All Activity

There’s “no evidence of these claims was presented to the circuit court,” judges said. By Rebecca Rivas, Missouri Independent Missouri courts were supposed to automatically erase eligible marijuana misdemeanors from criminal records by June 8, 2023, six months after voters legalized recreational marijuana. But in a recent St. Louis case, the Missouri State Highway Patrol told an appellate court that “hundreds of thousands” of marijuana offenses may still exist on criminal records that should have been cleared. The patrol offered no evidence to back up that estimate, the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District noted in an April opinion. But the case exposed a practical problem with Missouri’s marijuana expungement process: If a court missed an eligible case, it remains unclear what the person is supposed to do about it. So far, the answers are inconsistent. People whose cases were missed have been told to ask a circuit clerk to fix the issue administratively, file a regular expungement petition or pursue a writ of mandamus. None has emerged as a clearly established statewide remedy. The appeal involved a St. Louis man identified in court records as D.S., who sought to expunge a 2003 misdemeanor marijuana conviction through a court petition intended for incarcerated individuals. A St. Louis County circuit judge granted the marijuana expungement. The patrol did not argue that the marijuana offense was ineligible. Instead, it argued that the court had no authority to grant the request through that kind of petition because the constitutional amendment required misdemeanor marijuana expungements to happen “automatically.” Only incarcerated people with eligible marijuana offenses, the patrol argued, had to petition a court. Allowing such petitions, the patrol argued, would open the floodgates to “hundreds of thousands” of offenses that court clerks have missed and cause “an immense burden” on state courts. The case itself is a sealed record but the court’s April opinion is a public record, and the appellate judges summarized the patrol’s argument in a footnote. “While MSHP claims hundreds of thousands of offenses exist that should have been automatically expunged and predicts that allowing persons entitled for automatic expungement to petition would place an immense burden on Missouri courts,” the footnote states, “no evidence of these claims was presented to the circuit court.” After the underlying case was closed June 4, the highway patrol said it could comment on the litigation. In an email to The Independent, Capt. Scott White, a spokesman for the highway patrol, said estimates of “potentially eligible offenses were based on the broad language of the constitutional amendment” and based on the agency’s records in its Central Repository. The Central Repository is where the highway patrol maintains criminal history records reported by law enforcement agencies and courts throughout the state. It now also updates these records when marijuana cases are expunged. White said the patrol “has no concerns with the petition process when it is conducted in accordance with the amendment’s requirements.” While the judges agreed with the patrol that “the circuit court exceeded its authority in hearing the petition,” they ultimately sided with the man because the courts were obligated to expunge the man’s misdemeanor by June 8, 2023—the deadline set in the constitutional amendment. Lee Camp, an attorney with ArchCity Defenders law firm and who represented D.S., said the ruling is already having repercussions. His organization has been approached by several people whose records should have been expunged but weren’t. Some have since filed petitions in St. Louis County, and their cases have been dismissed due to the appellate court ruling. John O’Sullivan, spokesman for the St. Louis County court where the expungement occurred, said that’s because the court is interpreting the appellate decision to require that petition to proceed under Missouri’s regular criminal expungement law—not the marijuana amendment’s petition process. Camp said that interpretation is concerning because under state law the county cites, people can only expunge three misdemeanors in their lifetime. “I appreciate St. Louis County is trying to clarify a process,” Camp said, “but there’s no way ArchCity could advise any of our clients to burn these statutory expungements on these things.” The appellate judges agreed and wrote D.S. “should not have to use one of the three expungements permitted for misdemeanors when the circuit court was directed by the Missouri Constitution to expunge the conviction at issue.” The D.S. case shows, Camp said, the courts have not demonstrated that they have completed expungements. He believes the next step is for citizens to file a writ of mandamus, which would order public officials to complete tasks mandated by law. Camp added, “This is a mess.” ‘Reach out to your circuit clerk’ The case raises questions about what people are supposed to do if the clerk’s office hasn’t expunged an eligible marijuana judgment. “If someone feels as if they should have gotten an automatic expungement for a marijuana judgement and did not, they may reach out to the St. Louis County Circuit Clerk’s office,” O’Sullivan said. O’Sullivan added if the clerk’s office reviews the case file and finds it should have received an automatic expungement, “they will work to get the charge expunged and there would be no need for someone to file a petition.” If someone still wants to file a petition in a misdemeanor marijuana case, O’Sullivan said the appellate ruling states people need to file it like a regular expungement for a criminal case, and “not the constitutional amendment as that deals with incarcerated individuals.” Missouri courts have expunged about 155,000 marijuana cases since voters approved the 2022 constitutional amendment to legalize recreational cannabis, according to data compiled by Missouri’s state courts system. The state court system estimates that about 334,000 cases have been reviewed—which would mean the counties expunged 46 percent of the cases they reviewed. But clerks say the number of cases reviewed is higher because the paper records reviewed and deemed ineligible weren’t documented. Courts were mandated, as part of the amendment, to search their files for eligible marijuana-related charges and then make it as if they never existed on people’s records. But what should people do if court clerks missed their case? Saline County Circuit Clerk Becky Uhlich, who serves as first vice president of the Missouri Circuit Clerk Association, said she would advise people to contact the clerk for the county court. “Please reach out to your circuit clerk, bring it to their attention, and let them investigate why it wasn’t automatically expunged,’” she said. In 2023, Uhlich said the court clerks received lists with thousands of potential eligible offenses from the Office of State Courts Administrator. “Computers generated those reports,” she said. “Computers are not always accurate in those things.” The lists didn’t include people who were under 21 at the time of the arrest or paper files, which largely end around 2014. For paper records, court clerks have to read summaries for every single criminal record. The turnaround was also fast, given the amendment passed on Dec. 8, 2022 and the court clerks had six months to complete the task. There wasn’t a specific year courts needed to search back to outlined in the constitution, clerks have previously told The Independent. However, Uhlich and others have suggested it’s 1971, which was the first marijuana-related drug statutes, based on information the state administrator provided to court clerks. “This was new territory,” she said. “I was really blessed because I was able to hire someone who had previous knowledge and we met our deadline, but I can’t say that that was the case for every county.” Joel Currier, spokesman for St. Louis circuit court, said their clerks are continuing to review cases for eligibility. “Of the thousands of cases that must be reviewed by a limited number of available clerks, it’s possible either some cases have been missed or that they’re still awaiting to be reviewed,” Currier said. “Anyone who believes they still may have a case eligible for automatic expungement may contact the St. Louis Circuit Clerk’s Office to inquire and our clerks will work to review them as quickly as possible.” This type of variation from county to county concerns Camp and the ArchCity Defenders, a legal advocacy organization. “It’s not just about getting the expungement order itself,” Camp said. “It’s really what it means if you’re in the category of people who have not received that mandatory expungement order. That means you’re not enjoying the same privileges as someone that two years ago received automatic expungement in a different circuit.” The lack of expungement, Camp said, could be the difference between receiving employment, housing and benefits opportunities. Hundreds of thousands of cases Dan Viets, an attorney, Missouri NORML coordinator and chair of the advisory board of the 2022 marijuana legalization campaign, estimated last year that hundreds of thousands of marijuana cases may still be on people’s records—in agreement with the highway patrol. His estimate, he said, was based on FBI crime statistics showing more than 16,600 marijuana arrests in 2018, though not all law enforcement agencies report their statistics to the FBI. A conservative estimate of 20,000 marijuana arrests per year, Viets argued, would mean that the 140,000 expungements so far “represent only about seven years of such arrests.” While he still believes that there are many older cases that haven’t been expunged, Viets said he’s taken a step back from his initial claim last year—largely because the courts haven’t seen a mass number of people petitioning for expungements. That’s why he disagrees with the highway patrol’s claim in the D.S. case that the courts would be overwhelmed if everyone was allowed to petition for a marijuana misdemeanor expungement. “It has not happened,” Viets said. “That’s the most persuasive evidence…and we defense attorneys have been filing petitions for expungement since that time.” Viets also strongly disagrees that circuit courts exceeded their authority to hear D.S.’ petition. Viets has filed a few dozen petitions for clients whose records weren’t automatically cleared. “It’s just not reasonable to deny people access to the courts,” Viets said. He also called the part in the decision about the circuit court’s authority “mere dicta,” or statements made by a judge in a legal opinion that weren’t necessary to resolve the case and aren’t binding. The legally binding part of the decision, Viets said, was that the appellate judges found the circuit court’s decision to hear the petition “harmless,” since they were obligated to do it two years ago. What’s also not written in the Constitution, he said, is people’s right to file a writ of mandamus. It’s something he’s thought about doing to ensure courts complete the marijuana expungements, especially the ones that didn’t search through criminal records past the 1980s and some municipal courts. “We didn’t say, ‘Yes, you have a right to file a writ of mandamus,’ in the language of [the marijuana constitutional amendment],” said Viets, who helped write the language, “but by God, due process requires that every citizen has the right to file for a writ of mandamus.” This story was first published by Missouri Independent. Photo elements courtesy of rawpixel and Philip Steffan. The post ‘Hundreds Of Thousands’ Of Missouri Marijuana Conviction Records May Still Exist Despite Deadline To Clear Them, Police Say appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is resisting a prohibitionist group’s request for an agency official to testify about the harms of marijuana during a hearing on the Trump administration’s move to reschedule cannabis that is scheduled to start next week. The organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), which opposes the proposed reform, wants Luli Akinfiresoye, a pharmacologist in the DEA Diversion Control Division’s Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section, to testify during the proceedings. Akinfiresoye was previously an official DEA witness for an earlier, subsequently cancelled hearing on marijuana rescheduling during the Biden administration. During that time, she submitted into the record a report that attempts to link cannabis consumption to psychosis, depression and impaired cognitive functioning. It also says there is “great concern” about use of non-federally-approved medical marijuana products under state laws, arguing it could have “unpredictable and unintended consequences.” However, “The Government does not intend to identify Dr. Akinfiresoye as witness for our case in chief,” during the current proceedings, DEA attorney James J. Schwartz wrote in an email to SAM this week, prompting the group to seek to subpoena the DEA pharmacologist as its own witness in the hearing. The prohibitionist group is one of seven parties that have been invited to participate in the hearing, while no reform supporters who requested to take part are being allowed to do so. DEA told SAM that if it wants to call the agency pharmacologist as a witness, it will need to submit a request under specific rules known as Touhy regulations, and also that the information it wants to uncover in the hearing may be shielded under the Privacy Act. If that is the case, “the information may not be disclosed without prior written consent of those identified in documents who are protected by the Privacy Act, or pursuant to the order of a court of competent jurisdiction and signed by a Judge,” Amber Porter, section chief in DEA’s Office of Chief Counsel, wrote to an attorney at Torridon Law PLLC, which is representing SAM. “Please also be aware that one or more privileges, such as the law enforcement privilege, may bar release of the information you seek.” The DEA report linked to Akinfiresoye’s prior testimony says that “cannabis impairs a wide range of psychomotor skills, including motor coordination, divided attention, and complex task performance.” “Furthermore, chronic use of cannabis can impair cognitive functioning, affecting the organization and integration of complex information, as well as impair attention and memory processes,” it says. “Prolonged use may lead to greater and potentially irreversible impairment, which could impact daily life functions. Chronic users may develop a dependence syndrome characterized by a loss of control over cannabis use.” “Long-term cannabis smoking can also cause epithelial injury to the trachea and major bronchi, leading to airway inflammation, impaired pulmonary defenses, and a higher prevalence of chronic and acute bronchitis symptoms. Additionally, cannabis use can exacerbate schizophrenia in affected individuals.” The report also discusses state medical marijuana laws, raising concerns about patients’ use of cannabis to treat conditions for which it hasn’t received federal approval: “State programs have legalized cannabis for a variety of medical conditions, such as (but not limited to) chronic pain, glaucoma, anxiety, and as an antiemetic in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea. However, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the use of unapproved cannabis and/or unapproved cannabis-derived products to treat a number of medical conditions including, AIDS wasting, epilepsy, neuropathic pain, spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis, and cancer and chemotherapy-induced nausea is of great concern. FDA notes that its drug approval process involves a careful evaluation for safety, efficacy, quality, and monitoring once approved for marketing. The use of unapproved cannabis and cannabis-derived products can have unpredictable and unintended consequences, including serious safety risks. Furthermore, there has been no FDA review of data from rigorous clinical trials to support safety and efficacy of the unapproved products for the various therapeutic uses for which they are being used.” DEA is technically the proponent of the proposed marijuana rescheduling rule and will fill the role of defending it during the hearing, though some cannabis reform supporters are skeptical it will effectively do so given the agency’s long history of defending strict prohibition. DEA’s seeming reluctance to ease the way for testimony from Akinfiresoye that might focus on the potential harms of cannabis could give reform supporters some comfort, however—though it remains to be seen how agency personnel it does put forth to partake in the hearing speak to marijuana’s effects and the need for federal scheduling reform. To that end, Marijuana Moment this seek sent a latter asking the DEA judge overseeing the proceedings to reconsider his decision to prohibit livestreaming of the hearing. Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julis last week issued a preliminary order laying out rules and timelines for the marijuana rescheduling proceedings—simultaneously recognizing that “national public interest in this issue predicates towards a policy of transparency” while also determining that “the hearing will not be televised, livestreamed, or broadcasted in any way.” As a result, people who wish to observe the historic cannabis reform process must attend in person in Arlington, Virginia under the judge’s order. In a letter sent to Julius on Tuesday, Marijuana Moment counsel Joseph A. Bondy noted that DEA permitted livestreaming of an earlier, subsequently cancelled hearing process on the proposal to move cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III that took place during the Biden administration. “That prior determination was correct. The public-interest rationale for contemporaneous access has not diminished,” Bondy wrote. “If DEA believes safety, witness-management, or operational concerns now require a more restrictive access regime, those concerns should be identified and addressed through narrow conditions rather than a categorical ban.” “Limited physical seating in Arlington is not a meaningful substitute for livestreaming. Marijuana Moment, like many members of the press and public who follow federal cannabis policy nationally, cannot rely on a handful of available seats as a practical means of observing and reporting on the hearing. That is precisely why DEA’s prior livestreaming directive mattered: it allowed those physically outside the courtroom to observe the proceeding without disrupting the hearing, burdening security, or conferring party status on anyone.” “In a proceeding of this public significance, and in light of DEA’s prior livestreaming directive, a public hearing is not meaningfully public if access depends on the happenstance of limited physical attendance,” Marijuana Moment’s attorney wrote to the DEA judge. “Delayed access to transcripts is no substitute for contemporaneous observation. The press reports events as they unfold. The public evaluates government action in real time. And in a proceeding of this magnitude, transparency is not a courtesy. It is a safeguard.” “For a substantial public audience seeking serious coverage of federal cannabis policy, Marijuana Moment is an important channel through which public understanding of this proceeding occurs.” — Marijuana Moment’s journalism is made possible by readers like you who value this work enough to support us with monthly pledges on Patreon. If you rely on our reporting to stay informed about key cannabis developments, please help us keep doing this by becoming a sustaining subscriber today. Backing us at the $25/month level also gets you access to our Bill Tracker so you won’t miss any important marijuana legislation in your state. — DEA last week announced that it had selected participants for the marijuana rescheduling hearing—and only opponents of the reform have been invited to take part, some of whom have filed litigation in an attempt to block the reform. No reform supporters who expressed intent to participate were invited. The hearing will begin on June 29 and is set to conclude no later than July 15. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in April issued an order that immediately reclassified state-licensed medical cannabis, as well as marijuana products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III. Under a separate order the acting attorney general signed, the upcoming hearing will consider more comprehensively moving marijuana to Schedule III. In order to be considered for participation in the hearing, parties needed to file requests articulating their interest in the proceeding, the objections or issues they wish to be heard on and their position on those issues. “The purpose of the hearing is to ‘receiv[e] factual evidence and expert opinion regarding’ whether marijuana should be transferred to schedule III of the list of controlled substances,” Blanche’s initial notice, filed in April, said. The attorney general also selected an administrative law judge (ALJ) to oversee the proceedings. “The ALJ’s authorities include the power to hold conferences to simplify or determine the issues in the hearing or to consider other matters that may aid in the expeditious disposition of the hearing; require parties to state their position in writing; sign and issue subpoenas to compel the production of documents and materials to the extent necessary to conduct the hearing; examine witnesses and direct witnesses to testify; receive, rule on, exclude, or limit evidence; rule on procedural items; and take any action permitted by the presiding officer under DEA’s hearing procedures and the” Administrative Procedures Act, Blanche wrote. A prior hearing process on the marijuana rescheduling process that was initiated by the Biden administration stalled last year amid litigation over alleged improper communications and witness selection. The current marijuana rescheduling process is being challenged with several lawsuits that have been consolidated by a federal appeals court. Those pieces of litigation against the cannabis reform have been filed by state attorneys general, marijuana legalization opponents and a cannabis-focused biopharmaceutical corporation. Meanwhile, the already-enacted rescheduling of state-licensed medical cannabis is already having broad impacts. The Congressional Research Service published a report on the current cannabis rescheduling move explaining that certified patients who possess medical marijuana from state-licensed dispensaries now have certain protections under Schedule III. “The order appears to authorize end users to possess marijuana for medical use without a CSA-compliant prescription,” it says. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has posted a draft update to a gun purchase form to acknowledge the federally legal status of medical marijuana under rescheduling. The revised section in question notably says that only “use or possession of marijuana for recreational purposes” is federally prohibited, leaving out the prior form’s mention of medical cannabis. The U.S. Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) said they plan to issue new tax guidance for the marijuana industry following rescheduling. The reform will benefit state-licensed marijuana businesses by allowing them to take federal tax deductions they’re currently barred from under an IRS code known as 280E that doesn’t apply to Schedule III substances. Even DEA, which has long opposed cannabis legalization and was accused of stalling the rescheduling process initiative by the Biden administration, has launched a registration process for state-legal marijuana businesses to take advantage of federal benefits that come with the reform. The Department of Transportation, on the other hand, issued guidance saying that use of state-legal medical cannabis is still no excuse for a positive drug test by truck drivers, pilots and other safety-sensitive workers. A congressional committee recently voted to block federal officials from taking further steps to carry out cannabis rescheduling. Read the filings on SAM’s request for the DEA officials to testify below: The post DEA Resists Testimony From Agency Official Linked To Report On Marijuana’s Harms During Rescheduling Hearing appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A new poll shows that Pennsylvania voters overwhelmingly support marijuana legalization—and that the largest share put the blame on Republican lawmakers for the fact that the state has not yet enacted the reform. The survey, conducted by Public Policy Polling this month, found that three out of four voters favor legalizing recreational cannabis. When asked whether “adults over 21 should have places to purchase non-medical cannabis products that are legal, and strictly regulated,” 55 percent said they strongly agree and 20 percent somewhat agree. Only 16 percent strongly disagree and 7 percent somewhat disagree, with another 3 percent saying they are unsure. When asked in a separate question whether Pennsylvania should keep the illicit market status quo, or if the state should legalize, regulate and tax non-medical use of cannabis by adults, 68 percent favored reform while just 14 percent said the laws should remain the same. The poll also informed voters that: “In the past 4 years the Pennsylvania Senate has had a bipartisan bill that would legalize and regulate the sale of adult use cannabis products.  A similar bipartisan measure has been introduced in the House. In that same time period, the last two Governors have endorsed the passage of adult use cannabis legislation, yet it has yet to pass.” “Who do you believe is the biggest obstacle when it comes to passing adult use cannabis legislation: the Governor, Democrats in the State Legislature, or Republicans in the State Legislature?” it asked. Forty percent of respondents blamed GOP lawmakers, 12 percent blamed Democrats and 9 percent said the governor was to blame for the lack of progress. The poll results come as a Republican senator is blaming the state’s Democratic governor for the defeat this month of his bill to create a new Cannabis Control Board (CCB) to oversee the state’s medical marijuana program and intoxicating hemp products and that could also one day oversee recreational cannabis if it is legalized. Most GOP senators in the Republican-controlled chamber voted for the legislation from Sen. Dan Laughlin (R), and all but two Democrats opposed it—with even some lawmakers who signed onto the measure as cosponsors ultimately voting against it. Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) “obviously weighed in on the Democratic side of the aisle and asked for a ‘no’ vote over there, successfully,” Sen. Dan Laughlin (R) said after the vote. “I knew it was a risk putting it up for a vote, because there were some discussions going back and forth… I had a little bit of a heads-up, but we chose to roll forward.” The governor’s office confirmed in a statement that he opposes the bill as drafted. “The Shapiro Administration remains supportive of comprehensive cannabis regulation, which would enable a competitive, revenue-generating adult-use market, protect patient access to the current Medical Marijuana Program and rein in hemp-based intoxicant products that are currently unregulated,” Rosie Lapowsky, a spokesperson for the governor, said. “Senate Bill 49 does not substantively advance those goals.” The now-defeated measure would transfer regulatory authority for the state’s existing medical cannabis program from the Department of Health to a new seven-member CCB. The governor would appoint three members—one with law enforcement experience, another with expertise in dealing with addiction and a third with experience in “cannabis matters.” The Senate president pro tempore, Senate minority leader, House speaker and House minority leader would also each get to make one appointment. The body would oversee cannabis permits, enforcement, seed-to-sale tracking, advertising, labeling, testing and other aspects of the legal industry. Moments after the bill’s defeat on the Senate floor, the chamber adopted a motion to reconsider—but it’s not yet clear when or if the legislation will get another vote. The bill would also create new types of medical cannabis permits for warehousing/distribution and third-party transporters, and would require regulars to issue an additional permit to an independent grower/processor. It would additionally add a new requirement for dispensaries to have a physician, pharmacist, physician assistant or certified nurse practitioner available at all times during hours of operation. A new Cannabis Regulation Fund would be established, supported by fees from the program. Forty percent of revenue would fund CCB’s operations, 15 percent would help patients pay for medical marijuana, 10 percent would support drug misuse prevention and treatment, 10 percent would go to local police departments and the remainder would go into the state’s general fund. Laughlin’s legislation would also significantly restrict most hemp THC products, aligning the state with a new federal policy that is set to take effect later this year recriminalizing preparations with total THC content of more than 0.3 percent on a dry-weight basis or more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container. To the end, the new Pennsylvania poll also asked about the availability of intoxicating cannabinoid products, with 84 percent either strongly or somewhat agreeing that the state should enact a law to prevent their sales to minors and 85 percent favoring sales only at “strictly regulated, age-restricted storefronts.” The new survey involved interviews with 589 Pennsylvania voters on June 16 and 17. Laughlin, who is also sponsoring bipartisan legislation to legalize adult-use marijuana previewed the now-defeated regulatory measure last year, saying that Pennsylvania should take initial steps to make sure the state is “ready to act when legalization becomes law” by establishing a CCB now. In a cosponsorship memo, Laughlin wrote that his bill would “transfer regulatory control of the Medical Marijuana Program to the CCB, ensuring continuity, efficiency, and improved oversight of medical cannabis businesses and patient access.” It would further “establish uniform safety standards to protect consumers from untested and potentially harmful products.” The bill text itself would not enact recreational marijuana legalization on its own. But the description indicates that the sponsor feels the current regulatory regime under the Pennsylvania Department of Health should be replaced with a more targeted agency that would ostensibly be suited to oversee an adult-use market if lawmakers move to end prohibition. “By consolidating oversight under a single regulatory board, we can eliminate inconsistencies, enhance transparency, and provide the structure needed to responsibly manage this industry,” the memo says. The action on the cannabis regulatory bill, SB 49, came shortly after the House of Representatives passed a bill to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities. — 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. — It also 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. Shapiro 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. 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. Read the full Pennsylvania marijuana poll results below: The post Pennsylvania Voters Strongly Support Legalizing Marijuana—And They Blame Republicans For Blocking Progress, New Poll Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A newly updated federal government report shows that states where marijuana is legal have generated nearly $15 billion in tax revenue from legal cannabis sales since late 2021. The U.S. Census Bureau this month issued the latest periodic update to its Cannabis Excise Sales Tax Collections data to include totals from the first quarter of 2026, during which states reported taking in a total of $825.1 million in marijuana tax revenue. Since the agency began tracking the issue in the third quarter of 2021, states have raked in more than $14.8 billion in earnings from cannabis sales, the latest data shows. The new numbers show there has been a dip in state marijuana tax revenue compared to the last quarter of 2025, which saw cannabis earnings of $878.1 million. Individual states reporting the highest dollar amounts from marijuana sales during Q1 of this year were California ($151.9 million), Washington State ($98.9 million), Michigan ($72.5 million), New York ($69.6 million), Illinois ($64.9 million) and Colorado ($53.3 million). The latest updated federally compiled figures also provide a look at which states have brought in the most cannabis revenue over time since the Census Bureau started tracking the issue nearly five years ago. The more than $3.1 billion that California has generated from marijuana sales since late 2021 represents more than a fifth of all cannabis dollars brought into state coffers across the country during that period. Washington State comes in second place, with $2.1 billion, followed by Illinois ($1.3 billion), Colorado $1.3 billion), Michigan ($1.2 billion), Massachusetts ($831.5 million) and Oregon ($777.7 million). The federal data doesn’t include tax earnings from quarters prior to Q3 2021. A separate report published this month by the advocacy group the Marijuana Policy Project found that states have generated more than $28.4 billion in tax revenue from recreational marijuana sales since the first markets launched over a decade ago. While those figures reach back further than the Census Bureau’s do, they don’t account for additional revenue that states have collected from medical marijuana sales, or from cannabis business application and licensing fees. Notably, the Census tracker’s numbers lag behind the real-time market. The agency says figures shown are “based on a calendar quarter and generally represent taxes collected on sales made during the prior quarter (i.e. data released in September 2023 will cover sales during the quarter ended June 30, 2023).” Data is also incomplete. Nevada, for example, did not report any data for Q1 2026 despite providing information for previous quarters. While not every state with legal marijuana has consistently provided data for the national tracker, the project nevertheless represents the federal government’s growing effort to account for the size and scope of the cannabis industry—which despite the growing number of state legalization laws remains generally federally illegal, although the rescheduling reform being implemented by the Trump administration is partially changing that. In 2023, the Census Bureau separately updated its survey of private businesses to better capture marijuana-related economic activity. Together, the tracking and reporting efforts indicate an increasing willingness by the federal government to acknowledge the billions of dollars in annual economic activity generated by an industry that it continues to largely prohibit. The new state tax revenue data used to build the report “result from a complete canvass of all state government agencies,” the bureau said in a methodology note. While it refers to the revenue as “quarterly cannabis excise sales tax collections,” it also says that “taxes” are defined rather broadly. “For this dataset, the concept of ‘taxes’ is comprised of all compulsory contributions exacted by a government for public purposes,” it said. “Tax revenue is further defined to include related penalty and interest receipts of a government but to exclude protested amounts.” The bureau has two separate tax codes for marijuana revenue that it asks states to report, one for taxes on cannabis transactions and another for business license fees. The agency has said its own figures might not align perfectly with state-reported data “because the Census Bureau may be using a different definition of which organizations are covered by the term, ‘state government.’” The bureau’s definition, it explains, “refers not only to the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of a given state, but it also includes agencies, institutions, commissions, and public authorities.” Meanwhile, a separate economic analysis released this month by Vangst and Whitney Economics found that, for the first time since state recreational marijuana markets launched in 2014, the industry saw a year-over-year decline in national revenue from cannabis sales in 2025. The post New Federal Report Tracks Nearly $15 Billion In Marijuana Revenue Collected By States Over The Last Five Years appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

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

Many clients prefer Escorts in South Delhi because the companions are stylish, intelligent, and naturally charming. Their warm nature and graceful presence help create an enjoyable experience filled with comfort and relaxation.

I really like your take on the issue. I now have a clear idea on what this matter is all about.. walton airport taxi

Marijuana scholarship bill in Congress; AK cannabis record-sealing law takes effect; Study: Medical marijuana for pain; DEA hearing op-ed 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… Before you dig into today’s cannabis news, I wanted you to know you can keep this resource free and published daily by subscribing to Marijuana Moment on Patreon. We’re a small independent publication diving deep into the cannabis world and rely on readers like you to keep going. Join us at https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW Marijuana Moment sent a letter asking a Drug Enforcement Administration judge to reconsider his decision to not allow livestreaming of the hearing on federal cannabis rescheduling that begins next week—citing the judge’s own order that acknowledges that “national public interest in this issue predicates towards a policy of transparency.” Reps. Troy Carter (D-LA) and Dina Titus (D-NV) filed a new bill that would create a marijuana-focused scholarship program for students pursuing careers in cannabis while also funding research on the plant at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions. Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) allowed a criminal justice bill containing provisions to let people keep marijuana conviction records confidential to take effect without his signature. A new study from the Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management involving more than 6,000 chronic pain patients in the state’s medical marijuana program found that 55 percent “were able to improve their life enjoyment and pain interference in general activity within 4 months of starting medical cannabis.” “Medical cannabis patients report improvement in pain symptoms after four months.” Jason Ortiz of Last Prisoner Project argues in a new Marijuana Moment op-ed that the Drug Enforcement Administration’s upcoming federal cannabis rescheduling hearing includes the “wrong voices.” “A decision about whether to continue one of the most outdated and destructive drug policies in American history should not exclude the people and advocates most directly affected by it.” The Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission gave approval for a business to start growing the state’s first legal medical marijuana plants and separately voted to begin accepting applications for product manufacturers. / FEDERAL A former U.S. Agency for International Development official authored an op-ed criticizing the Trump administration’s “drug war” tactics. Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME) sent a letter urging Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins to expand the Great American Cotton Plan by including hemp and other fibers. / STATES Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mandela Barnes tweeted, “When I’m governor, we’re going to legalize marijuana.” A Connecticut representative reacted to accusations of him having a conflict of interest on cannabis policy. Colorado regulators published guidance about unified marijuana business license applications. Massachusetts regulators sent an update on four internal working groups’ progress toward implementing rules for marijuana social consumption businesses. Rhode Island regulators issued a final medical cannabis business license. Michigan regulators are conducting a survey on cannabis product recalls. California regulators sent updates about various cannabis issues. The U.S. Virgin Islands Cannabis Advisory Board will meet on Thursday. Vermont regulators will host a budtender training on Thursday. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study found that adoption of recreational marijuana legalization “may help to reduce the size of illegal cannabis markets, or there may be shifting law enforcement seizure priorities in those states.” A review concluded that “both naturalistic and therapeutic use [of psychedelics] mitigate the effects of racial trauma.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The Cannabis Council of Canada is suspending its active operations. / BUSINESS Curaleaf Holdings, Inc. shareholders approved several proposals. / CULTURE Seth Rogen discussed his role in normalizing cannabis use. Make sure to subscribe to get Marijuana Moment’s daily dispatch in your inbox. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: The post DEA judge pressed to allow cannabis hearing livestream access (Newsletter: June 24, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

I have read your article, it is very informative and helpful for me.I admire the valuable information you offer in your articles. Thanks for posting it.. minicab airport walton near me

Thanks for a wonderful share. Your article has proved your hard work and experience you have got in this field. Brilliant .i love it reading. rail taxi walton near me

If you are a man of distinction and visiting Karol bagh district in Delhi for the first time, you must be looking for the best adult entertainment. We're here to make that happen. Our Escort Service in Karol Bagh are known for their beauty, charm, and their art of entertaining men. Our sexy call girls will bewitch you with their voluptuous figure and captivating presence. Whether it's college kids or celebrity, our offerings are catered to all tastes and preferences. Savor luxury without the hassles and with no price tag!

Marijuana Moment is asking a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) judge to reconsider his decision to prohibit livestraming of a hearing on the Trump administration’s cannabis rescheduling proposal that is scheduled to begin next week and that features only opponents of the reform as invited participants. Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julis last week issued a preliminary order laying out rules and timelines for the marijuana rescheduling proceedings—simultaneously recognizing that “national public interest in this issue predicates towards a policy of transparency” while also determining that “the hearing will not be televised, livestreamed, or broadcasted in any way.” As a result, people who wish to observe the historic cannabis reform process must attend in person in Arlington, Virginia under the judge’s order. In a letter sent to Julius on Tuesday, Marijuana Moment counsel Joseph Bondy noted that DEA permitted livestreaming of an earlier, subsequently cancelled hearing process on the proposal to move cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III that took place during the Biden administration. “That prior determination was correct. The public-interest rationale for contemporaneous access has not diminished,” Bondy wrote. “If DEA believes safety, witness-management, or operational concerns now require a more restrictive access regime, those concerns should be identified and addressed through narrow conditions rather than a categorical ban.” “Limited physical seating in Arlington is not a meaningful substitute for livestreaming. Marijuana Moment, like many members of the press and public who follow federal cannabis policy nationally, cannot rely on a handful of available seats as a practical means of observing and reporting on the hearing. That is precisely why DEA’s prior livestreaming directive mattered: it allowed those physically outside the courtroom to observe the proceeding without disrupting the hearing, burdening security, or conferring party status on anyone.” “In a proceeding of this public significance, and in light of DEA’s prior livestreaming directive, a public hearing is not meaningfully public if access depends on the happenstance of limited physical attendance,” Marijuana Moment’s attorney wrote to the DEA judge. “Delayed access to transcripts is no substitute for contemporaneous observation. The press reports events as they unfold. The public evaluates government action in real time. And in a proceeding of this magnitude, transparency is not a courtesy. It is a safeguard.” “For a substantial public audience seeking serious coverage of federal cannabis policy, Marijuana Moment is an important channel through which public understanding of this proceeding occurs.” The letter makes clear that Marijuana Moment “does not seek to participate as a party, present evidence, examine witnesses, submit proposed findings, or alter the merits schedule” and “seeks only contemporaneous public and press access to an administrative hearing of recognized national public interest.” Bondy requested a response from Julius by Thursday. — Marijuana Moment’s journalism is made possible by readers like you who value this work enough to support us with monthly pledges on Patreon. If you rely on our reporting to stay informed about key cannabis developments, please help us keep doing this by becoming a sustaining subscriber today. Backing us at the $25/month level also gets you access to our Bill Tracker so you won’t miss any important marijuana legislation in your state. — Meanwhile, the attorney is also representing a major cannabis reform organization that is asking DEA to reconsider the decision to exclude it from participating in the hearing as an interested party. The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), which represents the interests of people who use cannabis, filed the “emergency request for reconsideration” on Friday through Bondy, saying that the “public interest will be substantially harmed if the record omits the consumer perspective.” DEA last week announced that it had selected participants for the marijuana rescheduling hearing—and only opponents of the reform have been invited to take part, some of whom have filed litigation in an attempt to block the reform. No reform supporters who expressed intent to participate were invited. “NORML’s exclusion, if not corrected immediately, will deprive NORML and the cannabis consumers it represents of meaningful participation in prehearing procedures, witness presentation, exhibit designation, cross-examination, legal briefing, and any other proceedings necessary to compile a complete record,”Bondy, who serves as chair of NORML’s board of directors, wrote to DEA Administrator Terrance Cole. “The prejudice is immediate. It cannot be cured after the hearing closes.” According to several rejection letters Marijuana Moment has seen from cannabis reform supporters, DEA said they do not meet the definition of an “interested person” to participate because they are not “adversely affected or aggrieved by any rule or proposed rule issuable.” NORML said in its request for reconsideration, however, that “DEA’s denial rests on a mistaken premise: that NORML is not adversely affected or aggrieved by the proposed rule because NORML supports removing marijuana from schedule I and recognizes that schedule III is preferable to schedule I.” “That is not NORML’s position. NORML supports removal from schedule I. But NORML does not concede that schedule III is the correct final federal treatment for marijuana,” Bondy wrote. “NORML’s position is that marijuana should be removed from the CSA schedules and regulated under a cannabis-specific federal framework directed to public health, consumer safety, product integrity, youth prevention, truthful labeling, testing, research access, impaired-driving policy, anti-diversion, state-regulated market realities, and illicit-market displacement.” The attorney wrote that the injury from Schedule III status for marijuana is “not mere ideological disappointment.” “NORML’s members would remain subject to federal controlled-substance status and the legal consequences that flow from it. Adult-use consumers who lawfully participate in state-regulated markets would remain outside coherent federal recognition,” Bondy said. “Schedule III would preserve federal illegality for cannabis activity outside federally authorized medical, research, or registrant channels. It would continue federal-state conflict, public confusion, stigma, collateral consequences, and consumer-safety harms.” The hearing will begin on June 29 and is set to conclude no later than July 15. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in April issued an order that immediately reclassified state-licensed medical cannabis, as well as marijuana products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III. Under a separate order the acting attorney general signed, the upcoming hearing will consider more comprehensively moving marijuana to Schedule III. In order to be considered for participation in the hearing, parties needed to file requests articulating their interest in the proceeding, the objections or issues they wish to be heard on and their position on those issues. “The purpose of the hearing is to ‘receiv[e] factual evidence and expert opinion regarding’ whether marijuana should be transferred to schedule III of the list of controlled substances,” Blanche’s initial notice, filed in April, said. The attorney general also selected an administrative law judge (ALJ) to oversee the proceedings. “The ALJ’s authorities include the power to hold conferences to simplify or determine the issues in the hearing or to consider other matters that may aid in the expeditious disposition of the hearing; require parties to state their position in writing; sign and issue subpoenas to compel the production of documents and materials to the extent necessary to conduct the hearing; examine witnesses and direct witnesses to testify; receive, rule on, exclude, or limit evidence; rule on procedural items; and take any action permitted by the presiding officer under DEA’s hearing procedures and the” Administrative Procedures Act, Blanche wrote. A prior hearing process on the marijuana rescheduling process that was initiated by the Biden administration stalled last year amid litigation over alleged improper communications and witness selection. The current marijuana rescheduling process is being challenged with several lawsuits that have been consolidated by a federal appeals court. Those pieces of litigation against the cannabis reform have been filed by state attorneys general, marijuana legalization opponents and a cannabis-focused biopharmaceutical corporation. Meanwhile, the already-enacted rescheduling of state-licensed medical cannabis is already having broad impacts. The Congressional Research Service published a report on the current cannabis rescheduling move explaining that certified patients who possess medical marijuana from state-licensed dispensaries now have certain protections under Schedule III. “The order appears to authorize end users to possess marijuana for medical use without a CSA-compliant prescription,” it says. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has posted a draft update to a gun purchase form to acknowledge the federally legal status of medical marijuana under rescheduling. The revised section in question notably says that only “use or possession of marijuana for recreational purposes” is federally prohibited, leaving out the prior form’s mention of medical cannabis. The U.S. Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) said they plan to issue new tax guidance for the marijuana industry following rescheduling. The reform will benefit state-licensed marijuana businesses by allowing them to take federal tax deductions they’re currently barred from under an IRS code known as 280E that doesn’t apply to Schedule III substances. Even DEA, which has long opposed cannabis legalization and was accused of stalling the rescheduling process initiative by the Biden administration, has launched a registration process for state-legal marijuana businesses to take advantage of federal benefits that come with the reform. The Department of Transportation, on the other hand, issued guidance saying that use of state-legal medical cannabis is still no excuse for a positive drug test by truck drivers, pilots and other safety-sensitive workers. A congressional committee recently voted to block federal officials from taking further steps to carry out cannabis rescheduling. Read the letter to the DEA judge from Marijuana Moment’s attorney below: The post Marijuana Moment Asks DEA Judge To Allow Livestreaming Of Rescheduling Hearing For Transparent Public Access appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Medical marijuana is associated with significant improvements in life enjoyment, general activity and physical wellbeing among Minnesota chronic pain patients, according to a new study from researchers at the state’s Office of Cannabis Management (OCM). The peer-reviewed study, published in the journal Clinical Therapeutics, analyzed data from more than 6,000 chronic pain patients in Minnesota’s medical marijuana program from March 2022 to February 2023. It represents a more narrowly tailored review of medical cannabis patient outcomes that OCM published in a broader report last year. Researchers at OCM’s Division of Data and Analytics specifically looked at chronic pain patients who reported participating in the cannabis program for at least eight months, assessing the impact of medical marijuana use based on their on pain, enjoyment of life and general activity, or PEG, score. The latest study iteration also features novel data on product preferences among the pain patient cohort. “Medical cannabis patients report improvement in pain symptoms after four months.” “Patients in the Minnesota Medical Cannabis Program report decreased interference to life enjoyment and general activity from pain symptoms 4 months after starting medical cannabis,” the study found. Specifically, among pain patients with moderate-to-severe PEG scores at the time of enrolling in the cannabis program, 55 percent reported an improvement in life enjoyment of at least 30 percent within four months of their first purchase. Another 55 percent reported improvements to general activity interference and 41 percent said their pain scores improved. What stands out about the study isn’t just that symptoms of pain meaningfully improved within four months of medical cannabis use for patients with the intractable condition; it’s also that, even with pain persisting to some extent, marijuana made life more enjoyable and restored patients’ general functionality. As far as product-specific preferences are concerned, the study authors said high THC:CBD products “were the most commonly purchased in all medical cannabis product categories.” Flower was the most popular product type, followed by vapes and edibles. However, after adjusting for the number of cannabis transactions among patients, the study determined that “there was no significant difference in reduction of PEG scores between purchasing profiles.” “Future research on medical cannabis should determine the frequency of use of different products and administration methods to further investigate how cannabis can be used for effective pain management in patients with chronic pain,” it found. — 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 top-level report from OCM that regulators released last year also showed that nearly a quarter of patients who were taking other pain relievers reduced the use of those drugs after using medical marijuana. That’s consistent with a growing body of scientific literature that supported the idea of a substitution effect with marijuana and painkillers, as well as other common pharmaceutical drugs. Meanwhile, separate state data out of Minnesota that was released in April indicates that, despite concerns from legalization opponents who claimed the policy would lead to skyrocketing use by teens, cannabis consumption by middle and high school students in the state is lower now than it has ever been over the past decade. Photo courtesy of Max Pixel. The post Medical Marijuana Significantly Improves Life Enjoyment Among Pain Patients, Study From Minnesota State Officials Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A newly enacted Alaska law will shield people’s marijuana conviction records from being publicly released in certain circumstances. The cannabis provisions are included in a large package of criminal justice legislation that Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) allowed to become law without his signature on Thursday. Last month, the measure, HB 239, cleared the Senate in a 20-0 vote and was approved by the House of Representatives 39-1. The new law will make it so people who were convicted of possessing less than an ounce of marijuana while over 21 years of age at the time of the offense can request that their records not be released. The protections only apply to people who were not convicted of any other criminal charges in the relevant case. The requirement for someone to proactively request that their records not be released in order for them to remain sealed will be sunsetted on January 1, 2028. The cannabis reform that is now part of the omnibus criminal justice legislation enacted into law was initially introduced as a standalone bill, HB 81 from Rep. David Nelson (R). “In 2014, the state of Alaska voted to legalize the cultivation, sale, and recreational use of marijuana for adults. Despite this change in state law, some Alaskans remain blocked from employment, housing, volunteering, licensing, and other opportunities,” Nelson said in a sponsor statement about the bill. “Hardworking Alaskans could automatically be denied a chance because of previous low level marijuana convictions and employers are potentially deprived of skilled labor in an increasingly dwindling labor market.” “The State cannot afford to pass on skilled labor simply because low level misdemeanors are hindering some Alaskans from pursuing those positions or from finding housing closer to better opportunities,” he said. “This bill will help individuals keep portions of their record confidential while still allowing government agencies access for background and statistical information. Hardworking Alaskans must be given a chance to find redemption for small mistakes and be given the opportunity to make an economic impact like any other citizen.” — 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. — Separately in Alaska, a government task force recommended earlier this year that the state move forward with plans to provide regulated access to psychedelics if the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorizes the medical use of substances like psilocybin and MDMA. An activist campaign, meanwhile, announced in December that it failed to collect enough signatures to put an initiative to legalize certain psychedelics such as psilocybin and DMT on the state’s 2026 ballot—but activists emphasized that the “work is far from over” as they shift focus to placing the reform measure before voters in 2028. The post Alaska Bill To Let People Seal Their Marijuana Convictions Becomes Law Without Governor’s Signature appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Every day that goes by, we’re losing time and availability.” By Zach Wendling, Nebraska Examiner The Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission cleared the way Monday for the first state-licensed cultivator to put marijuana plants in the ground, while another is taking steps to fight a local zoning decision. The four-member commission voted unanimously to ratify the successful inspection of MahāMotā Cultivation Company in Raymond. This paves the way for the first legal marijuana plants in the state to take root. The commission began meeting last June, and starting Wednesday, the commission will begin accepting applications for product manufacturers. The commission can license four product manufacturers, under agency regulations, which also allow licensing of up to 12 transporters and up to 12 dispensaries. ‘We’re losing time’ Meanwhile, former State Sen. Kent Rogert, a registered lobbyist and sole owner of another licensed cultivator group, KRL Med LLC, said Monday that his company has been stopped in its tracks over a reversal from the Washington County planning and zoning administrator. Rogert said commission staff had been set to inspect the property on May 26, but days before, the county administrator said KRL Med could not use a recommended agricultural exemption to grow marijuana. Hemp, Rogert was told, would qualify, but not marijuana. “Every day that goes by, we’re losing time and availability,” Rogert told commissioners Monday. The former lawmaker said the Washington County rules are “very, very broad, and we definitely fit within that,” but his company is complying with and appealing a stop-work order that also prevents Rogert and his team from going on the property or finishing a greenhouse. Rogert said his group has reached out to the Washington County attorney, but has not heard back. Last year, as state lawmakers considered a broad medical cannabis regulatory bill backed by supporters of the 2024 ballot measure, Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R) united dozens of sheriffs and law enforcement organizations in opposition. The Washington County sheriff was one such opponent. Upon questioning from commissioners about whether Rogert’s company could grow this year, Rogert said the “days are ticking away pretty fast,” but, if resolved soon, he’s “cautiously optimistic that we can get something done.” Commissioner J. Michael Coffey of Omaha, a retired district judge, asked whether Rogert would pursue litigation. Rogert said he will go through the local appeal first, outside the courts. Commissioner Lorelle Mueting, interim commission chair, offered to help however Rogert needs, and commissioners voted 4-0 to renew KRL Med LLC’s license for six more months, a sign they are at least OK with Rogert trying to move forward. Two other cultivators Another cultivator, Meadowlark Medicinals, delayed its inspection. Mueting did not give a reason why but said when the cultivator is ready, an inspection can be rescheduled. Commissioners on Monday also approved the request of the fourth and final licensed cultivator, Midwest Cultivator Group, to relocate from Omaha to Gretna. The group also faced changing zoning requirements in Omaha, but a leader of the company, Robert Wagner, said Gretna leaders already approved a requested conditional-use permit for the organization. Wagner said while the company is monitoring the movement of other license types, they will be ready to move forward with a “minimal viable product” when possible and after clearing inspection. Product manufacturer applications Commissioner Jim Elworth of Nebraska City made a successful motion, 3-1, to open up applications for product manufacturers beginning Wednesday. The plan is to solicit applications over the next four weeks and, once the commission can assess application fees, ask applicants to submit the payment and comply with any updated regulations at that time. Elworth said the Legislature appropriating funds for the commission’s work influenced his decision to move ahead, rather than wait for pending regulations to be approved first. “I’m just very concerned about waiting that much longer,” Elworth said. Mueting, the no vote, expressed concern that not accepting application fees would make Nebraska an outlier nationwide for another round of applicants. She was also concerned the application time frame was longer than the previous 19-day period for cultivators last fall. However, Commissioner Bud Synhorst of Lincoln agreed to Elworth’s plan with the idea that applicants could amend their application—or back out—later. Elworth said he will work with commission staff so applicants understand that fees will be charged and that there might be other changes later, such as a willingness to take on transportation duties and amend the planned license type. “Let’s get them in hand so we can deal with them as fairly as possible,” Elworth said. The commission’s next scheduled meeting is 1 p.m. July 20, which would be five days after the current set of temporary regulations expires. The regulations can be extended for 90 days. Regulations await sign off Commissioners in April voted unanimously to advance a formal set of regulations to Hilgers for his signature. Hilgers, who opposes medical marijuana, has not yet signed, but if he does, Gov. Jim Pillen (R) would also need to sign off for the regulations to take effect without an end date. After that, commissioners hope to amend the regulations once again to add application fees, as authorized by the Legislature this spring. Hilgers’s office did not respond to a reporter’s question Monday on the status of the regulations, which were sent to him in mid-April. The issue of medical cannabis is also shaping up to be a hot-button issue for 2026 elections, with Hilgers’s general election opponent, Democrat Jocelyn Brasher, a former assistant attorney general, attending Monday’s meeting to see the commission’s work for the first time. “Today’s meeting made one thing clear: That people and patients in Nebraska deserve more than delay, confusion and dysfunction currently happening under Attorney General Mike Hilgers,” Brasher said after the meeting. “As attorney general, I will uphold the will of the people and respect Nebraska voters on medical cannabis.” Asked about the possible hiccup, should Hilgers not sign in time, Mueting told reporters after the meeting: “We anticipate final regulations to be done by then.” Other agency business In other agency action: The commission will end its agreement with the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission this Friday that had allowed the sharing of office space and staff on a limited basis for almost a year. The overlapping structure largely existed because three of the four commissioners—all but Mueting—also serve on the Liquor Control Commission. The commission will seek permanent office space for dedicated staff and pursue changes to a lease agreement to permanently use a hearing room in downtown Lincoln. A job posting for a commission executive director, with a hiring salary of $100,000, is now public. The commission hired legal counsel. The commission had previously received legal help from the chief legal officer of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, an agency that has long opposed medical cannabis, and, recently, an attorney from the AG’s Office. Commissioners in April said the move was about optics and a possible appearance of “impropriety,” not a judgment on past legal help. This story was first published by Nebraska Examiner. Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images. The post Nebraska Officials Approve Start Of Medical Cannabis Cultivation appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Superior Place, My organization is a great believer during ad opinions regarding online websites that will let the webpage novelists recognize that they’ve put in an item worthwhile that will the online market place! toto togel In fact My partner and i examine that last night yet I needed several feelings regarding it and after this I desired to learn that once more due to the fact it is extremely well written. bandar togel

You may be permitted to blog post details, though not back-links, with regard to they are really sanctioned and even at area. situs toto Surprise! The things a watch opener this approach content is actually in my position. A whole lot highly valued, book marked, Document can’t anticipate a great deal more! hargatoto togel

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with extra information? It is extremely helpful for me. pilarhoki

A very awesome blog post. We are really grateful for your blog post. You will find a lot of approaches after visiting your post. pilarhoki slot

“A decision about whether to continue one of the most outdated and destructive drug policies in American history should not exclude the people and advocates most directly affected by it.” By Jason Ortiz, Last Prisoner Project The federal government has finally admitted what millions of people have known for decades: cannabis never belonged in Schedule I. But it’s listening to the wrong voices in deciding how to carry out the process. Schedule I is supposed to be reserved for substances with no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. By moving cannabis products produced within state-regulated medical cannabis programs to Schedule III, the government has acknowledged that cannabis has medical value. That admission may be limited, but it cuts through the central justification for keeping cannabis in Schedule I at all. If cannabis no longer fits that category, the criminal penalties tied to its Schedule I status must change too. I have walked the halls of Congress with people who served years, and in some cases decades, for cannabis offenses while legal cannabis businesses opened across the country. I have heard from veterans and patients who fear that using cannabis for pain, trauma or chronic illness could put their freedom at risk. That’s why Last Prisoner Project is petitioning the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to participate in its upcoming hearing on the proposed cannabis rescheduling rule. But the DEA denied our application, along with applications from every other pro-legalization advocacy group in the country. As a result, the only outside voices allowed into the process are organizations that support continued criminalization and the incarceration of people for cannabis offenses. A decision about whether to continue one of the most outdated and destructive drug policies in American history should not exclude the people and advocates most directly affected by it. For any serious federal cannabis reform to be successful and impactful, it must include addressing the damage done to the people who have been incarcerated, supervised, deported, denied opportunity or denied medical access because of prohibition. At Last Prisoner Project, those are the people we work with every day: people coming home after years behind bars, people living with criminal records and families still waiting for relief. Over the last six years, we have helped dismiss, modify or clear more than 250,000 sentences, supported 24 presidential pardons, helped pass 10 bills and worked in 24 states. Alongside our pro bono partners, we have supported thousands of hours of legal work and distributed millions in reentry assistance to people trying to rebuild their lives after cannabis incarceration. But our work is far from finished. One of our constituents, Michael Pelletier, shows what federal prohibition still means in real life. Michael was paralyzed as a teenager after a farm accident and later used marijuana to manage severe pain. In 2006, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole for importing marijuana from Canada. President Trump commuted his sentence in 2021, but Michael still faces the cruelty of federal prohibition. Because marijuana remains federally controlled, he cannot freely use medical cannabis for chronic pain without risking the terms of his supervision. What public safety purpose does that serve? Michael has already lost years of his life to cannabis criminalization. He should not have to choose between pain relief and his freedom. Neither should anyone else. It is time for the federal government to remove cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act entirely, expand clemency and resentencing, clear records, support people coming home and end supervision rules that force patients to choose between medical cannabis and their freedom. As the nation’s cannabis community watches these historic hearings unfold, the question before the country is bigger than whether cannabis belongs in Schedule I or Schedule III. The real question is whether our laws will finally reflect the truth that cannabis prohibition has failed, and the people harmed by that failure deserve relief now. Jason Ortiz is the director of strategic initiatives for Last Prisoner Project, the leading national nonprofit working to free people incarcerated for nonviolent cannabis offenses and repair the harms of criminalization. The post DEA’s Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing Includes The Wrong Voices (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Thank you a bunch for sharing this with all of us you actually realize what you are talking about! Bookmarked. Please also seek advice from my site =). We could have a hyperlink change contract between us! 강남달리는토끼

Two Democratic members of Congress have filed a new bill aimed at supporting marijuana-focused research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs). The Establishing and Developing University Cannabis Agriculture Techniques and Excellence (EDUCATE) Act of 2026, filed last week by Reps. Troy Carter (D-LA) and Dina Titus (D-NV), would award grants to fund cannabis research while also creating a new scholarship program to support students who are pursuing careers in marijuana or hemp. Under the legislation, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) would award grants on a competitive basis to support research on the cultivation and processing of marijuana, including studies focusing on: The optimization of cultivation and harvesting practices for marijuana crops. The examination of soil health, water conservation, pest management, and sustainability impacts of marijuana agriculture. The evaluation of economic development opportunities for minority and disadvantaged farmers in emerging marijuana markets. Workforce development, training, and extension activities related to marijuana agriculture. The bill would authorize the allocation of $5 million a year to fund such research grants from fiscal years 2026 through 2030, with at least 25 percent earmarked for HSIs, and there would be a requirement to give priority to institutions that have partnerships with minority and small-scale farmers or community-based agricultural organizations. The EDUCATE Act also seeks to create a new Marijuana Agriculture Studies Scholarship Program that would award grants of up to $10,000 per year to undergraduate or graduate students at HBCUs and HSIs who are studying food and agricultural sciences and are intending to pursue “a career in marijuana or hemp agriculture, marijuana cultivation, plant science, agricultural technology, agricultural science, or agricultural policy.” — 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 legislation authorizes USDA to spend up to $100,000 on the scholarships per year for fiscal years 2026 through 2030. The department would need to submit annual reports to Congress on the grants awarded, the studies they funded and participation in the scholarship program. The bill also contains provisions to clarify that institutions of higher education and individuals awarded funding under the new program could not be denied federal benefits or subject to prosecution or civil penalties due to marijuana-related activities in accordance with the legislation. “The legal, responsible use of cannabis has been a major economic driver in Nevada and across the country and deserves further research,” Titus said. “The EDUCATE Act would enable students to explore and study jobs in the cultivation, research, business, and policy sectors of the legal marijuana market by providing federal funding to institutions of higher education.” Read the full text of the new marijuana research and scholarship bill below: The post Feds Would Create Marijuana-Focused Scholarship Program For Students Under New Bill In Congress appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

What a fantabulous post this has been. Never seen this kind of useful post. I am grateful to you and expect more number of posts like these. Thank you very much. M88

Positive site, where did u come up with the information on this posting? I'm pleased I discovered it though, ill be checking back soon to find out what additional posts you include. 강남달리는토끼

It is my first visit to your blog, and I am very impressed with the articles that you serve. Give adequate knowledge for me. Thank you for sharing useful material. I will be back for the more great post. dax69 alternatif