All Activity

Thanks for Your article..it gives us immense knowledge.Body massage gives you ultimate relief to your body.i would like to recommend each and everyone go for massage once in a week for ultimate relief. it will not only gives you relief but also increse your productivity. Bangalore call girl

So i'm certainly very happy acquire this url and even made like analyzing invaluable articles and reviews released these. That options belonging to the novelist is remarkable, bless you in the have. jokispin login

“There are products that have not been subject to the same rigorous testing that the medical marijuana requires.” By Stewart Yerton, Honolulu Civil Beat It happens all the time now at Oʻahu Dispensary and Provisions in Waikīkī: A prospective customer like Blake Birdwell comes looking for a pre-rolled hemp cigarette or hemp-based edible, only to find the kiosk’s shelves are empty of such goods—by recent order of the Hawaiʻi Department of Health. “It’s really shitty,” Birdwell said on a recent afternoon after making the rounds at other shops like Natural Mystic, Vape Hawaiʻi and Hawaiʻi’s Cheapest. “They’re all telling me, ‘No.’” It’s a new reality for people like Birdwell who until recently were able to purchase a range of THC products without a medical marijuana card at dozens of shops across ​​the state—often at a lower price than the products for sale at Hawaiʻi’s officially licensed medical marijuana dispensaries. The state has now cracked down on sellers of hemp-based products that had been operating under a loophole in federal law, and that’s set up a battle in which Oʻahu Dispensary and Provisions’ owner, Lance Alyas, has asked a federal judge to stop the crackdown. The suit, which alleges the state has improperly recriminalized federally legal hemp, has gained national attention in legal news reports. The free-market libertarian magazine Reason, which generally opposes government-regulated monopolies, has also weighed in. It’s the latest iteration of an ongoing struggle to regulate cannabis in Hawaiʻi, which has become widely available for adults to use recreationally in two dozen states. It’s also a matter of life and death for Alyas’ business, he says, which operates four locations on Oʻahu. “We have 20 people at risk of losing their jobs,” he said. Booming Market For Low-THC Hemp Products Hemp is the same plant species as cannabis sativa—or marijuana—which is a federally controlled substance, though hemp has been historically grown for non-intoxicating uses and contains lower levels of tetrahydrocannabinol or THC. Congress’s 2018 Farm Bill made hemp legal as long as the plants contained no more than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC, the ingredient that gets people high, by weight. That led to a national flood of products—including gummy candies, vapes, drinks and pre-rolled cigarettes—containing THC derived from federally legal hemp. In 2020, the Hawaiʻi Legislature passed a law making it legal to grow hemp, but not to produce or sell hemp-based THC products. Such products proliferated legally on the continent, however, thanks to the 2018 farm bill. By 2024, the hemp-based cannabinoid market had grown to $3.5 billion and was expected to reach $4.4 billion by 2029, the Brightfield Group, a consumer goods research firm reported. Others, such as Portland-based market researcher Beau Whitney, estimate the market now is actually closer to $30 billion to $44 billion, thanks in part to THC beverages. Adult beverages containing THC derived from hemp have become so popular and ubiquitous that even Target has begun selling the drinks in hundreds of stores in four states. Until recently, Hawaiʻi residents could order drinks online, shipped to their door, from brands with names like Willie’s Remedy+, produced by the singer Willie Nelson. The challenge for Hawaiʻi regulators has been how to deal with such products, which are legal under federal law, coming into the state, where they weren’t supposed to be sold. ‘Premier Pakalolo Provider’ Lobbied For Change Noa Botanicals is one of Hawaiʻi’s eight licensed medical marijuana dispensaries not subject to the crackdown. Although technically a maker and distributor of medication people can buy only with a doctor’s approval, Noa Botanicals’s marketing looks more like that of a lifestyle brand—not a medical product for patients seeking pain medication. Its Instagram page, for instance, calls itself “Hawaii’s Premier Pakalolo Provider” and carries the slogan “Find your Hawaiʻi High.” A recent post shows greenhouse workers posing with big marijuana plants above the text “Bud Huntaz out here baggin’ da real trophies.” Other posts feature local music artists HIRIE and Sierra Lucia. Starting in late 2024, Noa Botanicals’s chief executive, Karlyn Laulusa, began lobbying House Consumer Protection and Commerce Committee Chair Scot Matayoshi (D) and other lawmakers about unlicensed retailers selling hemp-based THC products. The crux of the problem, as Laulusa described it in emails to lawmakers, was that the licensed, highly regulated dispensaries were losing business to unregulated retailers selling hemp-derived products that were illegal in Hawaiʻi. The number of unlicensed retailers had boomed from 10 on Oʻahu in 2024 to 74 by early 2025, she wrote, and were taking over the market. Lualusa cited a market analysis from the Department of Health estimating that out of a total annual market of $198 million to $360 million, only $60 million was going to licensed dispensaries. The rest—$138 million to $300 million annually—was going to the unregulated market. While all of this was happening, buyers were dropping out of the official medical marijuana program. In December 2021, there were 34,125 Hawaiʻi residents with a medical marijuana card, according to the Hawaiʻi Department of Health. DOH’s most recently available report, from the end of last year, shows 28,735 people had cards—a 16 percent decline. Meanwhile, Laulusa told lawmakers that the Department of Health’s Office of Medical Cannabis Control and Regulation had authority over only the regulated dispensaries. The regulators couldn’t do anything about the unregulated ones. The result of Laulusa’s lobbying efforts was Act 269 of 2025, which was supported by the Honolulu Police Department and the prosecutor’s office, as well as two other licensed dispensaries, Aloha Green Apothecary and Cure Oahu. The law, combined with interim administrative rules, gave the health department the ability to require all sellers to register with the agency and open their stores to inspection by cannabis control agents who could tell the retailers what products they needed to remove from their shelves. As Andrew Goff, chief of DOH’s Office of Medical Cannabis Control and Regulation, describes it, ACT 269 and administrative rules gives the office the ability to enforce existing law. The registration requirement enables the office to know what retailers are selling cannabis products, so the office can let the retailers know what products are allowed and what are not. Alyas, who obtained the correspondence between Noa Botanicals’s Laulusa and Matayoshi through a public records request, questioned whether lawmakers should be working so closely with industry executives to shape a new law. Laulusa did not respond to requests for comment. Matayoshi said it’s part of his job to communicate with industries the state closely regulates and solve problems. Not talking to the regulated industry, he said, would be failing to do due diligence. “If we’re going to be regulating doctors,” he said, for example, “I think we should be talking to doctors.” In any case, DOH began enforcing the rules in July, which has led to the situation where people like Birdwell can’t get pre-rolled hemp reefers from places like Oʻahu Dispensary and Provisions. As president of the Drug Policy Forum of Hawaiʻi, Nikos Leverenz generally supports legalization and regulation of adult-use cannabis. Although he testified against Act 269, Leverenz did say DOH’s enforcement rules can provide a useful framework for regulating sales of cannabis sold to adults—if policymakers legalized such sales outside of medical marijuana dispensaries. “The DOH has the authority to do what it’s doing now, but I don’t think it’s in the best interest of consumers,” he said. “And it’s certainly not in the interest of businesses outside of the licensed cannabis dispensaries.” Economic Protectionism Or Consumer Protection? This echoes one of Alyas’s main complaints: that policymakers are favoring the licensed dispensaries over anyone else, engaging in economic protectionism of a medical cannabis dispensary industry that’s had the benefit of a government-imposed oligopoly for a decade. When the Legislature established the medical dispensary program in 2015, it limited the number of licenses to eight, with each licensee permitted to operate two retail dispensaries. Over time the Legislature increased the number of dispensaries a licensee can run to four if the licensee can show the location is needed to serve a rural or underserved population. Alyas questions why, if the market calls for more retail locations, policymakers haven’t simply granted more licenses, rather than letting the same eight businesses, which he calls “the Hateful Eight,” expand operations. More pointedly, Alyas questions the Department of Health’s 2025 decision to let Noa Botanicals open a new retail location on Royal Hawaiian Avenue under the statutory provision allowing new locations in rural or underserved areas, when there already were two competing licensed shops in Waikīkī. DOH said there was only one licensed dispensary at the time it approved Noa Botanicals’s request to open its Waikīkī location, and there are now a total of two in Waikīkī. The medical marijuana control office makes its determinations based on the licensee’s ability to serve and supply patients and an “assessment of the number of registered patients residing in the relevant area in relation to the capacity of the surrounding dispensary locations,” DOH said. Licensed dispensaries are subject to numerous regulations and are fundamentally different from hemp retail stores, the department said. Matayoshi, the House Consumer Protection and Commerce Committee chair, says regulation is not simply about protecting the network of dispensaries and affiliated production facilities the state has set up to produce and sell medical marijuana. It’s also about protecting consumers from untested, hemp-based THC products previously sold by unlicensed retailers. “There are products that have not been subject to the same rigorous testing that the medical marijuana requires,” he said. Matayoshi also took issue with the federal government’s carving out low-THC hemp from its schedule of controlled substances, which includes marijuana. “They try to draw a difference,” he said. “There’s not any. If hemp didn’t have the same effect people wouldn’t buy it.” Federal Loophole Set To Close Meanwhile, Alyas’s lawsuit remains alive in Honolulu federal court. Among other claims, Alyas argues that Hawaiʻi’s law violates the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause by criminalizing hemp that Congress legalized. It also challenges the state’s law under a constitutional doctrine known as the “dormant commerce clause,” which limits states’ ability to pass laws interfering with interstate commerce. Hawaiʻi Attorney General Anne Lopez’s (D) office has countered that the supremacy and dormant commerce clause arguments don’t apply and has asked the court to deny Alyas’s request for a court order preventing the state from enforcing the law. The issues concerning Hawaiʻi’s low-THC hemp law soon may be moot. In 2025, President Trump signed a bill that redefines hemp, effectively closing the loophole in the farm bill that allowed for the wave of hemp-based THC products to flood the market. The new measure was supposed to take effect in November, but the Senate passed a bill pushing the deadline back until December. Beau Whitney, the Portland-based hemp market researcher, has been following Congress’s movements closely. He said the new hemp definition threatens the whole industry and could have unintended consequences for industrial hemp. While some in Congress, including U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, have been pushing back, Whitney isn’t counting on those efforts to do anything, although he said, “There might be a diving catch.” This story was first published by Honolulu Civil Beat. Photo courtesy of Brian Shamblen. The post Hawaii Officials Defend Hemp Crackdown From Industry Lawsuit appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Cyberspace is without a doubt bogged downward through fake blogging and no realistic note nevertheless blog post is fabulous and even worthy that browse. Thanks for your time designed for writing it with me at night. camo wedding dress

That i taken aback when using the exploration everyone intended to get this to selected present astounding. Terrific process! togel macau

This is the details My business is locating everywhere you go. Appreciate it on your blog site, I just now signed up your site. That is a pleasant blog site. inch. bandar togel

Basically When i understand the item this morning although I did many thought processes concerning this and today I need to to learn to read the item all over again mainly because it is quite well written. toto slot

“The totality of the circumstances, including the odor of cannabis, provided law enforcement with probable cause to search.” By Carolina Journal The North Carolina Supreme Court has upheld a conviction in a Mecklenburg County case involving a defendant whose arrest was linked to authorities detecting cannabis odor. Friday’s unanimous decision in State v. Schiene marked the court’s third decision this year upholding arrests linked to cannabis odor. “This Court recently reaffirmed that ‘we continue to follow our precedents which require examination of the totality of the circumstances to determine whether probable cause exists’ and that ‘the odor of cannabis is one factor that may be considered’ as part of this examination,” wrote Justice Phil Berger Jr., referencing the high court’s May decisions in State v. Dobson and State v. Rowdy. “This Court has therefore already answered the single question on which review was allowed in this matter,” Berger added. “As further review of this resolved issue would be superfluous, we conclude that discretionary review was improvidently allowed.” When a court indicates that a review was “improvidently allowed,” it has decided that it never should have taken the case. The state Court of Appeals ruled unanimously in 2024 against defendant Codie Bruce Schiene. “The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion to suppress evidence seized from a vehicle pursuant to a warrantless search, reasoning that the totality of the circumstances, including the odor of cannabis, provided law enforcement with probable cause to search,” Berger explained. “To the extent the opinion of the Court of Appeals is consistent with Dobson and Rowdy, the opinion below remains undisturbed,” he concluded. Three court orders in July rejected requests from defense attorney Benjamin Kull. He had urged the high court to revisit the cases against his clients, Schiene and Tyron Lamont Dobson. Kull had argued in a June 16 court filing that the decision against Dobson “repeatedly violates the rule of law in order to allow the very type of ‘evil the [Fourth] Amendment was designed to prevent.’” Kull sought new oral arguments in Dobson’s case and a separate dispute involving Schiene. Kull presented the original arguments in both cases last September. During last September’s oral arguments, Kull produced a bag of what he said was legal cannabis. He argued that the cannabis would have the same odor as illegal marijuana. The state Supreme Court ruled unanimously on May 22 in State v. Dobson. The defendant argued that neither the cannabis odor alone nor the combination of cannabis and cologne justified a warrantless search in Greensboro in 2021 that led to criminal charges against him. “Because the odor of legal hemp and illegal marijuana are virtually identical, the question arises how that smell can factor into a law enforcement officer’s determination of when probable cause exists to conduct a warrantless search consistent with the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures,” Justice Anita Earls explained in her opinion. “Today we hold that under applicable federal Fourth Amendment doctrine, we continue to follow our precedents which require examination of the ‘totality of the circumstances’ to determine whether probable cause exists to conduct a warrantless search,” Earls wrote. “Below, the trial court determined that the totality of the circumstances justified the police search of Mr. Dobson’s vehicle and person,” Earls added. “The Court of Appeals affirmed that order, holding that the officers’ detection of a cover scent provided a basis to support probable cause for a search in addition to their detection of the odor of marijuana.” Dobson objected to the Appeals Court’s ruling and accused judges of applying “an unconstitutional ‘double odor’ rule” linking the marijuana odor and a cover scent, Earls explained. “The State argues that the ‘odor alone’ doctrine is good law; and in the alternative, that the Court of Appeals did not create a ‘double odor’ rule and other facts gave rise to probable cause. “We hold here that the smell of marijuana and the smell of a cover scent were not the only factors on which the officers relied in making their probable cause determination,” Earls wrote for the unanimous court. “Considering the totality of the circumstances, we hold that the officers’ search was objectively reasonable.” A unanimous state Supreme Court issued a related May 22 ruling in State v. Rowdy. That decision upheld the conviction of defendant Terrel Dewayne Rowdy based on a 2020 arrest in Forsyth County. Kull did not represent Rowdy. “This is a companion case to today’s decision in State v. Dobson, which reiterates that the odor of marijuana is a factor to be considered when analyzing the totality of the circumstances to determine whether an officer had probable cause to conduct a search,” wrote Justice Allison Riggs. “Terrel Rowdy was subject to two searches in connection with a traffic stop: a search of his person and a warrantless search of his automobile,” Riggs explained. “The searches were only proper if officers had reasonable suspicion to conduct the search of Mr. Rowdy’s person and probable cause to conduct the warrantless automobile search. The reasonable suspicion and probable cause analyses examine whether the totality of the circumstances, including the odor of marijuana, justifies a stop, search, or seizure.” “Under the totality of the circumstances, the search of Mr. Rowdy’s person was justified by his refusal to pull over for the traffic stop, his presence in a ‘high crime area,’ his prior convictions for narcotics and weapons offenses, the odor of marijuana, and his evasive behavior during questioning,” the opinion continued. “The warrantless search of his automobile was justified by the above factors and the additional discovery of what officers ‘believed to be a marijuana blunt’ during the search of his person.” “We hold that the search of Mr. Rowdy’s person met the reasonable suspicion standard and the warrantless search of his automobile met the probable cause standard, so the trial court did not err in denying his motion to suppress evidence,” Riggs wrote. When arguing for Dobson and Schiene last September, Kull cited the General Assembly’s 2018 decision to legalize smokable hemp. Police across North Carolina no longer have a way to distinguish between legal hemp and illegal marijuana, he said. “People of North Carolina through their elected legislative representatives have made a paradigm-shifting choice,” Kull argued. “They have created a legal form of cannabis in North Carolina.” State law allows people to buy and use hemp, Kull added. “The question for this court is whether you are going to impose a tax on that lawful behavior,” he argued. “Not a tax that people will be forced to pay with money, but a tax that people will be forced to pay with their constitutional rights.” Conditions have changed for law enforcement officers, Kull argued. “When the odor was always the odor of contraband, that odor was like Popeye’s spinach,” he said. “It immediately gave them a superpower — superpowers that they did not otherwise have.” Kull specifically targeted the state Appeals Court’s State v. Greenwood precedent from 1980. It allowed law enforcement officers to conduct warrantless vehicle searches based solely on cannabis odor. State Special Deputy Attorney General Zachary Dunn urged the high court in the Schiene case to preserve the odor rule. The Schiene arguments preceded those in the Dobson and Rowdy cases. “This case and the two that follow present one overarching question, which is whether the odor of marijuana—standing alone—provides probable cause for the search of a vehicle after the passage of the Industrial Hemp Act,” Dunn argued. “If the answer to that question is yes, this case, Dobson, and Rowdy all come out the same way. Probable cause existed, and the searches were proper.” U.S. Supreme Court precedent requires law enforcement officers to weigh the “totality of the circumstances” before proceeding with a warrantless vehicle search. The Greenwood case allowed North Carolina authorities to cite only the odor, Dunn explained. “The way it’s articulated is the odor of marijuana is the only circumstance in the totality of circumstances that mattered,” Dunn explained. “If you smell the odor of marijuana, then that is enough for probable cause.” This story was first published by Carolina Journal. Photo elements courtesy of rawpixel and Philip Steffan. The post North Carolina Police Can Search Based On Smell Of Cannabis, Supreme Court Rules appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

This sounds like such an interesting Q&A! I love how diverse Laganja Estranja's passions are, from drag to cannabis activism. It really makes me think about all the different people you can connect with out there, each with their own unique stories and perspectives. Sometimes, I find myself just wanting to chat with someone new and hear about their world. It’s a bit like how platforms like Omegle used to be – a place for those spontaneous, unscripted conversations that you wouldn't get anywhere else. It’s a great way to broaden your horizons and just have a bit of fun meeting different people.

States that enact marijuana legalization see jobs in the agriculture sector increase more than they would have without the policy change, according to a new economic analysis from researchers at Texas Tech University. The results, which were presented at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association’s 2026 meeting last month, found a 9 percent uptick in agriculture sector employment in states that legalized cannabis—though wages did not increase proportionately due to factors that researchers determined are likely unrelated. To investigate the relationship between marijuana legalization and industry-specific economic trends, analysts looked at state-level data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’s (BLS) Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages from 1990 to 2024. Applying a synthetic difference-in-difference (SDID) estimator, the researchers assessed “both aggregate and cohort-specific average treatment effects” on the target jurisdictions. “The policy effectively increased agricultural employment.” “Our baseline results indicate that legalization significantly increased agricultural employment by approximately 9 percent, while having no statistically significant effect on agricultural wages, all-industry employment, or economy-wide wages,” the study found. “The baseline SDID estimates indicate that the policy achieved its primary objective of expanding agricultural employment, with treated counties experiencing an approximately 9 percent increase in agricultural employment relative to the synthetic counterfactual. However, this employment expansion did not translate into measurable changes in agricultural wages, all-industry employment, or economy-wide wages.” Researchers said the “null wage response” to legalization, which seemed to be at odds with the “significant employment growth” they observed, likely isn’t related to the cannabis-specific policy factor. Rather, it’s “consistent with an elastic labor supply in the agricultural sector, where increased demand was absorbed through greater workforce participation rather than upward pressure on wages.” “Policymakers should consider adoption timing and local labor market conditions when designing similar interventions, as the effectiveness of the policy varies considerably across cohorts,” the study authors said. The cannabis sector is closely aligned with the agriculture industry, but legalization has had a wide range of economic impacts. For example, as of early 2026, direct jobs in the marijuana market reached about 412,500 U.S. workers, according to the U.S. Cannabis Jobs Report from Vangst and Whitney Economics Meanwhile, legalizing medical marijuana appears to be associated with reduced rates of employees missing work—particularly in trades like manufacturing and agriculture where workers are more likely to experience symptoms such as pain that cannabis can help treat—according to a recent study. Research published last year on marijuana legalization’s effect on workers’ compensation found that while the policy change was associated with a “gradual increase” in workers’ comp claims, the average cost per claim in fact fell after the policy change—as did patient use of prescription drugs, especially opioids and other painkillers. In 2021, a separate study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that adult-use cannabis legalization was associated with an increase in workforce productivity and decrease in workplace injuries. Those researchers looked at the impact of recreational cannabis legalization on workers’ compensation claims among older adults, observing declines in such filings “both in terms of the propensity to receive benefits and benefit amount” in states that have enacted the policy change. The post Marijuana Legalization Boosts Agriculture Jobs In States That Enact It, New Study Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Texas Democratic U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico is suggesting that his Republican opponent for the seat supports banning cannabis in order to aid his political donors in the alcohol and tobacco industries. “People are outraged across the state, and it’s not any one political party,” Talarico said of recently enacted state restrictions on hemp products in an interview with KTSM-TV. “It’s people across the spectrum.” The comments come as Texas regulators are moving to ban certain hemp-derived THC cannabis products, including those containing delta-8 and delta-10 THC. Now classified as Schedule I drugs under state law, possession is treated as a felony, carrying a punishment of 180 days to two years in prison and fines of up to $10,000. “Instead of getting it now from a local small business, Texans are now going to get it off the black market,” the Democrat, who currently serves as a state representative, said. “So this ban is a gift to the drug cartels.” Beyond aiding cartels, though, Talarico also believes making hemp products illegal while continuing to ban marijuana is a fiscal benefit for tobacco and alcohol companies—and he’s alleging that state Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), his opponent for the U.S. Senate seat, supports cannabis prohibition in order to benefit his campaign contributors in those industries. “It doesn’t make any sense until you follow the money and realize that it is big beer and big tobacco that are funding the politicians, like Ken Paxton, who turned around and banned these safe THC products in order to enrich the big beer and a big tobacco lobby,” Talarico said. Paxton did not reply to KTSM’s request for comment, the outlet reported. This isn’t the first time that Talarico has voiced support for cannabis reform or argued that prohibition of the plant benefits alcohol and tobacco companies. In an interview with The Breakfast Club last week, the Democratic candidate said that keeping marijuana illegal while also moving to restrict hemp THC products is an “insane” form of “corruption.” “Think about what industries are most worried about THC products being readily available: Big Beer, Big Tobacco, right? And so they were the ones pushing this THC ban because it hurts their bottom line,” he said. “And a lot of research shows that THC—cannabis—these products are safer and less addictive than than beer or tobacco.” “And so to me, this is a prime example of what corruption looks like when you’ve got big industries buying politicians and pushing bills that harm people, but benefit them financially,” Talarico said. The Senate candidate also noted that “a lot of young Texans, a lot of our veterans, they use THC products, for PTSD. Seniors use it.” The recently adopted Texas hemp product restrictions are being challenged with a federal lawsuit filed by hemp companies. A judge this week declined their request to impose a temporary restraining order on the THC crackdown while the overall litigation is considered. Paxton, for his part, filed lawsuits to block several Texas cities from implementing local voter-approved laws to decriminalize marijuana in his capacity as state attorney general. Meanwhile, voters in Houston will decide on an initiative to make misdemeanor marijuana possession the “lowest possible enforcement priority” for local police on the November ballot. Image elements courtesy of Antonioaesparza and Gage Skidmore. The post Talarico Suggests Paxton Cracked Down On Cannabis To ‘Enrich’ Donors In Alcohol And Tobacco Industries appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

One of the nation’s leading marijuana reform organizations says it would be “disastrous” for the cannabis industry is an initiative to roll back Massachusetts’s legalization law that is on that state’s November ballot is approved by voters. “If you haven’t been paying attention to what’s going on in the Bay State, it’s time to start,” Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) Executive Director Adam J. Smith said in an alert to supporters. “A loss in Massachusetts would have disastrous political and economic consequences for legal cannabis markets everywhere, and even a too-close victory would spook markets and incentivize a rash of similar initiatives in states around the country, each costing millions to try and defeat.” Last month, state officials issued a final determination that the initiative—which would repeal laws allowing the regulated commercial sales of recreational cannabis and home cultivation while maintaining legal possession and continuing the medical marijuana system—will appear on ballot this fall. After the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s Office determined that organizers for the anti-cannabis proposal had turned in enough valid signatures to put the measure before voters, a marijuana reform advocate filed an objection with the State Ballot Law Commission claiming that various signatures were not genuine, obtained through fraudulent means or were not “signed substantially as registered.” The body rejected the challenge to the legal marijuana rollback measure, however, clearing it to go before voters to decide. “Now, ten years into Massachusetts’ legal cannabis market, we are faced for the first time in history with the question… Will supporters of legal cannabis markets—in Massachusetts and elsewhere—stand up to defend them?” MPP’s Smith wrote in the new alert. :They had better, because victory is not a sure thing, and the risk is existential.” He pointed to recent polling showing that the anti-marijuana initiative is trailing by just a single-digit margin, and that the gap “narrows to within the margin of error once respondents hear arguments in favor of recriminalization.” “Legal cannabis is responsible for more than 20,000 jobs in the state. The legal cannabis that people are using, unlike the illicit market, is tested and properly labeled. Cannabis arrests and their associated costs—personal, economic, and in law enforcement—are down nearly 90%, and youth cannabis use is down 25% since the state legalized adult-use cannabis.” “The case needs to be made that ending the regulated market would lead to an explosion in the illicit market, reversing those gains and exponentially increasing the number of easy access points for kids,” MPP’s alert said. It’s official. Massachusetts’ Question 8 — the first-ever attempt to recriminalize adult-use sales and home grow in a legal state — is on the ballot. Stand with us to defend not just the state’s legal market, but the future of legal cannabis everywhere. https://t.co/SieDuGAcwK — Marijuana Policy Project (@MarijuanaPolicy) August 4, 2026 The prohibitionist organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana, whose affiliated group SAM Action is largely funding the anti-cannabis ballot campaign, has tens of millions of dollars in its war chest, Smith said, pointing to its most recent federal reporting form. On the other side of the debate, a coalition of Massachusetts marijuana business leaders, healthcare professionals and other advocates have launched a campaign to defeat the measure. “Question 8 could pass if the ‘No on 8’ Campaign lacks the resources to get its message out, broadly and consistently, from here to the election,” Smith said. MPP is asking industry operatives and supporters to donate to the No on 8 Campaign to “help us fight back and protect legalization progress.” “Whether you’re an industry member, an allied business, an advocate for the plant or for rational public policy or personal freedom—and wherever you are in the country—the Massachusetts ballot initiative is your fight,” he said. “It’s our fight.” The group is also selling t-shirts that say “Vote No On Question 8” to support the effort. In June, the campaign behind the anti-legalization ballot measure fired a signature gatherer it says was shown appearing to engage in “wholly unacceptable” conduct in a recent video. As Marijuana Moment reported, a man petitioning for the Massachusetts initiative as well as a similar anti-cannabis proposal in Maine was depicted in recent social media posts seeming to argue that voters who support legal marijuana access should sign the petitions in order to advance or protect reform. The campaign later said it has “zero tolerance for any circulation tactics that would mislead petition signers.” “The identified canvasser was immediately terminated, in coordination with our vendor, upon being made aware of the alleged conduct,” the group said. “The conduct apparent in the video would be wholly unacceptable and does not reflect how this campaign operates. We demand honesty, transparency and professionalism from everyone associated with our effort.” A video posted to Reddit of the signature gatherer shows the man collecting signatures outside a retail store in Massachusetts next to a sign that says “keep cannabis legal.” When confronted by a marijuana reform supporter who recorded the petitioner’s interactions with voters, he appeared to be trying to convince them that it is important to qualify the anti-cannabis measure for the ballot in order to then defeat it. “This is what we’re fighting against right here. That’s why we vote no,” he said. “If we can get this to the ballot right here, we vote no.” The person who captured the video pointed out that Massachusetts voters already approved marijuana legalization years ago, and that the only way it could be imminently repealed is if the new ballot measure qualified for the November election. If the initiative does not get enough signatures to go before voters, the state’s laws will remain the same. “It’s my job,” the petitioner insisted, however. “I know what I’m talking about.” “It’s a group of rich folks from out of state that want to basically take marijuana to when it was a medical marijuana card,” he said. “We don’t want that to happen.” The same man also appeared to also be gathering signatures for a separate measure in Maine that would similarly repeal laws allowing regulated adult-use marijuana sales and home cultivation rights for adults while keeping possession legal and adding new testing requirements for medical cannabis. The campaigns have previously been accused of misleading petitioning tactics. In Massachusetts, some voters reported that the campaign used fake cover letters for other ballot measures on unrelated issues like affordable housing and same-day voter registration during the first round of petitioning. Legal cannabis supporters filed a formal complaint about the prohibitionist effort’s tactics, but the State Ballot Law Commission rejected the challenge. The measure faced a legal challenge from cannabis industry operatives who argued it contains “impermissibly unrelated subjects,” and that the state attorney general’s official summary is “misleading and deficient.” The state Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments on the litigation challenging the anti-marijuana initiative but it ultimately ruled against the challenge. The post Top Marijuana Advocacy Group Raises Alarm About Initiative To Roll Back Legalization In Massachusetts appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

IL marijuana biz form; Study: Medical cannabis for endometriosis; TX hemp product ban op-ed; OH marijuana prices Subscribe to receive Marijuana Moment’s newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning. It’s the best way to make sure you know which cannabis stories are shaping the day. Get our daily newsletter. Email address: Leave this field empty if you're human: Your support makes Marijuana Moment possible… BREAKING: Journalism is often consumed for free, but costs money to produce! While this newsletter is proudly sent without cost to you, our ability to send it each day depends on the financial support of readers who can afford to give it. So if you’ve got a few dollars to spare each month and believe in the work we do, please consider joining us on Patreon today. https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW The Drug Enforcement Administration filed a federal court brief defending its stance that the synthetic cannabinoid hexahydrocannabinol (HHC) is an illegal Schedule I substance—and not legal hemp. The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation posted a new form that recreational marijuana retailers can use to apply for a license to begin selling medical cannabis, which is taxed at a much lower rate. A study of women with endometriosis found that medical cannabis treatment “was associated with sustained improvements in pain, health-related quality of life, sleep, and anxiety”—”with benefits sustained to 24 months and a favourable adverse event profile.” There was also a reduction in prescribed opioids, “including a clinically significant reduction in 26.1% of participants at 24 months.” Prisoner reentry advocate Michael A. Davis argues in a new Marijuana Moment op-ed that Texas officials’ crackdown on hemp products “creates more room for untested products, counterfeit labels and sellers who cannot be held accountable.” “It may also give organized criminal networks another market to exploit.” Ohio legal marijuana prices are significantly higher than those in neighboring Michigan—an analysis that comes shortly after lawmakers passed a bill that makes it a crime to possess cannabis purchased legally in another state. / FEDERAL President Donald Trump issued a proclamation declaring August to be National Substance Use Primary Prevention Month. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth warned that the International Criminal Court could investigate the U.S.’s military strikes on alleged drug boats, though he said there would be “no legitimate basis” to do so. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is seeking White House Office of Management and Budget approval for proposed changes to a hemp survey. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said he doesn’t think “it’s somehow more moral to take a Percocet than it is to take a hemp gummy to sleep at night.” / STATES Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) cited his mass marijuana pardon. Rhode Island Democratic attorney general candidates discussed one contender’s tenure as chair of the Cannabis Control Commission during a debate. A federal judge said he would rule on whether to halt a Virginia law restricting hemp products by Saturday. Alabama’s top medical cannabis regulator acknowledged that officials were a “little overly optimistic” in making predictions about the launch of the market. The South Dakota Medical Marijuana Oversight Committee will meet on Monday. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / LOCAL An Ingham County, Michigan official said eliminating the state’s new marijuana wholesale tax could undermine road repair efforts. / INTERNATIONAL Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers is considering a proposal to allow importation of samples of cannabis-containing medicines. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study concluded that “existing evidence suggests medical cannabis may improve quality of life and contribute to opioid reduction; however, limited clinical guidance, restrictive THC caps, and lack of dialysis-specific inclusion create barriers to access and implementation” in Texas. A study found that “CBD attenuates UVB-induced skin inflammation.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS Republican operative Roger Stone published a blog post about the Trump administration’s efforts to delay the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products. The Washington Times editorial board is concerned that more Americans are switching to marijuana over alcohol and tobacco. / BUSINESS iAnthus Capital Holdings, Inc. reported quarterly revenue of $35.3 million and a net loss of $14.4 million. Auxly Cannabis Group Inc. reported quarterly net revenue of C$45.8 million. Rubicon Organics Inc. reported quarterly net revenue of C$18.5 million. Vireo Growth Inc. announced a share buyback program. High Tide Inc. shareholders elected board of directors members. 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 defends synthetic cannabinoid ban (Newsletter: August 14, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

This lack of movement produces a strange sort of tension Fnaf. Information becomes of huge importance because the threat is not always in front of your eyes.

I faced a significant hurdle launching a women-centric online art gallery. Securing investment was a constant struggle, with many dismissing the niche, almost forcing us into a Repo of our initial vision.

In the captivating horror game FNAF, participants are required to endure hostile animatronic entities. A chilling environment, exhilarating gameplay, and a mysterious storyline await!

This is fantastic news! Empowering female entrepreneurs in the cannabis industry through programs like "The Initiative" is exactly what we need to see more of. It's inspiring to see these businesses get the support to become "investment-ready" and reach national brand status. It just goes to show how a focused effort can accelerate growth, much like trying to keep your cargo steady in a game of Eggy Car! Keep up the great work, everyone involved!

Medical marijuana helps women with endometriosis achieve long-term improvements in their symptoms while also reducing the use of opioids, according to a new study. Using cannabis-based medicinal products (CBMPs) “was associated with sustained improvements in pain, health-related quality of life, sleep, and anxiety at 24 months,” the research found. Cannabis was also “well tolerated” by most patients, demonstrating a “favourable” adverse event profile. Additionally, the study showed a reduction in prescribed opioids at 18 and 24 months—”including a clinically significant reduction in 26.1% of participants at 24 months,” the researchers wrote. The study involved 101 biological women diagnosed with endometriosis, a chronic condition that involves tissue similar to the lining of the womb growing outside of it. The disease can cause pain and scarring, and sometimes leads to difficultly getting pregnant. “Across 24 months, improvements were observed in measures of pain severity, its impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), sleep, and anxiety.” All participants had been signed up with the UK Medical Cannabis Registry for at least two years prior to joining the study. Data was collected at the launch of the research and again 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months later using a series of patient self-report surveys. “Mean prescribed [oral morphine equivalent] decreased from 19.9 ± 17.2 mg/day at baseline to 14.8 ± 15.9 mg/day at 24 months.” The study—conducted by researchers affiliated with Imperial College London, Curaleaf Clinic in London, George’s Hospital NHS Trust, North Bristol NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale University, Kings College London and South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust—was published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Cannabis product formats used by women who participated included dried flower, vape cartridges, topical ointments, sublingual oils and oral pastilles. “In conclusion, this prospective registry study demonstrated improvements in pain, health-related quality of life, sleep quality, and anxiety following CBMP initiation in patients with endometriosis, with benefits sustained to 24 months and a favourable adverse event profile,” the researchers wrote. They caveated that the study is limited by its observational nature and lack of a control group, noting that it does not demonstrate causality between cannabis use and improved symptoms. They also said it is likely that selection bias occurred “due to non-randomised recruitment through a private self-paying clinic.” A previous study published in 2024 found that women rated cannabis as “the most effective self-management strategy to reduce symptom intensity” of endometriosis. “Cannabis use resulted in a significant improvement in symptoms, going beyond just pain management, and a majority of users were able to reduce their pain medication intake,” that research concluded. Meanwhile, the governor of Illinois recently signed a bill adding endometriosis as a medical marijuana qualifying condition. The post Medical Marijuana Improves Pain, Sleep And Anxiety In Women With Endometriosis While Also Reducing Opioid Use, Study Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Texas can protect children and consumers without rebuilding the drug war.” By Michael A. Davis Texas officials have spent years treating hemp-derived THC as if it were the greatest danger facing the state. Now the crackdown is no longer political theater. Beginning July 31, Texas restored a controlled substance schedule that allows products labeled as containing delta-8 THC—or found to contain more than trace amounts of certain tetrahydrocannabinols—to be detained and referred to law enforcement. That does not mean every hemp product is illegal. Products that comply with the state’s delta-9 THC limit remain legal. But it does mean many products that adults bought openly from registered businesses have suddenly been pushed out of the regulated marketplace. Texas leaders may call that a public-safety victory. I see a policy that could make the market less safe. I write from the perspective of someone who has lived through incarceration and spent years working on reentry. I know how quickly lawmakers can turn a complicated social problem into a criminal offense. I also know what happens after the speeches end. The politician moves to the next issue, while ordinary people live with arrests, records, lost jobs and closed doors. There are legitimate concerns about intoxicating hemp products. Some have been sold in packaging that appeals to children. Potency can be inconsistent. Labels can be confusing, and testing standards have not always given consumers the protection they deserve. No responsible advocate should dismiss those problems. But those problems call for regulation, not denial. Texas already showed that it knows how to build guardrails. The state imposed a minimum purchase age of 21 and required government-issued identification. Regulators adopted rules involving labeling, testing, packaging and inspections. Those protections could have been strengthened with uniform dosage limits, random state testing, tougher penalties for businesses that sell to minors and clear rules against child-oriented advertising. Instead, Texas chose to remove certain products from legal shelves while leaving demand in place. That is where the real danger begins. A licensed retailer can be inspected. Its products can be tested. A batch can be traced or recalled. A business can lose its license for selling to a child. An illegal seller has no license to lose, no testing requirement to follow and no reason to check identification. A teenager who walks into a compliant smoke shop should be asked for identification. A dealer operating through social media, a parking lot or an unregulated delivery network will not care whether the customer is 17 or 37. This crackdown does not eliminate hemp-derived THC. It creates more room for untested products, counterfeit labels and sellers who cannot be held accountable. It may also give organized criminal networks another market to exploit. That does not mean every illegal sale is tied to a cartel, and we should not make claims the evidence cannot support. But when government closes a legal channel without ending consumer demand, illegal suppliers gain an opening. That is basic economics, not fearmongering. Texas applies a different standard to alcohol. Alcohol is sold in grocery stores, convenience stores, restaurants, stadiums and entertainment districts. It is present in homes and at parties across the state. A teenager may never need to fool a cashier to get it; the alcohol may already be in a refrigerator or handed over by an older friend. Texas does not respond by outlawing beer, wine and liquor for adults. It licenses sellers, checks identification, taxes the products and penalizes violations. The system is imperfect, but the principle is clear: Adult access can coexist with rules designed to protect children. Alcohol and hemp are not identical. They do not have to be identical for the double standard to matter. If Texas believes regulation can reduce the risks associated with alcohol, it should explain why regulation is suddenly considered impossible when the product is hemp-derived THC. The imbalance is even harder to defend when we look at the crises Texas already faces. The state Department of State Health Services says drug poisoning deaths increased 68 percent from 2019 to 2024. In 2023, drug poisoning was the leading cause of injury-related death for Texans ages 24 to 69. Families are still being devastated by fentanyl, while communities also confront gun violence, violent crime, untreated mental-health needs and unaffordable health care. Those problems require sustained investment in prevention, treatment, enforcement and recovery. They are expensive, complicated and politically difficult. Banning a product is simpler. It creates a headline and allows leaders to declare victory before the consequences are measured. We should also be honest about the economic interests surrounding this debate. Hemp-derived THC beverages are becoming real competitors in the broader adult-beverage market. NielsenIQ reported that mainstream retail sales reached $239 million over the latest 52-week period, an increase of 135 percent from the prior year. Some consumers are replacing a beer, glass of wine or cocktail with a low-dose THC drink. Some alcohol businesses see that market as an opportunity and have begun selling or distributing THC beverages. Others may see it as a threat. That division matters because “the alcohol industry” is not a single voice. Still, political contributions from people connected to alcohol distribution deserve public scrutiny when Texas leaders push policies that could remove a competing product. Campaign-finance records have prompted questions about major donations to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R), who led efforts to restrict hemp products in the most recent legislative session, from John Nau, a longtime beer distribution executive. A contribution does not prove a deal, and it would be irresponsible to claim otherwise. But Texans are entitled to ask whether established industries have greater access to political power than the small businesses and consumers who will bear the cost of prohibition. Following the money is not the same as alleging corruption. It is part of holding government accountable. Texas can protect children and consumers without rebuilding the drug war. Require every intoxicating product to be sold only to adults 21 and older. Mandate reliable identification checks, child-resistant packaging and plain labeling. Establish reasonable per-serving and per-package THC limits. Require independent laboratory testing, scannable batch information and random state verification. Punish businesses that mislabel products or sell to minors. Fund public education and impaired-driving enforcement. Those are not weak measures. They are what serious regulation looks like. Public safety should be measured by harm reduced, not products banned. If the result of Texas’s crackdown is that adults turn from accountable retailers to illegal sellers, then the state will have created the very danger it claimed to prevent. The question is not whether hemp should have rules. It should. The question is whether Texas wants rules that protect people—or prohibition that protects politics. Michael A. Davis is an Austin-based writer, author and reentry advocate whose work examines Texas politics, criminal justice, public policy and communities too often overlooked by those in power. He is the author of the books “The Road to Reentry,” “Pursuing Redemption,” “Reclaiming Freedom” and “The Mind You Inherited.” Image element courtesy of AnonMoos. The post Texas Officials Call Hemp A Crisis While Bigger Public Safety Threats Go Unanswered (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“People were already used to driving to Michigan to purchase cannabis, so as long as there’s still a massive price differential, they’re probably going to continue doing so.” By Megan Henry, Ohio Capital Journal Two years after Ohio recreational marijuana sales began, Ohio’s adult-use marijuana continues to be significantly more expensive than Michigan, according to pricing data. Meanwhile, Ohio Republican lawmakers have outlawed buying from other states. The cheapest ounce of marijuana in Ohio is $112 while the cheapest ounce in Michigan is $6.99, according to the WeedBuddy Cannabis Price Index. In Arizona, it’s $49.99, and in Colorado, it’s $16.73. The median cost of an ounce shows far closer prices though Ohio still sits as most expensive among the four states at $147.35, compared to $99 in Michigan, $120 in Arizona and $110 in Colorado. Ohio’s median price for an eighth of cannabis flower is $35, compared to Michigan’s $20 for the same amount as of July 31, the index shows. “Price is going to be one of the most important aspects in terms of determining where they purchase cannabis,” said Morgan Fox, political director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. “People were already used to driving to Michigan to purchase cannabis, so as long as there’s still a massive price differential, they’re probably going to continue doing so at least for the foreseeable future,” he said. Marijuana is illegal for recreational use in West Virginia, Indiana, Kentucky and Pennsylvania. Ohio recreational sales started in August 2024, about nine months after Ohioans voted to legalize recreational marijuana. A new law passed by Republican state lawmakers took effect earlier this year that made a wide variety of changes to the voter-passed law. Ohio Senate Bill 56 criminalized bringing legal marijuana from another state back to Ohio. “If you’re caught with cannabis that cannot be verified purchased in Ohio or verified grown in Ohio, then it’s the same penalties as it was under prohibition of pre-legalization,” Fox said. However, he was doubtful Ohio customers knew about the changes to Ohio’s law. “If people had gotten used to doing that when cannabis was not legal in Ohio, they’re probably going to continue to do so,” Fox said. The law also bans possessing marijuana in anything outside of its original packaging and requires drivers to store marijuana in the trunk of their car while driving. Furthermore, the law reduced THC levels in adult-use marijuana extracted from a maximum of 90 percent down to a maximum of 70 percent, capped THC levels in adult-use flower to 35 percent, and banned smoking in most public places. Ohio’s total recreational marijuana sales were $1.67 billion as of July 11, according to the Ohio Department of Commerce Division of Cannabis Control. The median price of a standard eighth of cannabis flower was $36.40 in Columbus, $32 in Cincinnati, and $30.80 in Cleveland at the end of July, according to the price index. Compared to cities in Michigan, the median price of the same amount of cannabis flower, according to the price index, cost $25 in Lansing, $20 in Detroit and $20 in Monroe, Michigan which is about 12 miles from downtown Toledo. There have been 32.5 million units of manufactured products that have been sold and 267,590 pounds of plant material, according to the division. There are 223 dual-use marijuana dispensaries in Ohio as of Thursday, meaning they can sell medical and non-medical marijuana, according to the division. More than 160 Ohio municipalities or townships that have moratoriums in place banning the sale of adult-use cannabis as of June 3, according to Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law. Michigan voters legalized recreational marijuana in 2018 and sales started in December 2019. “Michigan’s market is much more well established, and we’ve seen in most cannabis markets that prices tend to go down over time,” Fox said. Michigan has more than 800 active retail licenses as of June 2026, and Michigan marijuana stores reported about $3.17 billion in revenue in 2025, according to the Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency. “Michigan also has a much bigger market in terms of the numbers of dispensaries and the number of licensed businesses than Ohio does, largely because Ohio artificially capped that, so that means that since there’s more competition between those businesses, they have to keep their prices a little bit lower to be competitive,” Fox said. Michigan is the second-largest adult-use marijuana market in the nation, behind California. This story was first published by Ohio Capital Journal. The post Ohio Marijuana Prices Are Much Higher Than Those In Neighboring Michigan appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Illinois officials have posted a new form that recreational marijuana dispensaries can file in order to get permission to begin selling medical cannabis, which is taxed at a much lower rate than adult-use products. The expanded opportunity for marijuana businesses comes as part of omnibus cannabis legislation that was passed by lawmakers and signed into law by Gov. JB Pritzker (D) this session. The law also doubles the amount of marijuana that adults can legally possess, allows drive-thrus and curbside pickups at dispensaries and lets them stay open for longer hours of operation, among other changes. The five-page form released this week by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR) allows businesses holding an active Adult Use Dispensing Organization License issued under the state’s Cannabis Regulation and Tax Act to apply for a separate Medical Cannabis Dispensing Organization license. “Any adult use dispensary holding an active license in good standing may opt-in for a medical dispensary license,” IDFPR said in previously issued guidance about changes made by the new cannabis omnibus legislation. “This medical dispensary license will allow the dispensary to sell cannabis to medical cannabis patients at the medical tax rate up to the medical patient’s allotment.” Dispensaries can begin filing the form on September 10, and then they must wait for their so-called “15-37 License,” named after the section of the legislation, to be issued before they can begin medical cannabis sales. Applicants must submit a non-refundable fee of $5,000 and, if approved, their standard renewal fee will then increase by an additional $10,000 per renewal cycle. The new form, noted earlier by Illinois New Joint, asks about a business’s disciplinary history, ownership structure and tax compliance. It also asks questions such as: Does the dispensary include materials or signs informing patients that possession of cannabis is illegal under federal law? Does the education plan offer information available to patients on the potential side effects of cannabis? Does the dispensary offer materials or signs informing patients that consuming cannabis is prohibited in public places? Businesses also need to submit a patient prioritization plan that includes details about designating a medical cannabis line and registers that will serve medical cannabis patients first, as well as a floor plan showing a dedicated consultation area for patients. The medical cannabis sales option for adult-use businesses is part of SB 3222, which was approved by the legislature and signed by Pritzker in June. As enacted into law, the measure also allows residents of the state who are over 21 years of age to possess up to 60 grams of marijuana flower—double the amount in prior law. They are also able to have up to 10 grams of cannabis concentrates and infused products with up to 1,000 mg of THC—also double the earlier limit. Possession amounts for adult non-residents are also doubled under the bill and are generally set at half of what residents can carry. Additionally, people with past convictions for possession of up to 60 grams of marijuana are now able to have those records expunged—double the previous cutoff allowing only those with convictions for up to 30 grams to be eligible. The legislation also recriminalizes hemp THC products with more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container, in line with a federal ban that is set to take effect in November. The state’s list of medical marijuana qualifying conditions is also being expanded to add female orgasmic disorder, endometriosis, ovarian cysts and uterine fibroids. The governor held a signing ceremony for the legislation at a marijuana dispensary, saying he is “proud that Illinois continues to lead the nation in showing what thoughtful, balanced cannabis policy can achieve.” In 2019, Pritzker signed the state’s initial marijuana legalization policy into law. The post Illinois Recreational Marijuana Dispensaries Can Apply To Sell Medical Cannabis With New Form Posted By State Officials appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Finding reliable adult companionship becomes effortless once you experience the luxury of an Escort in Delhi. Their breathtaking partners are renowned for their warm hospitality and incredible dedication to your personal satisfaction. Confidentiality is strictly guaranteed, allowing you to surrender completely to the intense pleasures of the evening. Delhi Escort Service Escort Service in Delhi Escort Service Delhi Escort Delhi Delhi Escort Agency VIP Escort in Delhi Russian Escort in Delhi Independent Escort in Delhi Delhi Escort Escort in Delhi

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is defending its stance that a cannabinoid produced synthetically from components of the cannabis plant is federally illegal. DEA issued a rule in May 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. Two hemp companies filed separate lawsuits challenging the move, however, and on Tuesday DEA filed a brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in response to one of them—arguing that the company, Bluestar Operations, LLC, does not have standing to bring the case and, even if it did, it would fail on the merits. HHC, the agency said, “is a synthetic hallucinogenic drug that for decades has been included in schedule I under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA)” and has a similar chemical structure to THC, for which it has shared a DEA drug code until now. Assigning the code does is “a technical change that has no substantive effect on HHC’s status as a schedule I substance,” DEA said. “All the rule does is assign a tracking code to HHC to facilitate DEA’s administration of the CSA,” the brief said, adding that because the change “imposes no new obligations or liabilities,” Bluestar has not “identified any injury traceable to the rule that can be remedied in this proceeding.” Beyond that, DEA said, “Bluestar does not even claim that the listing of HHC in schedule I is categorically unlawful.” “Bluestar claims only that its specific products are hemp and therefore exempt from schedule I. But whether Bluestar’s HHC qualifies as a schedule I substance under the CSA or as hemp under the 2018 Farm Bill is a question of how those two statutory schemes interact and how Bluestar’s HHC is produced. Even under Bluestar’s view, there will still be HHC that does not meet the statutory definition of hemp; it is undisputed that at least some HHC products are properly included in schedule I, such as those with high concentrations of intoxicating substances. Nothing in the final rule conclusively adjudicates whether the HHC manufactured by Bluestar qualifies as hemp, nor does the rule impose independent obligations on Bluestar. Bluestar remains free to argue that its HHC qualifies as hemp in an appropriate case.” “Even if this Court were to grant Bluestar’s requested remedy and vacate the final rule, HHC still would be a schedule I substance as a THC,” the DEA brief said. “Bluestar thus would continue to suffer the same alleged injuries, which all stem from HHC’s placement in schedule I.” The drug agency also pointed to forthcoming planned changes in the legal status of hemp products. 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, the president signed new 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. As such, DEA said that the legal theory behind Bluestar’s case “will soon be overtaken by events.” The scheduled recriminalization of many hemp products “will defeat whatever remains of Bluestar’s claims,” it argued. That said, Senate recently approved a funding bill that includes a provision to delay the effective date of the hemp product ban until December 11—a move that was supported by the White House. While that change has not yet been approved by the House of Representatives or enacted into law, industry supports believe it could give them more time to convince Congress to enact a regulatory structure for hemp products as an alternative to broad prohibition. Meanwhile, the appeals court considering Bluestar’s challenge in June denied the company’s request for a stay on the drug code rule pending resolution of the litigation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is considering a separate similar case brought by the hemp company IHC Investments, Inc. Both suits say the agency’s decision is “unlawful.” In earlier briefs filed in June, DEA has said that each petitioner “fails to meet any of the factors required to show that a stay pending review would be warranted.” 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. The Bluestar case cited a prior ruling in the Fourth Circuit 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 said. 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 said. 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 IHC Investments case cited a prior Ninth Circuit ruling 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 said 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 said. “Congress did not clearly authorize the DEA to criminalize broad categories of hemp-derived cannabinoids through administrative interpretation.” Both petitions argued that DEA’s move 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 said. DEA, for its part, said in the HHC rule it filed 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 recent 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.” Read the DEA recent filing in the HHC lawsuit below: The post DEA Says Hemp Company Can’t Challenge Agency’s Stance That Synthetic Cannabis Compound HHC Is Federally Banned appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Houston marijuana measure to ballot; NC hemp op-ed; VA gov & AG defend hemp ban from lawsuit 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 President Donald Trump has been “misinformed by his staff” about hemp issues, according to Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC), who led an unsuccessful effort to keep the planned federal recriminalization of hemp THC products on track. The Houston, Texas City Council voted to place an initiative to make misdemeanor marijuana possession the “lowest possible enforcement priority” for local police on the November ballot. Chris Karazin of the hemp business Carolindica argues in a new Marijuana Moment op-ed that Congress should heed the lessons of the contentious hemp policy debate in North Carolina and “build a regulatory framework that protects consumers while preserving access to products that millions of Americans already use.” “Every industry benefits from predictable regulations. Hemp should be no different. Consumers deserve safe products. Businesses deserve certainty. Policymakers have an opportunity to deliver both.” A spokesperson Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) and Attorney General Jay Jones (D) defended newly approved hemp product restrictions in the face of a lawsuit from businesses who say the change is unlawful. / FEDERAL The National Institute on Drug Abuse is accepting input on its 2027-2031 strategic plan. The Drug Enforcement Administration launched a “Together for Families” network. The Birmingham VA Health Care System sent a press release about its participation in a psilocybin trial. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) tweeted, “I fought and won a major vote in the Senate this weekend to stop the hemp ban that would’ve devastated Minnesota’s farmers, brewers, and small businesses. Minnesota already has sensible safety rules in place, and now this moves to the House and must pass.” A spokesperson for Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said delaying the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products would “continue to expose our nation’s children to unregulated, intoxicating, hemp-derived THC products.” / STATES Former Florida Democratic gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum was jailed for allegedly missing a drug test and then testing positive for methamphetamine. Indiana’s attorney general claimed that tax revenue from marijuana legalization is “not outweighing the social costs.” New York’s Assembly majority leader discussed ongoing efforts to build the state’s legal marijuana market. Wyoming lawmakers discussed their views on marijuana policy. A federal judge rules that a New Jersey labor peace agreement requirement for cannabis businesses is preempted by federal law. Georgia regulators toured a medical cannabis cultivation facility. California officials touted enforcement actions against suspected illegal cannabis operations. Missouri regulators published the latest episode of their cannabis podcast. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / LOCAL Kalamazoo, Michigan officials are distributing free cannabis lock bags. / INTERNATIONAL The Canadian government is investing C$24 million to establish a national cannabis and brain health research consortium. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A review concluded that “across multiple conditions, cannabinoids demonstrate modest benefits in symptom reduction, including improvements in patient-reported spasticity in multiple sclerosis, significant seizure reduction in treatment-resistant pediatric epileptic syndromes, antiemetic effects in refractory [chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting], and appetite stimulation in cachectic states.” A study found that “use of CBD in patients with [obsessive-compulsive disorder] led to a decrease in the mean OCD score during the study period.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The executive director of the Pennsylvania Chiefs of Police Association authored an op-ed urging Congress not to reverse the planned federal recriminalization of hemp THC products. Americans for Safe Access is leading an effort to encourage the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and medical schools to include the endocannabinoid system in a medical nutrition education initiative. / BUSINESS Curaleaf was reportedly investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for money laundering and public corruption, though two federal grand juries declined to bring charges. Trulieve Cannabis Corp. completed its move to redomicile from British Columbia, Canada to Delaware. Ascend Wellness Holdings, Inc. reported quarterly net revenue of $126.1 million and a net loss of $9.8 million. Vireo Growth Inc. subsidiaries entered into a senior secured asset-based revolving credit facility providing a $65 million initial commitment, expandable to $85 million and further to $105 million through a $20 million accordion feature. 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 Trump “misinformed” on hemp issue, Republican senator says (Newsletter: August 13, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Lawmakers have an opportunity to build a regulatory framework that protects consumers while preserving access to products that millions of Americans already use.” By Chris Karazin, Carolindica Running a hemp business in North Carolina has become an exercise in navigating uncertainty. During the past year, it feels like I have spent almost as much time following legislation as I have serving customers, managing employees and planning for the future. Every new version of a bill brought new questions about what products we could legally sell and whether businesses like mine would still be operating the same way a year later. The government legalized hemp through the 2018 Farm Bill, allowing businesses to manufacture and sell products that met the federal definition of hemp. Since then, the industry has grown rapidly, but regulation has not kept pace, and states have responded in different ways. Some created regulatory systems for testing, labeling and sales. Others pursued broad restrictions, arguing stronger limits were needed to address consumer safety concerns. Congress is now considering the bipartisan Lawful Hemp Protection Act, legislation that would create a federal regulatory framework for many hemp-derived products. Instead of broadly prohibiting products, the proposal would establish national standards for testing, labeling, manufacturing and sales while allowing many hemp products to remain legal. Lawmakers are still working through the details and several provisions deserve additional clarification. Even so, the proposal represents a meaningful change in how Washington is approaching hemp policy. Rather than focusing primarily on eliminating products from the marketplace, lawmakers are debating how the industry should be regulated. A Lesson From North Carolina Many people outside our state have never heard of House Bill 328. The legislation originally had a narrow purpose of keeping hemp products off school property, and responsible businesses across the state supported that goal from the beginning. As the bill moved through the legislative process, lawmakers expanded it far beyond its original purpose. The latest version would prohibit most hemp-derived consumable products currently sold across North Carolina by adopting a much stricter federal THC standard. As written, the proposal would effectively remove many products that licensed hemp businesses legally sell today. Confusion followed every major revision, and businesses struggled to understand what products would remain legal. Even the bill’s original sponsor was left out of the conference committee that negotiated the final version. Customers asked whether products they had purchased for years would disappear, while companies delayed investment decisions because they were waiting to see what lawmakers would do next. North Carolina’s hemp industry contributes an estimated $4.4 billion to the state’s economy and supports nearly 20,000 jobs across more than 2,500 businesses. Behind those numbers are family-owned retailers, manufacturers, farmers, warehouse employees and countless small businesses that have operated legally while following the rules that existed at the time. Responsible hemp businesses have never argued against regulation. Age restrictions, product testing, accurate labeling, manufacturing standards and enforcement all help create a safer marketplace for consumers and a stronger infrastructure for businesses to build upon. Companies that ignore those standards should face consequences. However, uncertainty serves no one, and just pushes businesses to postpone hiring, while farmers have to question what crops they should even plant next season, which ultimately makes consumers lose confidence because they no longer know what products will remain available. Congress Has An Opportunity To Build On Those Lessons Congress now has an opportunity to learn from what states like North Carolina have experienced. The Lawful Hemp Protection Act is still a work in progress and lawmakers should carefully examine every provision before moving forward. Product definitions, implementation timelines and several regulatory provisions deserve thoughtful discussion that accounts for the differences between products. For example, cannabinoids such as THCO, THCP and THCV are vastly different, but the average consumer or legislator likely will not know the distinction. Clear regulations give businesses a standard they can meet while giving consumers confidence in the products they purchase. Consumers benefit from accurate labeling, testing requirements and consistent manufacturing practices. Regulators gain stronger oversight of the marketplace. Responsible businesses know what is expected of them and can invest with confidence. Lawmakers have an opportunity to build a regulatory framework that protects consumers while preserving access to products that millions of Americans already use. Congress should also recognize that businesses need time and certainty to adapt to new requirements. Frequent policy changes make long-term planning difficult for everyone involved, including regulators, which is why stabilizing the regulatory framework early is so important. You can’t scale chaos. Building Certainty For The Future North Carolina’s debate demonstrated how quickly uncertainty and misinformation can spread when legislation changes dramatically over the course of a single session. Congress has an opportunity to avoid repeating that experience by creating clear, consistent rules that protect consumers while allowing legitimate businesses to continue operating. Every industry benefits from predictable regulations. Hemp should be no different. Consumers deserve safe products. Businesses deserve certainty. Policymakers have an opportunity to deliver both. Chris Karazin is the founder, owner & operator of Carolindica, a North Carolina-based hemp company. Since starting the business in 2019, Chris has overseen its development from a homegrown startup to a recognized cannabis brand with multiple retail locations, in-house manufacturing and a nationwide wholesale presence. The post Congress Can Learn Lessons About The Hemp Debate From North Carolina’s Experience (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net