All Activity

The New Hampshire House of Representatives has effectively killed bills to legalize marijuana and allow the therapeutic use of psilocybin by not bringing them up for floor votes ahead of a key deadline. Meanwhile, separate legislation on those topics has already advanced. As legislators continue to push for a variety of drug policy reform proposals, with mixed results so far this session, the House on Thursday adjourned without bringing up scheduled measures to let voters decide on adult-use marijuana legalization as well as separate bills to end prohibition of low-level cannabis possession and give adults access to psilocybin as a novel treatment alternative. Here’s an overview of the cannabis and psychedelics bills that were not considered by the House: CACR 19 The House failed to consider a bill from Rep. Jonah Wheeler (D) that would have put a constitutional amendment on the state ballot to let voters decide if they want to legalize marijuana for adults 21 and older, allowing them to “possess a modest amount of cannabis for their personal use.” If enacted, the constitutional amendment would have appeared on the November state ballot. The the text of what would have gone before voters on the November ballot under CACR 19 reads: “Are you in favor of amending the first part of the constitution by inserting after article 2-b a new article to read as follows: [Art.] 2-c. [Adult possession of cannabis.] All adults who are 21 years of age or older shall have the right to possess a modest amount of cannabis intended for their personal consumption.” Members of the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee took up that legislation in January. It was ultimately deemed inexpedient to legislate by a majority of the panel, but in New Hampshire all bills still have the opportunity to advance to the floor even with negative committee recommendations. A motion from Rep. Alissandra Murray (D) to special order the legislation for consideration by the body before its adjournment on Thursday failed by a vote of 115-220. In a minority report, Murray, clerk of the committee, wrote that the legislation “returns the question of cannabis legalization to the people of New Hampshire, where it belongs. It does not itself legalize cannabis; rather, it allows voters to decide whether adults age 21 and over may legally possess a modest amount.” “The amendment intentionally avoids specifying possession limits, recognizing that such details are better addressed in statute than embedded in the constitution, where they are more difficult to amend,” she said, adding that polling shows overwhelming public support for legalization in New Hampshire. “It is high time we respect the will of the people and end the continued criminalization of adults for conduct that a strong majority no longer believes should be a crime.” Rep. Terry Roy (R), chair of the panel, wrote in the majority report that the panel “recommends CACR 19 as inexpedient to legislate because embedding a federal crime into the New Hampshire Constitution is a reckless act of legal entrapment that endangers the very liberties we are sworn to protect. While some frame this as ‘respecting the will of the people,’ they are actually inviting Granite Staters into a ‘federal trap’ where exercising a state-granted ‘right’ results in the automatic and permanent forfeiture of their Second Amendment rights.” “Beyond the constitutional risk, we must consider the professional doors this closes: any use authorized by this amendment remains an automatic disqualifier for federal security clearances in New Hampshire’s high-paying defense sector, as well as for military service and law enforcement,” he said. “A truly pro-liberty stance requires protecting our citizens from federal overreach, not baiting them into a conflict that strips them of their right to bear arms and their economic future.” HB 1235-FN Another cannabis legalization bill that didn’t get a floor vote in the House on Thursday is HB 1235-FN from Rep. Jared Sullivan (D) and five bipartisan cosponsors. The measure was also designated as inexpedient to legislate by the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee. Under the legislation, HB 1235, adults 21 and older would have been allowed to possess up to 2.5 ounces of cannabis flower and up to 10 grams of marijuana concentrates. The proposal would not have created a system of regulated commercial sales, however. In the majority report from the committee, the chairman reiterated his belief that legalization supporters are mischaracterizing the reform as a personal liberties issue. “The promise of ‘personal freedom’ is a hollow one when it results in the systematic closing of doors for New Hampshire’s young people and the erosion of our fundamental constitutional rights,” Roy said. “We must look at actual outcomes: since legalization, neighboring states have seen a 15 percent increase in workers’ compensation claims and a 55 percent higher rate of industrial accidents among users, a trend that would cripple New Hampshire’s productivity and drive up insurance costs for small businesses.” “Most critically, this bill creates a devastating ‘federal trap’ for the thousands of Granite Staters employed by our state’s thriving defense sector, which remains a primary economic driver with average annual wages exceeding $111,000,” he said. “We refuse to trade New Hampshire’s safety, economic future, and the Second Amendment rights of our citizens for a policy that offers only the illusion of liberty while stripping away the keys to a successful future and increasing road fatalities by 17.3 percent as seen in our neighboring states.” Rep. Buzz Scherr (D) said in the committee’s minority report that the proposed legislation “recognizes that New Hampshire residents are notably in favor of such an approach and that all of New Hampshire’s surrounding states have taken some version of this approach.” Sullivan, the bill sponsor, also filed separate legislation this session that would have legalized adult-use cannabis through a regulated sales model, with additional provisions to provide relief for those who’ve previously been criminalized over marijuana. That bill already passed the House this year, but it was then promptly killed in the Senate. HB 1796-FN The House on Thursday also did not take up a Republican-led bill from Rep. Michael Moffett (R) that would have permitted the regulated use of psilocybin in a medically supervised setting. To qualify for psilocybin treatment, a patient 21 or older would have needed to be diagnosed with treatment-resistant depression, PTSD, substance misuse disorder, a terminal illness requiring end-of-life care or any other condition authorized by the state Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). There would have been specific guidelines for facilities where the psychedelic could be administered, including security requirements and other safety protocols such as ensuring there are rescue medications on site if a patient experiences an adverse event. The legislation, HB 1796, would have also established a Therapeutic Psilocybin Treatment Fund, which would have been funded by revenue from licensing taxes and fees. The fund would have gone toward studies into the possibility of expanding the program to include additional psychedelics in the program. Rep. Tim Hartnett (D)—on behalf of the majority of the House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee that deemed the psilocybin bill inexpedient to legislate—said in a report that the measure contains “several insurmountable challenges,” including “significant financial challenges in staffing and related costs” for DHHS. “Second, the bill presupposes existing expertise and related capacities already exist within the NH government,” the report says. “Third, psilocybin has great promise and even though significant anecdotal evidence exists on its therapeutic benefit, compelling confirmatory scientific evidence remains early in its development.” “Further, beyond scientific studies, the experience of actual day-to-day-mainstream clinic operations are even less well understood—the ‘how do we run a clinic’ questions of staff recruitment and training, program admissions, management of patient emergencies etc.—are in their infancy. News reports from other jurisdictions suggest there is much to be learned about running and regulating clinics providing treatments using this medication.” A minority report from Rep. Yury Polozov (R) says the legislation “provides an evidence-based treatment option for patients who have not responded to conventional therapies.” “Emerging research supports psilocybin’s potential benefits for mental health conditions when used in controlled therapeutic settings. The bill promotes public health and harm reduction,” the said. “It offers renewed hope for life to those in crisis, as suicide remains a major cause of death, particularly among veterans who often suffer from treatment-resistant depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.” Last month, the House approved a separate bipartisan bill to legalize the regulated use of psilocybin for medical purposes. It is now scheduled to be considered by the House Finance Committee on Tuesday before a final floor vote later this month that could move it to the Senate. The legislation from Scherr would create a regulatory pathway for patients with certain conditions to access the psychedelic for therapeutic use through a program overseen by DHHS. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile, Gov. Kelly Ayotte (R) has already threatened to veto any marijuana legalization bill that reaches her desk, though the constitutional amendment proposal would not require gubernatorial action. The governor said in August that her position on the reform would not change even if the federal government moved forward with rescheduling the plant. Since then, President Donald Trump has directed the attorney general to finalize the process of moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). At a committee meeting last year, Sullivan ultimately made a persuasive argument for advancing his legalization bill, pointing out that the House has repeatedly passed similar legislation and that the chamber should stand its ground, forcing the Senate and governor to again go on record with their opposition to a policy popular among voters. “We know where it’s going to go. Let’s send a virtue signal,” Sullivan said. “Let them be the ones that are pissing off voters who care about this.” In the Senate, the Judiciary Committee in January also took up a bill from Sen. Donovan Fenton (D) that would allow adults over the age of 21 to legally possess up to four ounces of cannabis in plant form and 20 grams of concentrated cannabis products, as well as other products containing no more than 2,000 milligrams of THC. Last June, the New Hampshire Senate voted to scrap compromise legislation that would have lowered the state’s criminal penalty for first-time psilocybin possession while also creating mandatory minimum sentences around fentanyl. As originally introduced, the legislation would have completely removed penalties around obtaining, purchasing, transporting, possessing or using psilocybin, effectively legalizing it on a noncommercial basis. However a House committee amended the bill before unanimously advancing it last March. Image element courtesy of Kristie Gianopulos. The post New Hampshire House Lets Marijuana Legalization And Psilocybin Therapy Bills Die Without A Vote appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

The Delaware Senate has unanimously approved a bill that would allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals. After advancing through the Senate Health & Social Services Committee, with a clarifying amendment, the full chamber passed the legislation from Sen. Marie Pinkney (D) in a 21-0 vote on Thursday. It now heads to the House of Representatives for consideration. “The legislation essentially requires our hospitals to allow patients to utilize their medical cannabis in the hospital when they are diagnosed with a terminally ill diagnosis,” Pinkney said on the floor ahead of the vote. “The hospitals worked very well with me in the process of formalizing this legislation, and so we have created a process where the patients are ultimately responsible for the administration and storage of their medical cannabis.” “There’s also language in the bill that makes it so that if for some reason, the federal government decides to react to the fact that cannabis remains scheduled drug that the hospitals are able to put this program on pause so that they won’t be at risk for losing any federal funding,” she said. Under SB 226, patients and their caregivers would be responsible for acquiring and administering medical marijuana, and it would need to be stored securely at all times in a locked container. Smoking or vaping of medical cannabis would be prohibited, so patients would need to consume it via other methods. Healthcare facility officials would need to see a copy of patients’ state medical marijuana registry ID cards, and they would be required to note their use of the drug in medical records. They would also need to “develop and disseminate written policies and procedures for the use of medical marijuana within the health care facility.” Facilities would be able to prohibit medical marijuana use if they determine that such use would have an “adverse impact on the medical care and treatment of the patient or is otherwise contraindicated.” They would also be able to suspend permission to use cannabis if a federal agency such as the U.S. Department of Justice or Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services takes an enforcement action against such use or “issues a rule, guidance, or otherwise provides notification to health care facilities that expressly prohibits the use of medical marijuana in health care facilities.” The right to use medical cannabis under the bill, SB 226, would not apply to patients who are in the emergency department. Prior to the floor vote, the bill sponsor consulted with Medical Society of Delaware and the Delaware Healthcare Association to craft an amendment, which was adopted in committee, specifying that the legislation applies only to licensed acute care hospitals and not other types of healthcare facilities, and clarifying that patients and caregivers must notify attending physicians of patients’ use of medical cannabis. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile in Delaware, the Senate in January voted to override the governor’s veto of a bill that would prevent local governments from imposing onerous zoning restrictions that make it more challenging for marijuana businesses to operate in their jurisdictions. Delaware’s adult-use cannabis market launched last August, with the governor touting the state’s first “successful” weekend of adult-use cannabis sales, with total purchases for medical and recreational marijuana totaling nearly $1 million—and compliance checks demonstrating that the regulated market is operating as intended under the law. The launch of Delaware’s legal market came about two years after marijuana legalization was enacted into law under former Gov. John Carney (D). Ahead of the sales roll-out, the governor last July toured one of the state’s cannabis cultivation facilities, praising the quality of marijuana that’s being produced, which he said will be the “French wine of weed.” The launch of the legal market came with some controversy, however, with critics alleging that allowing medical operators to start adult-use sales ahead of other license applicants is unfair. Dozens of other would-be retailers that have either already received licenses or are still awaiting issuance will need to wait for further regulatory approvals until they can open their doors—a situation that’s frustrated some advocates. Two lawmakers who led the push to legalize marijuana sought input from consumers and businesses about the market launch. Sen. Trey Paradee (D), the sponsor of SB 75, and House Majority Whip Rep. Ed Osienski (D)—the primary sponsor of the state’s 2023 legalization bills—put out an online form last year for residents to share thoughts and feedback about the cannabis program anonymously. Separately, a Delaware House committee in January approved a bill to decriminalize public consumption of marijuana. While certain legal marijuana states like Colorado and Ohio still impose criminal penalties for public cannabis use, Delaware stands out as especially punitive, with a maximum penalty that carries the risk of jail time in addition to a fine. The post Delaware Senate Passes Bill To Let Terminally Ill Patients Use Medical Marijuana In Hospitals appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Federal marijuana rescheduling would represent a historic policy change with major implications for cannabis research and industry—but it should be viewed as a “transitional” step that must be followed up with comprehensive reform to better align state and federal law while promoting equity, a new academic paper argues. Professors at the University of California published the analysis in the journal Cannabis & Cannabinoid Research, focusing on the impacts and limitations of moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) as federal agencies recommended following a scientific review. To be sure, rescheduling “would be the most significant federal cannabis policy shift in more than five decades, yet its legal and practical consequences are widely misunderstood,” the paper says, noting that the move has the potential to “expand research capacity and strengthen incentives for [Food and Drug Administration, or FDA] compliant development.” But the reform would not federally legalize marijuana or legitimize state cannabis markets, and confusion around the continued legal disconnect could prove problematic as the reform movement continues to expand, it points out. The authors also emphasized that “rescheduling does not expunge records, repair past harms, or ensure equitable participation and may accelerate consolidation absent protective safeguards.” “We conclude that Schedule III should be treated as a transitional status, with agencies prioritizing research access and public health surveillance while Congress addresses banking, interstate commerce, and durable criminal justice and equity reforms,” the paper says. The analysis—which is based on documentation from federal agencies, reports from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and independent studies on rescheduling—is broken down into two key sections: What moving cannabis to Schedule III does do, and what it doesn’t do. On a surface level, rescheduling would finally recognize the medical value of marijuana, consistent with the definition of a Schedule III drug. Such substances hold relatively low abuse potential with some currently accepted medical use. As a Schedule I drug, marijuana is currently considered medically useless and uniquely dangerous under federal law. The report also says that “perhaps the most consequential long-term impact of rescheduling is its effect on research,” removing certain barriers associated with studying Schedule I drugs that have deterred scientists from taking on the added costs and logistical requirements to research marijuana. “Rescheduling would also mitigate the chilling effect that Schedule I stigma has had on academic and clinical participation, thereby enabling broader institutional engagement,” the authors said. “Recent executive actions directing federal agencies to prioritize medical cannabis and cannabidiol research reinforce this shift.” Another impact of rescheduling is that, while it wouldn’t mean automatic FDA approval of cannabis products available in state markets across the country, it would clarify “regulatory incentives for product development.” The paper also explains that “one of the most immediate commercial effects of rescheduling would be relief” from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code known as 280E, which currently prevents state-licensed cannabis businesses from taking federal tax deductions that are available to other traditional industries. “This shift would improve reinvestment capacity, debt service, and financial stability for many operators,” the authors said. “However, increased capital availability may also accelerate consolidation if effective equity-protective measures are not put in place. This dynamic could have negative public health consequences, as the history of tobacco use suggests.” Rescheduling would not mean that marijuana would be federally legalized, the paper stresses, nor would it allow for interstate marijuana commerce or “confer FDA approval on existing products.” “State-legal cannabis would remain federally unlawful unless specific statutory exemptions or FDA approval pathways are in place,” it says. “Banking access would remain constrained without congressional action, such as the enactment of the SAFE or SAFER Banking Act, which would provide statutory protections allowing banks and credit unions to offer financial services to state-legal cannabis businesses without exposure to federal penalties. These limitations reflect structural features of federal law rather than regulatory oversight.” Further, rescheduling “does not resolve the legal paradox in state markets: compliance with state law does not guarantee federal legality,” it continues, stating that the resulting tension “may persist for years, underscoring the need for legislative clarity.” As many advocates have explained, moving marijuana to Schedule III on its own also “does not advance social equity,” despite the fact that criminalization “has inflicted significant harm on disadvantaged communities through arrests, convictions, and collateral consequences.” “Although rescheduling acknowledges medical use, it does not expunge records, repair past harms, or ensure equitable participation in legal markets,” the paper says. “Sequencing reforms to include targeted capital access, technical assistance, and protections against predatory acquisitions is essential.” “Federal agencies should treat Schedule III as a transitional status. Priorities should include expanding research access, strengthening public health surveillance, and protecting equity operators. Congress retains responsibility for resolving issues related to interstate commerce, banking, and criminal justice reform. Reform sequencing should explicitly guard against displacement caused by consolidation.” “Rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III would mark a historic recalibration of federal drug policy. It aligns statutory classifications with contemporary medical evidence without legalizing cannabis, approving products, or resolving equity concerns,” the authors conclude. “Properly understood, Schedule III is a starting point—an opportunity to replace absolute declarations with evidence and to pursue a coherent, equitable cannabis policy grounded in science and law.” What the paper doesn’t address is the current rulemaking status of the rescheduling proposal, which resulted from a review mandate under the Biden administration. President Donald Trump subsequently signed an executive order in December that directed the attorney general to expeditiously finalize the rescheduling process, but that’s yet to materialize. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile, the first-ever White House drug czar recently said that while he loves Trump and “almost everything he does,” that affection doesn’t extend to the pending proposal to federally reschedule marijuana, which he described as a “gateway drug” that’s harming youth. A White House spokesperson defended the administration’s rescheduling push in an earlier interview with Fox News Digital, stating that it’s part of his “pledge to expand medical research into applications of marijuana and cannabidiols.” “The president’s historic action paved the way for the development of promising new treatments for American patients, especially veterans—and the presence of several leaders from law enforcement and veterans groups at the Oval Office signing is indicative of how President Trump continues to push the envelope to support our nation’s heroes,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai said. The rescheduling plan has been met with mixed reactions on Capitol Hill. For example, prohibitionist Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) half-jokingly told Marijuana Moment last month that he felt the Justice Department should “take about 20 years” to finish the rescheduling process. In December, Harris separately said Trump doesn’t have the authority to unilaterally reschedule marijuana via executive order. But while lawmakers could overrule any administrative move to enact the reform, it would be a “heavy lift” in the Republican-controlled Congress, he acknowledged. Another GOP lawmaker on the other side of the debate, Congressional Cannabis Caucus co-chair Rep. Dave Joyce (R-OH), recently told Marijuana Moment that while marijuana rescheduling might not be at the top of the agenda for the Justice Department or White House amid competing interests, he and bipartisan colleagues will be ready when “opportunity does present itself.” Joyce separately said in January that he doesn’t think the attorney general would seek to undermine the president’s executive order to move marijuana to Schedule III despite any personal reservations she may have about the policy change. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Trump’s first pick for attorney general this term who ultimately withdrew his nomination, raised eyebrows after posting on X that he’s been told the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is actively drafting a rescheduling rule and intended to issue it “ASAP.” There’s some confusion around that point, however, as a rule is already pending before the Justice Department—and a new rule would presumably be subject to additional administrative review and public comment. A Democratic senator told Marijuana Moment in January that it’s “too early to tell” what the implications of Trump’s cannabis order would be—saying that while there are “things that look promising” about it, he is “very concerned about where the DOJ will land.” “The ability of the Trump administration to speak out of both sides of their mouth is staggering,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said. “So I’m just going to wait and see right now. Obviously, there’s things that look promising—to end generations of injustice. I really want to wait and see.” In January, two GOP senators filed an amendment to block the Trump administration from rescheduling cannabis, but it was not considered on the floor. Meanwhile, DEA recently said the cannabis rescheduling appeal process “remains pending” despite Trump’s executive order. Bondi, the attorney general, separately missed a congressionally mandated deadline in January to issue guidelines for easing barriers to research on Schedule I substances such as marijuana and psychedelics. Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images. The post Marijuana Rescheduling Is A ‘Transitional’ Step That Must Be Followed By Banking, Commerce And Justice Reforms, New Analysis Says appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Bipartisan congressional lawmakers have filed a bill that would repeal a decades-old federal statute that’s led to the denial of housing for millions of people with prior drug convictions. Reps. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-FL) and Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA) filed the legislation—titled the “Fair Future Act”—last week. An earlier version was introduced with a Senate companion last session, but it did not advance to enactment. The measure would strike a section of the 1988 Fair Housing Amendments Act that the lawmakers say has prevented more than nine million people from accessing rental housing no matter how serious the offense was or how long it’s been since they’ve been convicted. “Because drug laws vary widely from state to state, this policy can produce dramatically different outcomes for Americans living just miles apart,” a press release from Frost’s office says. “In one state, a person may serve jail time for marijuana possession and then face permanent exclusion from federal Fair Housing protections. Across the state line, however, the same conduct may be entirely legal.” Frost said that “housing is a fundamental human right and the foundation for a stable and dignified life.” “People who have served their time and repaid their debt to society should be no exception. Outdated housing policies and conflicting state laws deny those with prior drug convictions a fair shot at reentering society,” he said. “At the same time, the criminalization of homelessness only deepens the cycle of instability, setting people up to fail before they have a chance to rebuild. The Fair Future Act will help break this cycle of exclusion and ensure that a past mistake does not erase a person’s right to a safe, stable place to call home.” Mackenzie, for his part, said that fair housing access “is fundamental to the American Dream,” and, for many Americans, the current statute “has become an insurmountable obstacle.” “By allowing housing providers to automatically reject some applicants based on certain past drug convictions, regardless of how much time has passed, the law can shut the door on individuals who have worked to rebuild their lives,” the congressman said. “It’s time to give every American equal opportunity when applying for a lease.” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) filed the Senate companion of the Fair Future Act in 2024. It remains to be seen whether he will lead on the legislation in his chamber this session. Booker and Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) introduced a separate bill in December to allow people living in federally assisted housing to use marijuana in compliance with state laws without having to fear losing their homes. Under current policy, people who live in public housing are prohibited from using controlled substances in those facilities regardless of state law, and landlords are able to evict them. The bicameral legislation—titled the “Marijuana in Federally Assisted Housing Parity Act”—would change that. Norton has filed similar versions of the proposal over recent sessions, but the reform has yet to be enacted. Booker joined Norton in sponsoring the legislation last Congress as well. In 2018, a Trump administration official said that she was working to resolve conflicting federal and state marijuana laws as it applies to residency in federally-subsidized housing, but it’s not clear what came of that effort. Norton sent a letter to HUD in 2021 that implored the department to use executive discretion and not punish people over cannabis in legal states. In response, the President Joe Biden’s HUD secretary told the congresswoman that it is statutorily required to continue denying federally assisted housing to people who use marijuana, even if they’re acting in compliance with state law. — 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. — Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) also raised the issue during a committee hearing in 2019, pressing former HUD Secretary Ben Carson on policies that cause public housing residents and their families to be evicted for committing low-level offenses such as marijuana possession. Ocasio-Cortez and then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) also filed legislation that year that would protect people with low-level drug convictions from being denied access to or being evicted from public housing. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) also introduced an affordable housing bill in 2020 that included a provision to prevent landlords from evicting people over manufacturing marijuana extracts if they have a license to do so. Last week, Merkley filed an amendment to House-passed housing bill with provisions that would allow people who work in the state-legal marijuana industry to qualify for federal mortgage loans. Read the latest version of the Fair Future Act below: The post New Bipartisan Congressional Bill Would Prevent Housing Discrimination Against People Convicted Of Marijuana And Other Drug Offenses appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

There is a certain fantasy associated with the grace and sophistication of an airhostess. Our escorts from this profession bring that same level of poise, care, and attention to detail into your private time. They know how to take care of you and ensure your journey into pleasure is smooth and unforgettable. Fulfill that secret fantasy today. Welcome aboard a beautiful Airhostess Escort In Delhi for a first-class experience.

Senate psychedelics bill; Feds reject Snoop’s “Smoke Weed” trademark; MD medical marijuana for firefighters; Cannabis consumers’ politics 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… Hold on, just one second before you read today’s news. Have you thought about giving some financial support to Marijuana Moment? If so, today would be a great day to contribute. We’re planning our reporting for the coming months and it would really help to know what kind of support we can count on. Check us out on Patreon and sign up to give $25/month today: https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office denied an application to trademark “Smoke Weed Everyday” that was filed by Snoop Dogg’s company—determining that registrations can’t be issued for federally illegal goods and that the phrase is too “commonly used” to “function as a trademark.” Sens. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) and David McCormick (R-PA) filed a bill to provide $30 million to support psychedelic-focused “centers for excellence” operated by the Department of Veterans Affairs where veterans could receive treatment involving substances like psilocybin, MDMA and ibogaine. An Ohio cannabis campaign has less than one week left to collect enough signatures for a referendum to block new marijuana and hemp restrictions from taking effect. The Delaware Senate Health & Social Services Committee approved a bill to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities. The Maryland House Economic Matters Committee held a hearing on a bill to protect firefighters and rescue workers from being penalized for off-duty use of medical cannabis, with the sponsor saying they “should not be punished for seeking legal, medically prescribed relief for the physical toll of that work.” NuggMD’s Andrew Graham authored a new Marijuana Moment op-ed about polling data that shows “cannabis consumers as a group do not have a political party preference that differs from the general electorate.” / FEDERAL The Drug Enforcement Administration is promoting a podcast about the science of addiction. The Congressional Research Service published a report about drug use in the military. / STATES New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill’s (D) budget proposal projects $106 million in marijuana revenue for Fiscal year 2027, with $25.5 million being used to support hospital- and community-based violence intervention programs. Minnesota regulators announced a recall of cannabis products that do not meet THC content or labeling requirements. Delaware’s top marijuana regulator discussed the rollout of the state’s recreational market. Colorado regulators published average market rates for retail marijuana. California regulators sent updates on various cannabis issues. The Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Advisory Board will meet on March 25. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / INTERNATIONAL North Macedonia regulators are revoking medical cannabis business licenses over alleged violations. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A study found that “cannabis users performed modestly better on tests of numeric memory and fluid intelligence, but no significant differences were observed in longitudinal cognitive change.” A study suggested that “medical cannabis reimbursement may be a viable option for very select workers’ compensation patients.” / ADVOCACY, OPINION & ANALYSIS The Texas Hemp Coalition transitioned to inactive operational status “until meaningful progress is made toward advancing and protecting the hemp industry in Texas.” / BUSINESS Verano Holdings Corp. reported quarterly net revenue of $206.6 million and a net loss of $183.4 million. SNDL Inc. reported quarterly net revenue of C$252.5 million. Ascend Wellness Holdings, Inc. reported quarterly net revenue of $120.5 million and a net loss of $48.7 million. Village Farms International, Inc. reported quarterly net sales of $49.6 million. MariMed Inc. reported quarterly revenue of $41.7 million and a net loss of $4.6 million. 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 Ohio cannabis referendum faces deadline next week (Newsletter: March 13, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

This sounds like a really interesting and empowering workshop! Meggyn's approach to body positivity through art is inspiring. The coloring book sounds like a fun and creative way to explore self-love. If you enjoy this kind of hands-on activity, you might also enjoy the Suika Game. It's a surprisingly relaxing and engaging puzzle game – a different kind of creative outlet but equally satisfying!

Snoop Dogg’s signature catchphrase “Smoke Weed Everyday” cannot be trademarked by the artist because marijuana remains federally illegal and the slogan has become too popular in mainstream culture, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) says. Dr. ETC Holdco, LLC—an entity affiliated with Snoop that owns his intellectual property portfolio—submitted a trademark application for the phrase in 2024. Then, nearly two years later, it received a denial letter from USPTO on Tuesday. The federal agency, which falls under the U.S. Department of Commerce, gave two main reasons for the rejection: 1) Goods and services marketed under a trademark must comply with federal law, and “the application includes items or activities that involve a per se violation” of federal law, and 2) the phrase comes from a “song lyric commonly used in association with cannabis use,” making it too popular to exclusively trademark. “To qualify for a federal registration, the use of a mark in commerce must be lawful under federal law in the sense that the commerce recited in the application complies with applicable federal laws that regulate the identified goods and/or services,” USPTO said. “If the goods or services with which a mark is intended to be used are prohibited by law, the applicant can neither use its mark in lawful commerce nor have the requisite bona fide intent to use the mark in lawful commerce. ” The letter also explains how certain hemp-related terms and phrases could potentially be eligible for trademark registrations unlike those linked to marijuana because hemp and its derivatives were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill. However, because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has declined to enact rules allowing for the lawful marketing of cannabinoids like CBD as a food items or dietary supplements, USTPO said it would similar deny trademark applications for those products. The agency’s denial letter additionally said the registration was refused “because the applied-for mark is a slogan or term that does not function as a trademark or service mark to indicate the source of applicant’s goods and/or services and to identify and distinguish them from others.” “In this case, the applied-for mark is an informational social, political, religious, or similar kind of message that merely conveys support of, admiration for, or affiliation with the ideals conveyed by the message,” it said. “Terms and phrases that merely convey an informational message are not registrable.” To support its case, USTPO provided examples of the phrase “Smoke Weed Everyday” appearing on various products sold by retailers such as Amazon, Weed Dreams and Red Bubble. “Because consumers are accustomed to seeing this term or phrase used in ordinary language by many different sources, they would not perceive it as a mark identifying the source of applicant’s goods and/or services but rather as only conveying an informational message,” it said. Josh Gerben, an attorney and co-founder of Gerben IP, said in a blog post about the USTPO denial that Snoop’s company may appeal the decision, but “the most difficult” challenge the case presents “is the federal legality issue tied to cannabis sales.” “The application identifies retail services involving cannabis products,” he said. “Under current Federal Law, marijuana remains illegal, and the USPTO routinely refuses applications tied to federally unlawful goods or services.” “Taken together, the refusals create a steep uphill battle,” Gerben said. “Fortunately for Snoop Dogg, this refusal affects only the trademark registration…not the activity the phrase famously celebrates.” Meanwhile, Snoop has been gradually expanding his cannabis enterprise over recent years. For example, last year, he brought another direct-to-consumer hemp lifestyle platform to market under his Death Row Records label. In 2024, the artist also expanded his Smoke Weed Every Day (S.W.E.D.) brand with a separate direct-to-consumer retail platform selling hemp-derived cannabinoid products, smoking supplies and other merchandise. That platform also acts as a directory for S.W.E.D.’s physical retail marijuana locations, including a Los Angeles dispensary and a coffeeshop in Amsterdam, both of which were announced in 2024. Snoop, who’s referenced marijuana in songs and other performances for decades, has remained a cultural in the cannabis community as the drug has grown more mainstream. Today he regularly talks about his relationship with marijuana in interviews and TV appearances. In an appearance on Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen in 2024, Snoop confirmed that his entourage includes a staffer tasked with making sure people he smokes with don’t get too high, telling them “that’s enough” when they’ve reached their limit. It’s unclear if the person is the same Snoop disclosed paying upwards of $50,000 a year to roll blunts for him. Snoop estimated in 2019 that he consumes 81 blunts per day. In 2024, meanwhile, the artist took on a new role as a guest meteorologist on the TODAY Show, taking viewers through a personalized marijuana-themed weather map featuring cities from Weed, California and Tokeland, Washington to High Point, North Carolina and Pottsville, Pennsylvania. Late night host Jimmy Kimmel recognized Snoop’s cannabis legacy in 2023 when he declared the artist’s birthday, October 20, the “new high holiday” of DoggFather’s Day. While he might be best known as a prolific consumer, Snoop has also advocated for reform, which includes calling for a policy change at the NBA so that players could freely use cannabis off the court. He said that he supported the reform based on the “medical side of it, the health benefits and how it could actually help ease the opioids and all the pills that they’ve been given and the injections.” Snoop has long been pushing athletics organizations to adopt lenient marijuana policies, often emphasizing that point that cannabis could serve as a less addictive and dangerous alternative to prescription opioids. The artist had previously launched another marijuana brand, called Leafs By Snoop, in Colorado in 2015. Image element courtesy of TechCrunch. The post Feds Deny Snoop Dogg Request To Trademark ‘Smoke Weed Everyday’ Because Marijuana Is Illegal And Song Lyric Is Too Popular appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Maryland lawmakers on Wednesday took up a bill to protect firefighters and rescue workers from being penalized over their lawful use of medical marijuana off the job—taking testimony on the unique need to give emergency service professionals the option to use cannabis as an alternative treatment for health conditions that commonly afflict the first responder community. Members of the House Economic Matters Committee met to discuss the legislation, HB 797 from Del. Adrian Boafo (D), about a week after a Senate companion version of the cannabis measure sponsored by Sen. Carl Jackson (D) advanced through that chamber. This marks the latest in a series of attempts to enact the reform over recent sessions, Boafo said at the committee hearing on Wednesday, and lawmakers are “bringing it back because it’s so critically important to our firefighters” and other rescue professionals who “work long shifts in tense emergencies and high-stress situations every day.” “Many experience chronic pain, injuries and anxiety as a direct result of serving our communities,” he said. “Medical cannabis, when prescribed and used off duty, can help manage those conditions. But under current policies, firefighters who use medically prescribed cannabis can face retaliation or discipline from their employers, even when they’re following the law.” “That leaves many of these public servants with a difficult choice: Either continue doing their jobs in pain, or turn to stronger prescription drug drugs, often opiates, just to get through the day,” Boafo said, while emphasizing that “nothing in this bill allows for impairment on the job” and that those who come to work impaired “will still face serious consequences and will be reported” to state emergency medical services regulators. “Public safety remains a top priority here in Maryland, but our state must modernize its laws to protect employees who use medically certified cannabis responsibly and outside of the workplace,” he said. “Our firefighters and rescue professionals dedicate their lives to protecting us. They should not be punished for seeking legal, medically prescribed relief for the physical toll of that work.” HB 797 would amend the state’s medical marijuana law by stipulating that firefighters, emergency medical technicians, cardiac rescue technicians and paramedics employed by the state or local governments could not face employment discrimination or retaliation for testing positive for cannabis metabolites if they’re a registered medical marijuana patient. Specifically, employers could not “discipline, discharge, or otherwise discriminate against the fire and rescue public safety employee with respect to the employee’s compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment” if they test positive while holding a medical cannabis registration. Further, employers could not “limit, segregate, or classify its employees in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive the fire and rescue public safety employee of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect the fire and rescue public safety employee’s status as an employee.” Nothing in the legislation would prohibit employers from taking action against an employee for showing up to work while under the influence of cannabis, and any instances where a public safety worker is found to be impaired while on duty would be reported to the State Emergency Medical Services Board. Jeff Buttle, president of the Professional Firefighters of Maryland, told the House committee that the bill “provides important employment protections,” noting that “many firefighters, EMTs and paramedics experience job-related injuries, chronic pain and stress as a result of critical work—work they perform to protect our communities.” “For some of these professionals, medical cannabis—prescribed and used legally under Maryland law—may be part of their preferred treatment program,” he said. “However, under current policies, these employees may still face discipline or termination simply for using medical cannabis and then testing positive, even if their use occurs legally and off duty.” “House Bill 797 addresses this gap by ensuring that fire and rescue public safety employees are not discriminated against solely because they are medical cannabis patients,” he said. “Maryland’s firefighters and EMS professionals dedicate their lives to protecting others. This bill helps ensure they are treated fairly under the law, while continuing to uphold the highest [level] of safety and professionalism.” Grant Walker, president of the Prince George’s County Professional Fire Fighters and Paramedics Association, said that while most Maryland residents have been able to access medical cannabis for over a decade, “firefighters—the men and women who run into burning buildings and respond to medical emergencies—are still forced to choose between their careers and physician-recommended treatments.” “The human cost of this policy is real,” he said. “Firefighting is a profession marked by occupational cancer, chronic injuries, PTSD and severe sleep deprivation. Many firefighters are also veterans, already navigating complex treatment plans. They deserve access to appropriate medical care.” John Gardell, battalion chief with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Fire, also spoke in favor of the legislation, while stressing that “the ability to use medical cannabis does not allow someone to be impaired on duty.” “As a fire service professional for over 30 years, the men and women working around such an individual would not stand for it,” he said. “They know that their lives depend on that person. In the eight years the city of Pittsburgh has allowed the use of medical cannabis, we have had zero incidents of on-duty impairment. These men and women who dedicate their lives to protecting their communities deserve access to treatments and improve their health and wellbeing.” NORML’s Paul Armentano shared a scientific perspective on the issue in his testimony, explaining how “patients who consume medical cannabis during their off hours should be treated equally because THC primary metabolite is fat soluble,” meaning that it’s “detectable for weeks, even months, post-abstinence, long after any psychoactive effects have worn off.” “For this reason, many jurisdictions have abolished the use of these discriminatory urine tests in the workplace,” he said, listing numerous states and cities that have enacted such reform. “Following the abolishment of these cannabis-related urine testing policies, none of these jurisdictions have seen any decline in workplace safety or performance.” The advancement of the House and Senate cannabis bills comes a year after officials in Maryland’s most populous county said they were moving to loosen marijuana policies for would-be police officers in an effort to boost recruitment amid a staffing shortage. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile in Maryland, lawmakers are also advancing legislation to extend a psychedelics task force through the end of 2027 to develop updated recommendations on expanding therapeutic access to the novel drugs and potentially creating a regulatory framework for broader legalization. Legislators also took up a bill last month to protect the gun rights of medical marijuana patients in the state. Members of the House Judiciary Committee discussed the legislation from Del. Robin Grammer (R), who has sponsored multiple versions of the cannabis and gun rights measure over recent sessions, but they have not yet advanced to enactment. Separately, a Republican congressional lawmaker representing Maryland who has built a reputation as one of the staunchest opponents of marijuana reform on Capitol Hill—and whose record includes ensuring that Washington, D.C. officials are blocked from legalizing recreational cannabis sales—may be at risk of being unseated in November due to redistricting in his state. The post Maryland Lawmakers Take Up Bill To Protect Firefighters And Rescue Workers Who Use Medical Marijuana Off Duty appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Delaware senators have approved a bill that would allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities. Members of the Senate Health & Social Services Committee on Tuesday passed the legislation from Sen. Marie Pinkney (D), along with an amendment to clarify its scope. “This is a compassionate measure for patients in acute care settings to seek comfort with the use of their medical marijuana in a safe and dignified manner,” Christopher Otto, executive director of the Delaware Nurses Association, told senators before the vote. Pinkney, the chair of the panel, explained that she worked with the Medical Society of Delaware and the Delaware Healthcare Association to craft the adopted amendment, which specifies that the bill applies only to licensed acute care hospitals and not other types of healthcare facilities, and clarifies that patients and caregivers must notify attending physicians of patients’ use of medical cannabis. Under SB 226, patients and their caregivers would be responsible for acquiring and administering medical marijuana, and it would need to be stored securely at all times in a locked container. Smoking or vaping of medical cannabis would be prohibited, so patients would need to consume it via other methods. Healthcare facility officials would need to see a copy of patients’ state medical marijuana registry ID cards, and they would be required to note their use of the drug in medical records. They would also need to “develop and disseminate written policies and procedures for the use of medical marijuana within the health care facility.” Facilities would be able to prohibit medical marijuana use if they determine that such use would have an “adverse impact on the medical care and treatment of the patient or is otherwise contraindicated.” They would also be able to suspend permission to use cannabis if a federal agency such as the U.S. Department of Justice or Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services takes an enforcement action against such use or “issues a rule, guidance, or otherwise provides notification to health care facilities that expressly prohibits the use of medical marijuana in health care facilities.” The right to use medical cannabis under the bill would not apply to patients who are in the emergency department. The Health & Social Services Committee met to discuss the legislation in January, but the sponsor agreed to hold it for a vote so he could discuss the proposed policy change with healthcare stakeholders. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile in Delaware, the Senate in January voted to override the governor’s veto of a bill that would prevent local governments from imposing onerous zoning restrictions that make it more challenging for marijuana businesses to operate in their jurisdictions. Delaware’s adult-use cannabis market launched last August, with the governor touting the state’s first “successful” weekend of adult-use cannabis sales, with total purchases for medical and recreational marijuana totaling nearly $1 million—and compliance checks demonstrating that the regulated market is operating as intended under the law. The launch of Delaware’s legal market came about two years after marijuana legalization was enacted into law under former Gov. John Carney (D). Ahead of the sales roll-out, the governor last July toured one of the state’s cannabis cultivation facilities, praising the quality of marijuana that’s being produced, which he said will be the “French wine of weed.” The launch of the legal market came with some controversy, however, with critics alleging that allowing medical operators to start adult-use sales ahead of other license applicants is unfair. Dozens of other would-be retailers that have either already received licenses or are still awaiting issuance will need to wait for further regulatory approvals until they can open their doors—a situation that’s frustrated some advocates. Meanwhile, two lawmakers who led the push to legalize marijuana are separately seeking input from consumers and businesses about the market launch. Paradee, the sponsor of SB 75, and House Majority Whip Rep. Ed Osienski (D)—the primary sponsor of the state’s 2023 legalization bills—put out an online form last year for residents to share thoughts and feedback about the cannabis program anonymously. The idea is to identify any hiccups that lawmakers might need to address when they return for next year’s legislative session. Separately, a Delaware House committee in January approved a bill to decriminalize public consumption of marijuana. While certain legal marijuana states like Colorado and Ohio still impose criminal penalties for public cannabis use, Delaware stands out as especially punitive, with a maximum penalty that carries the risk of jail time in addition to a fine. Photo courtesy of Philip Steffan. The post Delaware Senators Approve Bill To Allow Terminally Ill Patients To Use Medical Marijuana In Hospitals appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Bipartisan senators have introduced a bill to provide $30 million in funding annually to establish psychedelic-focused “centers for excellence” at U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities, where veterans could receive novel treatment involving substances like psilocybin, MDMA and ibogaine. As Trump administration officials continue to promote the therapeutic potential of psychedelics, with plans in the works to expand access and research opportunities, Sens. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) and David McCormick (R-PA) filed the “Innovative Therapies Centers of Excellence Act” this week to help realize that goal. A House companion version of the bill—sponsored by Congressional Psychedelics Advancing Therapies (PATH) Caucus co-chairs Reps. Lou Correa (D-CA) and Jack Bergman (R-MI)—was introduced last year, but it has not yet advanced in the chamber. The House and Senate measures are substantively identical, with minor formatting differences. “When I came back from Iraq, I saw my fellow Marines, like so many other veterans, struggle to get the help they needed,” Gallego said in a press release. “Our veterans sacrificed so much for this country. We owe it to them to explore every treatment that can help them heal, including therapeutic uses of psychedelics that may finally break through when others haven’t. I’m proud to lead this bill to help the VA study promising alternative therapies that can save lives.” The legislation, SB 4031, would require VA to designate at least five of its medical facilities as centers for excellence that would be charged with researching the therapeutic potential of psychedelics for conditions such as anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance misuse. It also lists several psychedelics that the lawmakers want to see explored: MDMA, DMT, ibogaine, ketamine and psilocybin. The VA under secretary could expand that list, and they could also add medical conditions that could be studied. “Our veterans face disproportionately high rates of PTSD, depression, and substance use disorders due to combat exposure, trauma, and challenges that follow them home,” McCormick said. “Every day, 17 of them die by suicide. That must change.” “The Innovative Therapies Centers of Excellence Act will ensure the VA keeps pace with the private sector by expanding access to cutting-edge treatments, like MDMA-assisted therapy, promoting ongoing research on veteran health outcomes, and closing gaps in treatment services for our veterans who need it most,” he said. “We owe them nothing less than our very best.” There are a number of factors that VA would need to take into account as it selected the facilities that would host the centers of excellence, including regional distribution, partnerships with accredited medical schools, ability to recruit scientists “capable of ingenuity and creativity in medical research efforts,” data collection capabilities and more. The legislation would provide for $30 million in appropriations for VA annually to carry out the research. VA would need to submit a report with findings and recommendations to veterans-focused congressional committees within two years of enactment and each subsequent year. Among other things, the report would need to detail activities being carried out at the centers, key findings from the research projects and recommendations on ways to “improve the delivery of innovative therapies to veterans.” Melissa Lavasani, founder and CEO of the Psychedelic Medicine Coalition (PMC), said on Thursday that the bill “represents more than a research initiative” because it’s a “step toward building the clinical and policy infrastructure needed to responsibly integrate innovative therapies into modern healthcare.” “The VA can serve as a national proving ground, helping generate the evidence and care models that could ultimately benefit patients across the entire healthcare system,” she said. Amy Rising, a veteran and psychedelics reform advocate, said the veteran community “should never feel like the country they served has run out of options for their healing.” “We owe it to them to pursue every responsible, evidence-based pathway that could improve treatment for PTSD, depression, and other serious health conditions,” she said. While it’s uncertain if or when the House or new Senate bills might advance, their introduction this session represents a continuation of a unique theme in Congress over recent years, with bipartisan lawmakers increasingly finding common ground on psychedelics research and therapy. — 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. — Those lawmakers notably have allies in top positions within the Trump administration, including VA Secretary Doug Collins and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. who have both embraced psychedelic policy reform. Kennedy recently told Joe Rogan on a podcast episode that the administration is “very anxious” to create a pathway for the novel therapies and that officials across federal agencies want to “get it out to the public as quickly as possible.” Multiple veterans groups also recently advised congressional lawmakers about the need to continue exploring psychedelics and marijuana as alternative treatment options for the military veteran population at hearings on Capitol Hill. The Wounded Warrior Project (WWP) and Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) specifically cited the Innovative Therapies Centers of Excellence Act as an example of a reform they’re backing. Correa and Bergman, the House sponsors of that legislation, separately filed a bill in January that would also promote research into the therapeutic potential of certain psychedelics in the treatment of serious mental health conditions experienced by veterans. The bipartisan duo in January also discussed the importance of strategically advancing psychedelics reform in a way that mitigates bureaucratic conflict and the influence of outside interests. Even just one misstep could threaten to upend the movement, they said. Last year, the VA secretary touted his role in promoting psychedelics access for veterans with serious mental health conditions, saying he “opened that door probably wider than most ever thought” was possible. The department in 2024 faced criticism after rejecting a grant application from an organization that helps connect veterans to programs abroad where they can receive psychedelic therapy to treat serious mental health conditions. Meanwhile, in November, Kennedy, Vice President JD Vance, the FDA commissioner and other Trump administration officials attended a “Make America Healthy Again” summit that featured a session dedicated to exploring psychedelic medicine. In June, Kennedy said his agency is “absolutely committed” to expanding research on the benefits of psychedelic therapy and, alongside of the head of FDA, is aiming to provide legal access to such substances for military veterans “within 12 months.” The secretary also said in April that he had a “wonderful experience” with LSD at 15 years old, which he took because he thought he’d be able to see dinosaurs, as portrayed in a comic book he was a fan of. Last October, Kennedy specifically criticized FDA under the prior administration over the agency’s “suppression of psychedelics” and a laundry list of other issues that he said amounted to a “war on public health” that would end under the Trump administration. Photo elements courtesy of carlosemmaskype and Apollo. The post Bipartisan Senate Bill Would Create Psychedelic-Focused VA Research Centers To Explore Innovative Treatments For Veterans appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

very nice content pls write more Dunearn House Frasers

“Cannabis consumers as a group do not have a political party preference that differs from the general electorate.” By Andrew Graham, NuggMD The persistent assumption that cannabis consumers are not sufficiently loyal to the Republican Party has always stood in the way of progress, to one degree or another, in the fight to end prohibition. With Republicans in unified control of the government and an executive order to complete the process of rescheduling the plant in force, that assumption affects how audiences who are not necessarily in tune with the culture think and act with respect to cannabis policy. Cannabis consumers are the main stakeholders in any change to the legality of the plant. Whether they favor or disfavor the people in power is an obvious factor in what happens next. That is why it’s worth zooming in fully on whether that persistent assumption is true, and if so, to what degree. As it turns out, the notion that cannabis consumers are predisposed as a group to vote a certain way is flat-out wrong. The data says cannabis consumers as a voting bloc have the same partisan composition as the general electorate. The bloc does not favor Democrats, “liberals” or progressives, nor does it disfavor the Republican Party. Here’s how we know: The NuggMD-Marijuana Moment Presidential Approval Poll has been monitoring the political affiliation of cannabis consumers since last spring. Our first set of consolidated data on political affiliation (combined n = 2,081), released today, shows no statistically significant difference between cannabis consumers and everybody else when it comes to political affiliation. In the 31 states that we poll in, cannabis consumers identify as Republican, Democrat or something else at the same rate as the general population of those states, as measured in the 2024 Cooperative Election Study, a benchmark survey on political affiliation that drills down to the state level. In other words, cannabis consumers as a group do not have a political party preference that differs from the general electorate. Cannabis consumers General population* Republican 26.5% 28.6% Democrat 35.7% 33.6% Other/Something else 37.8% 37.8% Cooperative Election Study 2024, n≈60,000, filtered to 31 states, weighted by commonweight. The differences shown fall within the pooled margin of error of ±2.15 percent and are not statistically significant. Notably, our polling footprint is already 1.5 percentage points more Democratic than the nation as a whole. Taking that handicap into account, the top-lines are essentially the same. Putting adult-use on state ballots may juice turnout, which generally benefits Democratic candidates. But the data shows the harmful results of prohibition are felt equally across partisan lines. We have also been polling the degree to which effectuating pro-cannabis policy, such as moving the plant to Schedule III, would cause the voting bloc in question to shift its level of support for the current administration. This is the area in which the cannabis consumer voting bloc is unique. Party identification is one of the most stable and slowest-moving psychological attachments a voter holds. Nevertheless, our consolidated data across three waves of presidential approval polls conducted during the past year shows a considerable political reward is available to President Donald Trump if Attorney General Pam Bondi obeys his order to complete the rescheduling process. That reward is extraordinarily durable. For instance, more than four in 10 respondents who disapprove of the administration say they would support it more for getting rescheduling done. This is not the same thing as switching party affiliation, but one can view it as a similar form of partisan defection. “If the Trump administration were to reschedule or legalize cannabis, would that change your level of support for it?” (n=1624) Much more A bit more Total movable No change Those who approve 52.0% 8.5% 60.6% 38.6% Those who are neutral 40.9% 10.1% 50.9% 48.5% Those who disapprove 28.7% 14.8% 43.6% 55.2% Forty-three million American adults consume cannabis with regularity, and it is a majority-Republican constituency in that more cannabis consumers live in states the president won in 2024 than in states he did not win. The takeaway is clear: Cannabis consumers aren’t going to fall for empty promises on rescheduling, but they will give credit for it where and when it’s due. Andrew Graham is head of communications for NuggMD. The post The Cannabis Consumer Community Is Just As Bipartisan As The General Population, Polling Data Shows (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

An Ohio campaign is making a final push for signatures to put a referendum on the November ballot that would repeal a law rolling back the state’s marijuana law and ban the sale of consumable hemp products outside of dispensaries. With about a week until a signature turn-in deadline, Ohioans for Cannabis Choice is calling on supporters to spread the word and ensure that they’re able to submit the requisite 248,092 signed petitions by March 19 to secure ballot placement. If the petition drive is successful, the implementation of the cannabis law enacted by Gov. Mike DeWine (R) after the state legalized adult-use marijuana would be put on hold until voters could have their say. If activists fall short, the controversial SB 56 would take effect immediately after the signature submission deadline. Dozens of Ohio businesses—including smoke shops, breweries and local retailers—are hosting petitions on site for voters to sign. Ohioans for Cannabis Choice has an interactive map showing those locations, and it’s urging supporters to promote that resource and urge others to join in the push to repeal SB 56. “This grassroots support is unprecedented in Ohio ballot initiatives and referendums, and we’re not done growing. But we are at a pivotal point in the campaign,” it said in an action alert last week, adding that the law that’d take effect without voter intervention would mean “the hemp products you are selling as businesses and purchasing as consumers, and supporting as Ohio voters WILL BE ILLEGAL and must immediately come off the shelves.” It's a beautiful day to sign the No On SB 56 petition! Find your signing location here -> https://t.co/MQO4YeUIjk pic.twitter.com/WGFytGlrMd — Ohioans for Cannabis Choice (@OH4cannabis) March 11, 2026 “Yes, like you, we are as mad as hell at this government overreach, this attack on consumers’ rights, and this potentially devastating blow to 6,000 small businesses and their employees,” it said. The governor, for his part, has been adamant about cracking down on the unregulated intoxicating hemp market—but the legislation he signed would do more than restrict the sale of cannabinoid products to dispensaries. It would also recriminalize certain marijuana activity that was legalized under the ballot initiative voters approved in 2023, and it’d additionally remove anti-discrimination protections for cannabis consumers that were enacted under that law. DeWine also used his line-item veto powers to cancel a section of the bill that would have delayed the implementation of the ban on hemp beverages. That action is being challenged in a lawsuit filed by breweries. Meanwhile, the referendum campaign working to block the law’s implementation has been in a time crunch since first floating the referendum late last year, only receiving approval to start collecting signatures for ballot placement last month after state officials initially rejected an earlier version of the petition that they said included factual errors. Making the ballot is only part of the battle, though. And while a majority of voters approved marijuana legalization—and polls have indicated that most residents are against aggressive restrictions on hemp sales—it remains to be seen whether the referendum would gain sufficient support in November to prevent an industry upheaval. The governor separately stirred controversy last month after telling critics of the law rolling back the state’s marijuana market and criminalizing intoxicating hemp products to stop “whining” and instead “be happy with their victory at the polls.” When the governor said that “proponents” of the referendum should take the win and accept the policy changes that are being implemented under SB 56, he wasn’t necessarily referring to the broader marijuana industry, as many stakeholders support reining in the consumable hemp market. DeWine’s office and a senator who led the charge to pass the bill have previously criticized the cannabis referendum campaign. A summary of the submitted referendum states that “Sections 1, 2, and 3 of Am. Sub. S. B. No. 56 enact new provisions and amend and repeal existing provisions of the Ohio Revised Code that relate to the regulation, criminalization, and taxation of cannabis products, such as the sale, use, possession, cultivation, license, classification, transport, and manufacture of marijuana and certain hemp products.” “If a majority of the voters vote to not approve Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the Act, then the enacted changes will not take effect and the prior version of the affected laws will remain in effect,” it says. Advocates have flagged a series of concerns with the law, pointing out, for example, that it would eliminate language in statute providing anti-discrimination protections for people who lawfully use cannabis. That includes protections meant to prevent adverse actions in the context of child custody rights, the ability to qualify for organ transplants and professional licensing. It would also recriminalize possessing marijuana from any source that isn’t a state-licensed dispensary in Ohio or from a legal homegrow. As such, people could be charged with a crime for carrying cannabis they bought at a legal retailer in neighboring Michigan. Additionally, it would ban smoking cannabis at outdoor public locations such as bar patios—and it would allow landlords to prohibit vaping marijuana at rented homes. Violating that latter policy, even if it involves vaping in a person’s own backyard at a rental home, would constitute a misdemeanor offense. The legislation would also replace what had been a proposed regulatory framework for intoxicating hemp that the House had approved with a broad prohibition on sales outside marijuana dispensaries following a recent federal move to recriminalize such products. Under the law, hemp items with more than 0.4 mg of total THC per container, or those containing synthetic cannabinoids, could no longer be sold outside of a licensed marijuana dispensary setting. That would align with a recently enacted federal hemp law included in an appropriations package signed by President Donald Trump. The federal law imposing a ban on most consumable hemp products has a one-year implementation window, however, and it appears the Ohio legislation would take effect sooner. As passed by the legislature, a temporary regulatory program for hemp beverages would have stayed in place in Ohio until December 31, 2026, but that provision was vetoed by the governor. The law also includes language stipulating that, if the federal government moves to legalize hemp with higher THC content, it’s the intent of the Ohio legislature to review that policy change and consider potential state-level reforms to regulate such products. — 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. — In September, the Ohio Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) filed proposed rules to build upon the state’s marijuana legalization law, laying out plans to update regulations on labeling and packaging requirements. Ohio retailers sold more than $1 billion worth of legal marijuana products in 2025, according to data from the state Department of Commerce (DOC). Last March, a survey of 38 municipalities by the Ohio State University’s (OSU) Moritz College of Law found that local leaders were “unequivocally opposed” to earlier proposals that would have stripped the planned funding. Meanwhile in Ohio, adults as of June are able to buy more than double the amount of marijuana than they were under previous limits, with state officials determining that the market can sustainably supply both medical cannabis patients and adult consumers. Photo courtesy of Brendan Cleak. The post Ohio Campaign To Block Marijuana And Hemp Restrictions Faces Deadline For Ballot Referendum Signatures appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Online safety bill in Congress & marijuana biz; HI medical cannabis in healthcare facilities; Study: Marijuana a “gateway” to orgasm 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… By starting a $10 per month pledge on Patreon—or about 45 cents per issue of this newsletter—you can help us rely less on ads to cover our expenses, hire more journalists and bring you even more marijuana news. https://www.patreon.com/marijuanamoment / TOP THINGS TO KNOW The Internal Revenue Service said a marijuana company’s argument that the 280E tax penalty doesn’t apply because cannabis doesn’t fall “within the meaning of” of a Schedule I drug would force the U.S. Tax Court to conduct its own rescheduling review under an “imaginary process” that is prohibited by federal law. The House Energy and Commerce Committee approved a bill that would require online platforms to take steps to prevent minors’ access to potentially sensitive content—including advertisements for cannabis products and certain other drugs and services. The Hawaii Senate passed a bill to allow terminally ill patients and qualifying patients over the age of 65 to use medical cannabis in health care facilities, subject to certain limitations. A new scientific review concludes that marijuana may be a “gateway to women’s orgasm” with significant therapeutic potential in the treatment of female orgasmic disorder/difficulty. “Five decades of convergent evidence…demonstrate a consistent association between cannabis use and enhanced orgasmic function.” Jordan Tishler of the Association of Cannabinoid Specialists argues in a new Marijuana Moment op-ed that a plan to launch cannabis kiosks in senior living communities presents access opportunities but also risks that need to be managed “within a medically supervised, ethically structured care model.” / FEDERAL Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) said at a hearing that “there’s a lot more we can do on hemp” and that it is “a growing market that we should be looking at, and not going backwards, on these opportunities to provide farmers with innovative sources of revenue amidst a difficult farm economy.” / STATES The Michigan Supreme Court heard arguments in a case on whether refraining from marijuana use can be mandated as a condition of probation. Oklahoma officials are being sued over a policy requiring medical cannabis businesses to have a certificate of occupancy. New York’s new top marijuana regulator discussed his goals for overseeing the legal industry. Massachusetts regulators are accepting public feedback on marijuana industry worker safety issues and a potential cannabis business license freeze. Oregon regulators published updated data on the psilocybin services program. The California Cannabis Advisory Committee will meet on Thursday. The Rhode Island Cannabis Control Commission will meet on Friday. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — / INTERNATIONAL Colombian President Gustavo Petro criticized marijuana and drug prohibition in a speech before the Commission on Narcotic Drugs. / SCIENCE & HEALTH A review highlighted the “role of cannabis as a potential coping mechanism for caregivers of older adults experiencing emotional burden.” A study found that “cannabidiol mitigates secondary genital injury after thoracic trauma by regulating systemic inflammation and hormone receptor signaling.” / BUSINESS The Boston Garden Dispensary is being sued for allegedly violating the trademark of TD Garden. / CULTURE Harrison Ford dodged Jimmy Kimmel’s question about whether he has ever smoked marijuana with Woody Harrelson. 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 Max Jackson. The post IRS disputes cannabis company’s tax argument (Newsletter: March 12, 2026) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

Excellent job curating trustworthy private servers with community-backed rankings. This is the definitive place to discover servers that value fairness and player activity. Real votes make all the difference when choosing where to play. Chicago Trolley

It's about time Instagram reconsiders its cannabis policy! WeedTube's petition is a crucial step. Many legal businesses are unfairly impacted. Imagine building a stunning structure in block blast , only to have it arbitrarily deleted – that's what these companies face. Let's hope Instagram levels the playing field and recognizes the growing legitimacy of the cannabis industry. Sign the petition!

Retro Bowl combines nostalgic graphics with engaging football management mechanics. Lead your team to legendary victories.

I am all that much satisfied with the substance you have specified. I needed to thank you for this extraordinary article. Retro Game Consoles

I like this post,And I figure that they having a great time to peruse this post,they might take a decent site to make an information,thanks for sharing it to me. Retro Game Handheld

The Hawaii Senate has passed a bill to allow qualifying patients to access medical marijuana at health facilities. After receiving a favorable report in committee last week, the legislation from Sen. Joy San Buenaventura (D) advanced through the full chamber in a unanimous 25-0 vote on Tuesday as part of the consent calendar. A House companion version of the proposal has also been moving through the process this session. The bill states that it’s the “intent of the legislature in enacting this chapter to support the ability of terminally ill patients and qualifying patients over sixty-five years of age with chronic diseases to safely use medical cannabis within specified health care facilities.” Advocates would have liked to see a mandate for health facilities to allow medical cannabis use, but as drafted it would simply permit such policies, while exempting residential treatment centers from the proposed law. Other exceptions built into the legislation, SB 2408, include provisions stipulating that medical marijuana couldn’t be used in substance misuse recovery hospitals, state hospitals or emergency departments of general acute hospitals “while the patient is receiving emergency services and care.” Smoking and vaping cannabis would remain prohibited in health facilities under the proposal, “provided that a home health agency shall only prohibit smoking or vaping immediately before or while home health agency staff are present in the residence.” General acute care hospitals couldn’t allow patients with a chronic disease to use medical cannabis unless they were terminally ill. In the event that a federal regulatory agency, Justice Department or Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) takes enforcement action against a health facility related to the medical cannabis policy, or if they explicitly notify the facility that they’re violating federal law, the health care institution could suspend the policy. Meanwhile, last week, another Hawaii Senate committee approved a bill to allow patients to immediately access medical cannabis once their registrations are submitted, instead of having to wait until their cards are delivered as is the case under current law. Buenaventura, chair of the Health and Human Services Committee, is also the sponsor of her chamber’s version of the proposal. Her panel more recently passed legislation to legalize low-dose and low-potency marijuana, even as members’ counterparts in the House of Representatives have said that cannabis prohibition will not be ended in the state this year. The legislation would allow adults 21 and older to legally possess and use certain amounts of low-dose and low-THC cannabis for personal use, with products limited to a maximum of 5 milligrams of THC per serving. In liquid form, they could have up to 5 milligrams of THC per twelve ounces. The Senate committee action comes after key House lawmakers signaled that cannabis legalization proposals would not be advancing in the 2026 session, citing a lack of sufficient support in their chamber. Despite renewed hopes that those bills—including one from House Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee Chairman David Tarnas (D) that would have put the issue of legalization before voters at the ballot—would advance this year, the sponsor and House Speaker Nadine Nakamura (D) said there wasn’t enough support within the legislature to pass them this round. State officials in January released a report on the potential economic impact of recreational marijuana legalization in the state, including revenue implications related to domestic and international tourism. All told, researchers said survey data and comparative analyses indicate that Hawaii could see anywhere from $46-$90 million in monthly marijuana sales by year five of implementation, after accounting for a maximum 15 percent tax rate on cannabis products. Hawaii’s Senate last year narrowly defeated a proposal that would have increased fivefold the amount of cannabis that a person could possess without risk of criminal charges. Had the measure become law, it would have increased the amount of cannabis decriminalized in Hawaii from the current 3 grams up to 15 grams. Possession of any amount of marijuana up to that 15-gram limit would have been classified as a civil violation, punishable by a fine of $130. A Senate bill that would have legalized marijuana for adults, meanwhile, ultimately stalled for the session. That measure, SB 1613, failed to make it out of committee by a legislative deadline. While advocates felt there was sufficient support for the legalization proposal in the Senate, it’s widely believed that House lawmakers would have ultimately scuttled the measure, as they did last February with a legalization companion bill, HB 1246. In 2024, a Senate-passed legalization bill also fizzled out in the House. Last year’s House vote to stall the bill came just days after approval from a pair of committees at a joint hearing. Ahead of that hearing, the panels received nearly 300 pages of testimony, including from state agencies, advocacy organizations and members of the public. Gov. Josh Green (D) signed separate legislation last year to allow medical marijuana caregivers to grow marijuana on behalf of up to five patients rather than the current one. And in July, the governor signed another bill that establishes a number of new rules around hemp products in Hawaii, including a requirement that distributors and retailers obtain a registration from the Department of Health. Lawmakers also sent a bill to the governor that would help speed the expungement process for people hoping to clear their records of past marijuana-related offenses—a proposal Green signed into law last April. That measure, HB 132, from Tarnas, is intended to expedite expungements happening through a pilot program signed into law in 2024 by Green. Specifically, it will remove a distinction between marijuana and other Schedule V drugs for the purposes of the expungement program. The bill’s proponents said the current wording of the law forces state officials to comb through thousands of criminal records manually in order to identify which are eligible for expungement under the pilot program. Meanwhile, in November, Hawaii officials finalized rules that will allow medical marijuana dispensaries to sell an expanded assortment of products for patients—including dry herb vaporizers, rolling papers and grinders—while revising the state code to clarify that cannabis oils and concentrates can be marketed for inhalation. The department also affirmed its support for federal marijuana rescheduling—a policy change that President Donald Trump ordered to be completed expeditiously but has yet to come to fruition. — 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. — Regulators are also launching a series of courses designed to educate physicians and other healthcare professionals about medical marijuana as the state’s cannabis program expands. The underlying medical marijuana expansion bill signed by the governor in late June, in addition to allowing more patients to more easily access cannabis, also contains a provision that advocates find problematic. Before lawmakers sent the legislation to Green, a conference committee revised the plan, inserting a provision to allow DOH to access medical marijuana patient records held by doctors for any reason whatsoever. Photo courtesy of Brian Shamblen. The post Hawaii Senate Passes Bill To Allow Medical Marijuana Use By Seriously Ill Patients In Health Facilities appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

While marijuana may soon be rescheduled under federal law, that doesn’t currently exempt state-legal cannabis businesses from an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code known as 280E that bars them from taking federal tax deductions, the agency argues in a new filing with the U.S. Tax Court. In response to a petition to the court filed by the New Mexico marijuana business Ultra Health—which challenged the conventional interpretation of the IRS code, which applies to tax deduction claims connected to the sale of Schedule I and Schedule II drugs under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA)—IRS said the issue has already been soundly settled by Congress and various federal courts. Those courts “have consistently held that section 280E is constitutionally valid and have created a robust legal authority supporting its validity and applicability to sellers of marijuana,” it said. “Federal courts have addressed the applicability of section 280E in over 40 published orders or opinions. No resulting order or opinion include a ruling or holding that section 280E is unconstitutional or inapplicable to cannabis sellers.” Ultra Health’s novel argument in support of its alleged eligibility for tax deductions is based on the fact that 280E applies to businesses that sell controlled substances “within the meaning of” Schedule I and Schedule II drugs under the CSA. (Emphasis added.) In its opening brief filed last year, the petitioner said that means the tax court “must determine the ordinary meaning of ‘within the meaning of schedule I and schedule II,'” and that interpretation shouldn’t be based exclusively on whether cannabis is simply listed as Schedule I. “A list, by itself, has no ‘meaning.’ To speak of ‘the meaning’ of a list is to speak of the characteristics that define it,” Ultra Health argued. “The characteristics that define schedules I and II of the CSA are the three-part classification criteria” that largely concern abuse potential and currently accepted medical value. “If a substance does not meet the section 812(b)(1) criteria, it does not fall within the statutorily defined meaning of schedule I and thus cannot be placed on the schedule I list. And if a substance on the schedule I list is revealed not to meet the section 812(b)(1) criteria, the CSA provides for its removal from that list,” it said. To that end, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Biden administration completed a review finding that marijuana does not meet the CSA criteria for a Schedule I drug and should be moved to Schedule III, which would make 280E tax restrictions inapplicable. President Donald Trump in December separately signed an executive order directing the attorney general to finalize the process of reclassifying marijuana—but that hasn’t formally materialized yet. And in the interim, IRS told the tax court that it’s an improper venue to independently make a scheduling-related determination. “This would create a seismic rift between how substances are controlled and identified under the CSA and how they are applied under tax law, and plainly Congress did not intend to hide this elephant in the mousehole of the ‘within the meaning of’ verbiage,” IRS said in the reply brief, which was filed last week. “Petitioner’s statutory text argument is inconsistent with the text of section 280E, established precedent, and the statutory and administrative framework that Congress created under the CSA and section 280E.” The petition from Ultra Health, which was also supported by several cannabis trade associations that submitted amici briefs in the case, further maintained that marijuana is not “prohibited” by the CSA and that Congress “has divested itself of Commerce Clause [of the U.S. Constitution] power to regulate marijuana,” IRS said in its latest filing. But the agency pointed to statute stipulating that only the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) can initiate a drug scheduling review. And while it acknowledged that DEA is “currently considering rescheduling, it has not yet published a final rule reclassifying marijuana.” IRS said “marijuana remains a Schedule I controlled substance, and was so during the entire period at issue, July 1, 2017, through June 20, 2020″—a period when Ultra Health argues it should have been eligible to take federal tax deductions despite selling cannabis. “Since marijuana was a Schedule I controlled substance during that period, the Court must ‘apply the law in effect at the time it renders its decision,’ and apply section 280E in those periods.” “Petitioner’s interpretation ignores the operative fact that marijuana remains a Schedule I controlled substance pursuant to the CSA,” the filing states. “Petitioner’s request that the Court reschedule marijuana pursuant to an imaginary process which is prohibited by the clear procedures of the CSA must be denied.” IRS also emphasized that the CSA and 280E “are sister statutes, and must not be read to conflict, absent clear congressional intent.” “Petitioner’s argument thus runs afoul of black letter law on interpreting sister statutes harmoniously and presuming that similar terms operate and contain consistent meanings across statutes… Plainly, absent clear intent to the contrary, Congress did not intend for the CSA and section 280E to conflict,” it said. “Instead, the CSA and section 280E must be read in harmony and to avoid inconsistent outcomes; if a substance is currently identified as a Schedule I or II controlled substance under the CSA, then it is a substance ‘within the meaning’ of Schedule I or II for purposes of section 280E.” The petitioner’s interpretation “effectively bestows rescheduling authority for controlled substances to the Court and creates incongruity between section 280E and the CSA,” it continues. “Petitioner’s argument fails because it ignores this important context within the CSA and would implicitly repeal the administrative process and roles delineated in the CSA for rescheduling substances.” “Absent clear intent to the contrary, Congress did not intend for the CSA and section 280E to conflict by having conflicting avenues for rescheduling. Instead, the CSA and section 280E must be read in harmony to avoid such inconsistent outcomes and the implicit repeal of the procedures by which a provision might be rescheduled. This conflicting interpretation and inconsistent outcome are not supported by the legislative history of section 280E or case law. The Court does not have authority to undertake an independent evaluation of the CSA scheduling criteria to determine where a drug fits within the Schedules. Such a reading is inconsistent with the plain language of the statute and canons of statutory construction.” Putting a finer point on the issue, IRS said 280E “should not be interpreted in a way that leads to inconsistent results with the CSA and functionally circumvents its procedural requirements for scheduling.” As for the scientific review into marijuana conducted by HHS and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that led to a rescheduling recommendation under former President Joe Biden, Ultra Health’s argument that the agencies’ conclusion should factor into its eligibility under 280E is “irrelevant” because “DEA is ultimately responsible for rescheduling,” IRS said in the filing, which was noted earlier by Law360. “Moreover, even when rescheduling occurs, there is no authority for the proposition that it would be retroactive to the tax years at issue,” it said. “Marijuana was ‘within the meaning of schedule I and II’ during the tax years at issue and still is today.” Further, the petitioner’s claim that a congressional spending bill rider preventing DOJ from using its funds to interfere in state medical marijuana programs is “misplaced and confuses funding priorities with the conduct Congress has clearly prohibited,” IRS said. “Section 280E provides that no deduction is allowed for amounts paid in carrying on any trade or business if such business consists of trafficking in controlled substances which is prohibited by state or federal law.” “If medical marijuana is not ‘prohibited’ by the CSA because Congress limited DOJ’s funding in one year, it would retroactively become prohibited if, in a subsequent year, DOJ funding were to be reinstated. And this still cannot explain how this would apply in partial year funding scenarios, or if Congress were to again subsequently restrict DOJ enforcement funding. This miasma of a system is, of course, easily avoided by applying the CSA (and appropriation riders) as written, which is the only permissible approach to statutory construction; selling marijuana is prohibited by the text of the CSA, and the appropriations riders’ only impacts are, as their texts say, to limit funds being used for limited purposes during limited periods of time.” Put simply, “the CSA clearly prohibits the sale of marijuana, and section 280E has a clear and consistent meaning when read as a whole. Accordingly, the judicial inquiry is at an end,” it said. “Unless Congress or the DEA reschedule marijuana, or Congress amends section 280E, we must conclude that Congress intended to prohibit marijuana traffickers from taking deductions and credits.” “It follows that section 280E applies to petitioner to disallow deductions in the tax years at issue,” IRS said. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has separately discussed prior attempts to challenge 28oE as it applies to state-legal marijuana businesses. In a report published last month, CRS pointed out that judges in the Tax Court issued a majority opinion upholding 280E and determining that the statute doesn’t violate the U.S. Constitution “because the disallowance of deductions does not constitute a ‘penalty’ for the purposes of the Eighth Amendment.” Meanwhile, IRS in 2024 warned the marijuana industry that some companies have, without a “reasonable basis,” filled out a supplementary form in an attempt to take federal tax deductions that they’re prohibited from receiving under a provision known as 280E. Of course, the federal tax issue may ultimately be resolved if the Justice Department follows through on Trump’s rescheduling directive, but despite a mandate to finalize the rule “in the most expeditious manner,” there haven’t been any updates on the status of that process in the weeks since the president signed the order. The post Marijuana Businesses Can’t Force Court To Do ‘Imaginary’ Rescheduling Review To Exempt Them From 280E Tax, IRS Says appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

I'd personally declare that will this is the a terrific article of an wonderful man or woman, i am just very happy to discover this specific. 해외선물 개발

“Kiosk-based cannabis access for seniors can be a positive development only if it is embedded within a medically supervised, ethically structured care model.” By Jordan Tishler, Association of Cannabinoid Specialists A company recently declared its intention to roll out cannabis ordering kiosks in several senior-life communities in Arizona. The general idea is that residents would gain easier access to cannabis by being able to order products on the kiosk and have the product delivered right to them—kind of like online ordering but without needing a computer. But without appropriate safeguards for medical and non-medical users alike, the risk of this scheme may outweigh the benefit of greater access. The Association of Cannabinoid Specialists (ACS) strongly supports efforts to reduce access barriers for older adults who may benefit from cannabinoid-based therapies, especially those with limited transportation and mobility. A guided ordering interface that reinforces clinician-based treatment plans (aka prescriptions), clear product information and licensed dispensary sourcing is far preferable to unregulated or informal supply channels that some seniors might currently rely on. However, simply placing cannabis kiosks in independent living communities without robust clinical safeguards is not acceptable from a specialist perspective. Older adults typically have multiple comorbidities, complex polypharmacy and age-related changes in metabolism and cognition that substantially increase the risk of adverse events, drug–drug interactions and delirium. Furthermore, access to cannabis without clinical guidance leads to increased risk of misuse, dependence or addiction. Introducing a point-of-sale educational experience, even one described as “guided,” is not a substitute for individualized medical assessment, diagnosis and ongoing monitoring by clinicians trained in cannabinoid medicine. ACS welcomes the stated focus on education and clear product information at the point of ordering, including helping residents understand different product types, routes of administration and onset/duration profiles. But education delivered via kiosks or brand-affiliated educators remains inherently product- and transaction-centric, whereas proper cannabinoid care must be patient- and diagnosis-centric, integrated into the person’s full medical history, medication list and goals of care. For seniors, dose-finding, titration schedules, contraindications and deprescribing decisions cannot responsibly be handled through a consumer-facing digital interface. If cannabis kiosks are to be deployed in senior living communities, ACS believes the following elements are essential: Formal collaboration with the resident’s medical team, including communication of products, doses and changes over time, and documentation in the medical record. Access to qualified cannabinoid-trained clinicians (physicians, NPs) for pre-initiation assessment and ongoing follow-up, not just sales or brand educators. Clear protocols for referring both medical and non-medical users to, or back to, qualified clinicians for guidance and follow-up, particularly to screen for high-risk users and drug interactions, and to appropriately recommend and titrate regimens for older individuals. Transparent separation between clinical guidance and commercial interests, including clear disclosure of financial relationships and avoidance of quota-driven or upselling practices. Without these safeguards, the convenience and revenue opportunity described for dispensaries and communities risk outpacing appropriate clinical governance and patient safety protections. From ACS’s point of view, kiosk-based cannabis access for seniors can be a positive development only if it is embedded within a medically supervised, ethically structured care model. We encourage senior living operators, technology vendors and dispensaries to partner with cannabinoid medicine specialists to design programs where improved access and education are matched by rigorous clinical oversight, documentation and responsibility for outcomes. Jordan Tishler, MD is the president of the Association of Cannabinoid Specialists. The post Marijuana Ordering Kiosks For Seniors Present Both Opportunities And Risks (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

At Coastals 4x4, also known as the W.A. Diff Centre, we have over 120 years of combined experience working with 4×4’s and other vehicles. You get trustworthy advice and recommendations on how to improve your vehicle. Plus, we stock over 26,000 parts and all the best brands so you have everything under one roof.