cannabis in the treatment of maladies such as chronic pain and nausea means patients whose specific conditions involve those symptoms can also access the alternative medicine. After the legislature declined to take him up on a suggestion to expand the qualifying condition list this session, Beshear said he’s using his authority to make it so patients with 15 additional health disorders—including Parkinson’s disease, HIV/AIDS, sickle cell anemia, fibromyalgia, arthritis and glaucoma—can also be certified for medical marijuana access. The Office of Medical Cannabis (OCM) is being tasked with updating the list to “clarify what’s already in that law,” he said. “Too much is at risk to just stand by and let the law’s lack of clarity leave Kentuckians without relief,” the governor said. “So today I’m taking action by signing an executive order.” “This is what the law is meant to do. And the emergency regulation will help people that already qualify, but don’t know that they do, sign up if they’re looking for an alternative,” he said. “It’s going to help people reclaim their lives through a safe, non-addictive treatment.” The executive order is a follow up to a medical cannabis legalization law Beshear signed in 2023, with a program that launched at the beginning of last year. Since then, the state has licensed 32 medical cannabis businesses. There are about 500 medical professionals who can now recommend medical marijuana, and nearly 24,000 Kentuckians are currently participating in the program. The governor said his new order would allow more than 400,000 additional people in the state to potentially qualify for medical cannabis access. “Steps like the one we’ve taken today will help directly improve the lives of Kentuckians across our Commonwealth,” Beshear said. “It’s a work we should focus on daily, rather than the political games that seem to have become routine. I want Kentuckians to know we’re listening. We’re ready to show up and deliver results to make life just a little bit better.” Asked whether he anticipates the state attorney general will push back on the use of executive authority to expand the medical marijuana law, Beshear shrugged off the suggestion, while insisting that the action simply provides clarity around the statute that’s already in effect. A person with sickle cell anemia is likely to experience pain, for example; and if pain currently counts as a qualifying condition, the governor reasoned that the overarching disorder is intrinsically covered. Today I took executive action to make Kentucky law more clear when it comes to qualifying conditions for medical cannabis. Now, 15 additional conditions are recognized, including sickle cell anemia, ALS, Crohn’s disease, Parkinson’s and more. Read more: https://t.co/c9w2KCzCV7 pic.twitter.com/RHd1qMHQ0f — Governor Andy Beshear (@GovAndyBeshear) June 2, 2026 He also cited the results of a recent study from researchers at the University of Kentucky that linked the availability of regulated medical marijuana dispensaries to lower rates of opioid overdoses. The governor was additionally asked to weigh in on the Trump administration’s recent push to reschedule medical cannabis from state-authorized sources, which may be expanded depending on the outcome of an administrative hearing process. He said he supports the effort, just as he did under the prior Biden administration. But he maintains that the law should be further reformed. “In the very least, [rescheduling] will allow a lot more research, and that is a good thing in any form of medicine,” he said. “I also think it’s time for decriminalization. Nobody should be going to jail just because of marijuana—though I think we’re going to see a lot less of that when folks who are just looking for pain relief that suffer from one of these conditions can now legally secure it with the medical treatment that they need.” Meanwhile, in addition to urging the legislature to go through the process of expanding the medical marijuana qualifying conditions list, Beshear in February also announced that cannabis gummies are available for purchase in the state’s licensed dispensaries. The governor in January also said he’s “not satisfied” with the time it’s taken to launch the state’s medical marijuana program—but that he anticipates the pace of patient access would “pick up significantly” in 2026. The state’s first medical cannabis dispensary opened in December of last year. The governor, who has long championed cannabis reform, previewed the market launch that month, while making the case that medical marijuana will help thousands of patients find an alternative to opioids for pain management. He made much of crossing a 15,000 patient registration milestone in late October, but that’s evidently grown meaningfully in recent months. Beshear previously acknowledged that “it’s taken longer than we would have liked” to stand up the industry since he signed medical marijuana legalization into law in 2023. In recognition of that delayed implementation, he signed an executive order to waive renewal fees for patients who get their cards so that they don’t get charged again before retailers open. And another order he signed providing protections for qualified patients who obtain medical marijuana outside of Kentucky “will stay in place.” Beshear separately announced last year that the state had launched a new online directory that lets people see where medical cannabis dispensaries will be opening near them. He emphasized that the state has been working to deliver access to patients “at the earliest possible date,” and that involved expediting the licensing process. Last year, the governor also ceremonially awarded the commonwealth’s first medical marijuana cards. Meanwhile, the governor sent a letter to Kentucky’s congressional delegation last year, “urging them to take decisive action to protect the constitutional rights of our law abiding medical cannabis patients” by repealing the federal ban on gun possession by people who use marijuana. That came after bipartisan Kentucky senators filed legislation that similarly called on the state’s federal representatives to take corrective action, which Beshear said he supports but would like to see even more sweeping change on the federal level. The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) warned Kentucky residents in 2024 that, if they choose to participate in the state’s medical marijuana program, they will be prohibited from buying or possessing firearms under federal law. During the November 2024 election, Kentucky also saw more than 100 cities and counties approve local ordinances to allow medical cannabis businesses in their jurisdictions. The governor said the election results demonstrate that “the jury is no longer out” on the issue that is clearly supported by voters across partisan and geographical lines. The post Kentucky Governor Expands Medical Marijuana For 15 New Qualifying Conditions, While Saying ‘It’s Time’ For Broader Decriminalization appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Hemp companies have filed lawsuits challenging the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) determination that a cannabinoid produced synthetically from components of the cannabis plant is federally illegal. DEA issued a rule last month saying that while it had already considered hexahydrocannabinol (HHC) to be a Schedule I illegal substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the agency will now giving the compound its own unique drug code for classification. HHC can be found in trace amounts in cannabis plants but is also synthesized by hydrogenating cannabidiol (CBD). It’s sometimes sprayed on cannabis flowers that are low in delta-9 THC, the most well-known psychoactive component of marijuana, and its psychoactive effects are reportedly similar. While the 2018 Farm Bill federally legalized hemp and its derivatives with less than .3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis, DEA says that only applies to naturally occurring, and not synthetic, cannabinoids. As such, it is the agency’s position that HHC does not fall under the definition of legal hemp. But that interpretation of federal statute is now being challenged in two separate lawsuits that say the agency’s decision is “unlawful.” One case, filed by Bluestar Operations, LLC before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, cites a prior ruling in that jurisdiction that found the hemp-derived cannabinoid THC-O-acetate is federally legal despite DEA’s claim to the contrary. “Congress intentionally employed expansive statutory language and did not prohibit cannabinoids subjected to ordinary extraction, refinement, conversion, hydrogenation, distillation, or similar manufacturing processes commonly utilized throughout the hemp industry,” the complaint says. DEA’s move “conflicts with the plain text, structure, and purpose of the 2018 Farm Bill and unlawfully inserts limitations Congress neither intended, nor enacted,” it says. The agency’s action has “already caused immediate and concrete harm to the Petitioner, including substantial compliance costs, business uncertainty, reputational harm, disruption of commercial relationships, and interference with ongoing operations.” “Congress, not executive agencies like the DEA, defines the scope of federal criminal liability. The DEA lacks authority to narrow Congress’s legalization of hemp cannabinoids through interpretive construction unsupported by statutory text.” The other new suit was brought by IHC Investments, Inc. in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which previously ruled that the federal legalization of hemp through the 2018 Farm Bill removed restrictions on a wide range of molecules produced by the cannabis plant—including the psychoactive cannabinoid delta-8 THC. The petition says that “DEA effectively, and thus unlawfully, attempts to expand federal criminal liability through administrative interpretation, unsupported by the plain statutory text of the enabling legislation.” “Congress did not prohibit converted cannabinoids, hydrogenated cannabinoids, or cannabinoids subjected to ordinary commercial processing techniques,” the complaint says. “Congress did not clearly authorize the DEA to criminalize broad categories of hemp-derived cannabinoids through administrative interpretation.” Both petitions argue that DEA’s move last month violates the major questions doctrine, a precedent holding that if an agency seeks to decide an issue of major national significance, that action needs to be supported by clear congressional authorization. The agency’s ban of HHC “carries enormous economic and political significance affecting a nationwide hemp industry involving billions of dollars in commerce,” the litigation brought by Bluestar says. David Sergi, the attorney leading the new Ninth Circuit case for IHC Investments, said in a press release that the litigation is a “coordinated defense of the rule of law and the stability of the American hemp industry. “The DEA is attempting to redefine federal law through administrative fiat, causing immediate and irreparable harm to businesses operating in reliance upon the 2018 Farm Bill,” he said. “These lawsuits in two different circuits demonstrate that the threat from the DEA’s unlawful overreach is national in scope.” DEA, for its part, said in the rule it filed last month that “only tetrahydrocannabinols in or derived from the cannabis plant—not synthetic tetrahydrocannabinols—are excluded from control as ‘tetrahydrocannabinols in hemp.'” “To clarify further, tetrahydrocannabinols produced through chemical conversion, even when hemp derived are considered synthetically produced for purposes of the CSA, do not qualify as ‘tetrahydrocannabinols in hemp’ under” the 2018 Farm Bill, the agency said. The Federal Register notice wasn’t the first time that DEA addressed the legal status of HHC. In a 2023 letter, Terrance Boos, chief of DEA’s Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, wrote that HHC “does not occur naturally in the cannabis plant and can only be obtained synthetically, and therefore does not fall under the definition of hemp.” The new filing signed by DEA Administrator Terrance Cole said that “this rule does not affect the continuing status of hexahydrocannabinol as a schedule I controlled substance in any way.” “This action, as an administrative matter, establishes a separate, specific listing for hexahydrocannabinol in schedule I of the CSA and assigns a DEA drug code for this substance,” it said. “This action will allow DEA to establish an aggregate production quota and grant individual manufacturing and procurement quotas to DEA-registered manufacturers of hexahydrocannabinol, who had previously been granted individual quotas for such purposes under the drug code for tetrahydrocannabinols.” The DEA notice cited a move last year by an international drug control body to add HHC to Schedule II of the United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971—but the document doesn’t note that when the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) took the action, the U.S. was the only country to abstain from the vote. DEA said that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) “concurs with the direct listing and drug code assignment of hexahydrocannabinol in the CSA.” Meanwhile, under provisions of a large-scale spending bill signed by President Donald Trump late last year, the federal definition of legal hemp is set to change in November. Unless that language is altered or its effective date is delayed, as some lawmakers are pushing for, only hemp products with up to 0.4 milligrams of total THC per container will remain legal after November 12. At the same time, however, the Trump administration is moving to more broadly reschedule marijuana under federal law. Read the new hemp industry lawsuits against DEA’s HHC rule below: The post Hemp Companies Sue DEA, Challenging Agency’s Claim That Synthetic Cannabis Compound HHC Is Federally Banned appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

About 2 in 3 Americans who use marijuana say it improves their sleep, according to a new survey from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM). The poll asked 2,003 American adults about their cannabis use and its sleep impacts. Overall, about 33 percent of respondents said marijuana makes their quality of sleep “significantly” or “slightly” better, compared to 11 percent who said it has “no impact” and 8 percent who reported significantly or slightly worse sleep outcomes. The remaining 47 percent said they don’t use cannabis at all. Consolidating the results to include only self-reported cannabis consumers, about 64 percent said using marijuana improved their sleep either significantly (35 percent) or slightly (29 percent). By contrast, 21 percent of cannabis users said it had no impact, while a total of 16 percent said it worsened sleep. The survey further found that respondents between the ages of 25 and 44 were most likely to find marijuana improved their sleep, and older Americans were generally less likely to report using cannabis in the first place. Men were more likely than women to say that using marijuana helps them sleep better. “While many states now allow the recreational and medical use of marijuana, its impact on sleep is multi-faceted,” Kannan Ramar, former president of AASM, said in a press release. He added that cannabis can be linked to “daytime sleepiness” and conditions such as sleep disruption. “Sleep is essential to health, so it is important to talk to a healthcare professional about any ongoing sleep concerns,” he said. “Sleep specialists can provide evidence-based treatments for anyone who has insomnia or another sleep disorder.” Does marijuana help or hurt sleep? The answer may not be as simple as you think. New survey results from the AASM found that one-third of adults report sleeping better when using marijuana, while others report no impact or even worse sleep. Explore what the latest data reveal… — American Academy of Sleep Medicine (@AASMorg) June 1, 2026 The poll—which was conducted from June 5-13, 2025 and had a +/-2 percentage point margin of error—is far from the first to indicate that marijuana can effectively help people with sleep issues. For example, using medical marijuana appears to help people reduce the use of medications, including sleeping aids, according to a recent study involving more than 3,500 patients. They also experience far fewer negative side effects after switching to cannabis from prescription drugs. Another study that looked at adults who drink cannabis-infused beverages also found improvements in overall wellbeing and sleep, as well as reductions in pain, stress, depression and anxiety. A 2025 study on the use of medical marijuana by older patients—age 50 and above—concluded that “cannabis seemed to be a safe and effective treatment” for sleep disorders, pain and other conditions. About 16 percent of Americans aged 21 and older say they use cannabis as a sleep aid, according to a separate industry-backed survey from last year. That makes marijuana more popular for sleep than prescription sleep aids (12 percent) or alcohol (11 percent), but still not quite as common as using supplements (26 percent) or over-the-counter sleep aids (19 percent). A pair of 2024 studies found that both older medical marijuana patients as well as people with fibromyalgia reported that cannabis improved their sleep. A different study that year from the retirement group AARP found that marijuana use by older people in the U.S. has nearly doubled, with better sleep as among the most frequently cited reasons. Another industry-backed survey last year found that an oral CBD solution effectively treated mild to moderate anxiety, as well as associated depression and poor sleep quality, with no serious adverse events observed. A study published in 2024, meanwhile, found that using marijuana before sleep has minimal if any effect on a range of performance measures the next day, including simulated driving, cognitive and psychomotor function tasks, subjective effects and mood. In 2023, a federally funded study found that people with anxiety experienced better quality sleep on days when they used marijuana compared to days when they used alcohol or nothing at all. Separate studies in 2019, meanwhile, found that fewer people purchased over-the-counter (OTC) sleep medications when they had legal access to cannabis and that many adult-use consumers at the time said they used marijuana for the same reasons medical cannabis patients did: to help with pain and sleep. The post 2 In 3 Americans Who Use Marijuana Say It Helps Them Sleep Better, New Survey Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Admiring the time and effort you put into your blog and detailed information you offer!.. your muscleshop

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. hptoto link

I wanted to thank you for this excellent read!! I definitely loved every little bit of it. I have you bookmarked your site to check out the new stuff you post. olxtoto resmi

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! เว็บแทงบอลออนไลน์

Louisiana’s governor says he signed a bill that threatens to send people to jail for up to one year if they smoke marijuana within 2,000 feet of a school property—including a college campus— because he is “tired” of smelling cannabis at football games. “Like most of you, I’m tired of going to our college and high school campuses and being inundated with the smell of marijuana,” he said in a video posted to social media. “And I’m tired of seeing drugs littering our high school and college campuses, hurting our students.” “These drugs take away from the family-friendly environments that our colleges are supposed to be, especially on game days,” the governor said. The legislation from Rep. Gabe Firment (R) that Landry signed last month applies to people who violate drug laws “while smoking, vaping, or otherwise abusing such controlled dangerous substance while on any property used for school purposes by any school, within two thousand feet of any such property, or while on a school bus.” The bill “takes a massive step toward protecting our families and children in Louisiana on those campuses,” the governor argued in his new video that was posted on Friday. “This bill will place strong penalties on those caught smoking and vaping marijuana or using any other illegal drugs while in a drug-free school zone,” he said. Drugs have no place on our high school and college campuses. Thanks to Representative @FirmentGabe’s bill, those who are caught with illegal drugs on these campuses will face strong penalties. We are bringing back the greatness of these family-friendly environments—… pic.twitter.com/BZFIjQaRWo — Governor Jeff Landry (@LAGovJeffLandry) May 29, 2026 Landry’s staff previously testified in favor of the measure at a committee hearing. Firment told senators at a House committee hearing that his bill “strengthens enforcement of Louisiana drug-free school zone laws by creating a clear behavior-based offense, so that when someone is openly smoking or vaping illegal drug in the school zone, law enforcement can act and prosecutors can prove the case.” “For marijuana, the bill establishes a clear and consistent penalty—up to a year in jail and $1,000 fine, ensuring that violations in school zones result in real, enforceable consequences,” he said. Sen. Rick Edmonds (R) argued on the Senate floor ahead of last month’s final vote that the bill, HB 568, “strengthens enforcement of Louisiana drug school zone law by adding a behavior-based trigger for violations and clarifying the penalty structure.” “The bill does not change what’s legal. It gives law enforcement a practical tool [and] ensures consistent consequences in school zones,” he said. Kevin Caldwell, Southeast legislative manager for the pro-legalization Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), said the group is “disappointed to see this deeply flawed legislation become law with the signature of Gov. Jeff Landry.” “His personal lobbying efforts forced many legislators to vote for a bill they know will have profound negative life altering consequences for potentially thousands of Louisianans,” Caldwell told Marijuana Moment. “His solution to every perceived problem has been a return to incarceration. These failed policies of the past should remain in the past.” “No child in Louisiana will be any safer after this legislation goes into effect,” he said. “But historical data clearly shows who will bear the brunt of this policy. The governor and legislature are seriously out of touch with the people of Louisiana.” In 2021, then-Gov. John Bel Edwards (D) signed a bill decriminalizing marijuana by removing the threat of jail time for possessing up to 14 grams. — 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 Louisiana Senate bill to let patients with terminal and irreversible conditions use medical marijuana in hospitals is also on Landry’s desk for final action. Separate legislation to create a psychedelic-assisted therapy pilot program, using opioid settlement dollars to fund clinical trials aimed at developing alternative treatments such as psilocybin, ibogaine and MDMA was also sent to the governor this session. A lawmaker recently filed a proposal that would create a new state task force to “study and develop findings and recommendations regarding the potential legalization of recreational marijuana.” Another lawmaker also introduced a bill to create an adult-use marijuana legalization pilot program in the state to determine whether the reform should eventually be expanded and permanently codified. Rep. Candace Newell (D)—who has long championed legislation to end cannabis criminalization and filed a similar legal marijuana pilot program measure last session—is sponsoring what’s titled the “Adult-Use Cannabis Pilot Program Regulation and Enforcement Act.” Getting the bill across the finish line could prove complicated in the conservative legislature, however. Newell’s earlier version of the pilot program legislation didn’t advance to enactment last year, and lawmakers that session also rejected other marijuana reform proposals such as one that would have established a tax system to prepare the eventual legalization of adult-use cannabis. The post Louisiana Governor Is ‘Tired’ Of ‘Being Inundated With The Smell Of Marijuana’ At Football Games, So He Signed A Bill To Jail People For It appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Superbly written article, if only all bloggers offered the same content as you, the internet would be a far better place.. เว็บแทงบอลออนไลน์

This is my first visit to your web journal! We are a group of volunteers and new activities in the same specialty. Website gave us helpful data to work. เว็บแทงบอลออนไลน์

The governor of Virginia is continuing to try to explain her veto last month of legislation to legalize recreational marijuana sales—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. “If I’m going to be responsible for a monumental consequential change to how we do one type of business in Virginia, then do it right,” Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) said in an interview with Cardinal News that was published on Friday. “The devil’s in the details.” “The fact that we’re going to be talking a little bit longer about how do you set up a retail cannabis market correctly—I don’t see that as something that is a negative,” she said. “Do people want me to sign a bill or do people want me to get it right, and as the person doing the implementing, what’s most important to me is get it right.” Lawmakers passed the 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. “Not only did it not give the state enough time to set up for success, but also establishes so many licenses that you can’t sort of tiptoe into, OK, let’s start with X number of licenses and then you’re going to rush the regulatory framework,” the governor said in the new interview. “Where’s the time to hire any of the law enforcement? We’re going to create an entire new law enforcement agency. When do we get them ready? When do they learn the laws that they’re enforcing when the regulators haven’t even built out their framework? When do you apply for your license? If you are able to open your doors as a store come January, when do you get your license? You walk back from that.” Spanberger believes that the delay will ultimately be good for businesses, and especially for ensuring that the market isn’t cornered by small number of large players. “There are still a lot of regulatory pieces of how do you make sure we’re expanding the market so it isn’t only the people who are already part of the medical legal market, so they don’t automatically dominate the entirety of the market,” she said. “These are also businesses: You don’t want to have failed businesses. If you’re flooding the market without any real understanding of what retail interest might be—opening up a full number of licenses at maximum capacity without a full understanding—you’re basically putting people in a place where if they one day say, I might want to have a retail cannabis shop, like move now or you might miss that chance. So now they’re starting to open a business they know potentially nothing about, without any regulatory framework to dig into, potentially bringing all of their personal capital to bear to try and fund this.” “I’m responsible for getting it right,” Spanberger said. “And if I were to sign a bill that I don’t think sets us up to get it right, then a year and a half from now, it’s headline after headline about, whether it’s like, somebody who lost their shirt because they started this business and they were set up for failure or a public health issue or confusion within the law enforcement community and that is all on me.” The governor also raised concerns about “challenges” on the federal level for marijuana businesses. “And then you deal with the issues that, from a lending perspective at the federal level, there’s still real challenges with getting your money in the banking system,” she said. “All of these things need to be figured out, and the biggest problem in all of this is there’s no time to get it right. And when you’re doing something so consequential that has major public safety implications, you’ve got to do it right.” As she has in past interviews since issuing the cannabis veto, Spanberger said her action was informed by discussions she had about the issue with governors of other states that have enacted legalization. “Not all experiences are created equal,” she said. There are states who did things that they wish they hadn’t, and we should be endeavoring to learn from whether it’s called their mistakes or the best practices that they’ve sort of led us to. That’s what we as Virginians would want to do.” The governor additional said she has “respect” for the “tremendous amount of work” that lawmakers did in crafting the now-vetoed cannabis sales legislation. “Their role is to put forth a bill,” she said. “In the process we have in Virginia, the governor has the option of signing, vetoing or amending. And if I wasn’t supposed to take that option of amending seriously, it wouldn’t be an option in our process… I should utilize it because it’s a responsibility that I use it.” “I wrote amendments. They are welcome to take up my amendments. The thing about it is like, there was a bill I would have signed, and they passed by all my amendments. That is fully their prerogative. But it is incorrect to say, ‘My goodness, she said she supported this. Now she won’t sign a bill.’ No, I won’t sign that bill, and you won’t even consider my amendments. That creates a space where now we have to potentially go back to the discussion table—which is fine, right, and that’s the reality of it. There is a bill I would have signed. They didn’t want that, but I’m not going to sign just any bill because they don’t want to have a conversation about amendments, and I think that is the tension. And it is wholly the legislature’s prerogative to reject, to accept or even to pass by my amendments. But it was also wholly the prerogative of the governor to say these amendments are so consequential and important to me… Maybe it’s a different story if they had taken up the amendments…. People agree with me, they don’t disagree with me. That’s a different discussion, right?” Meanwhile, top lawmakers are openly discussing the possibility of including provisions to legalize adult-use cannabis sales in still-outstanding budget legislation that they are due to pass by July 1. “I wouldn’t say that the cannabis retail market is totally dead yet for this year,” Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D) said recently. Lawmakers are scheduled to reconvene this month to tackle the budget. If they finalize that legislation close to the July 1 deadline, it could effectively force the governor to quickly sign any deal, even if she doesn’t like its provisions, in order to avoid a potential shutdown of the state government. Spanberger, for her part, pushed back on the idea that lawmakers would put marijuana in the budget as a tactic to force her to sign it. “The idea that we, that members of the General Assembly would be holding localities and their budgets in this purgatory space so that they can try and jam me with a budget is two things: one, kind of an outrageous possibility, and two, broadly something that most legislators I have spoken to wholly oppose,” she told The Richmond Times-Dispatch. 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 an 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 was not able to name any other governors she talked to about cannabis in response to a question from Marijuana Moment last week, however. The governor separately recently sought to explain her veto in an earlier interview last week, 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. Prior to vetoing the cannabis commerce bill, the governor did sign separate legislation to provide resentencing relief for people with past cannabis convictions. 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. Sen. Lashrecse Aird (D), and Del. Paul Krizek (D), the sponsors of the legalization bills, had urged colleagues to vote against the governor’s amendments last month—even if that meant risking a veto from Spanberger when the legislation returned to her desk, which has now occurred. Here are the other key details of the cannabis bills—SB 542 and HB 642—as approved by lawmakers and with the governor’s suggested amendments: Lawmakers voted to allow adults to be able to purchase up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana in a single transaction, or up to an equivalent amount of other cannabis products as determined by regulators. That would represent an increase from the limit in current law of 1 ounce. The governor, however, wanted the amount increased to only 2 ounces. Under the legislature’s plan, legal sales could begin on January 1, 2027, but the governor proposed to push that back to July 1, 2027. Lawmakers voted to impose an excise tax of 6 percent on cannabis sales as well as a 5.3 percent retail sales and use tax, while allowing municipalities to set an additional local tax of up to 3.5 percent. The governor’s plan was largely the same, though it would have increased the excise tax to 8 percent starting on July 1, 2029. Under the legislation as approved by lawmakers, revenue would have been distributed to the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund (30 percent), early childhood education (40 percent), the Department of Behavioral & Developmental Health Services (25 percent) and public health initiatives (5 percent). The governor, however, 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.” The Virginia Cannabis Control Authority would have overseen licensing and regulation of the new industry, and would have also taken on oversight of hemp, which is currently under the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Local governments could not have opted out of allowing marijuana businesses to operate in their area. Delivery services would have been allowed. Serving sizes would have been capped at 10 milligrams THC, with no more than 100 mg THC per package. The governor proposed to make public marijuana use a class 4 criminal misdemeanor instead of civil violation punishable by a $25 fine as under current law. She also wanted to make possessing cannabis by people under the age of 21 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. Illegally selling or distributing 50 pounds or more of marijuana would have been a class 2 felony punishable by life in prison. The governor sought to eliminate support for the Cannabis Equity Reinvestment Fund. Existing medical cannabis operators could have entered the adult-use market if they pay a licensing conversion fee that was set at $10 million. Cannabis businesses would have had to establish labor peace agreements with workers. As passed by lawmakers, the bill would have directed a legislative commission 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, but the governor proposed to remove that language. A coalition of cannabis reform organizations sent the governor a letter this month urging her not to veto the sales legalization legislation even though her amendments were rejected. “Together, these bills address the real issues surrounding cannabis in the Commonwealth today: an already-existing, unregulated marijuana market operating openly across the state while consumers, communities, and law enforcement are left without the protections of a legal framework,” the groups wrote. “Let’s be clear: these bills do not create a marijuana market in Virginia. That market already exists,” the letter said. “What these bills do is replace today’s predatory and unaccountable illicit operators with a regulated marketplace, enforceable rules, oversight, product safeguards, age verification, and the strict consumer safety standards already in use for Virginia medical cannabis.” The letter was signed by Virginia NORML, Marijuana Justice, Virginia Cannabis Association, Marijuana Policy Project and other groups. Separately, a coalition of hemp businesses that joined with a major alcohol retailer in asking Spanberger to veto the marijuana bill before she did so said the move presents an “opportunity” to craft better cannabis policy. Meanwhile, the governor signed several other reform bills last month—including measures to protect the parental rights of marijuana consumers and allow patients to access medical cannabis in hospitals. The post Delaying Marijuana Sales In Virginia Isn’t A ‘Negative,’ Governor Says After Vetoing The Reform appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

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. แทงบอลเต็ง