US cannabis industry files lawsuit against California ban

Cannabis advocates filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court late Tuesday challenging Gov. Gavin Newsom’s September 6 emergency order on illegal cannabis products.

The industry group US Hemp Roundtable has filed a lawsuit to block a ban on hemp-derived products containing intoxicating cannabinoids such as THC, a psychoactive compound that gives users a “high.”

The legal complaint filed against the state names six other plaintiffs, including Cheech and Chong Global Holdings, the cannabis company owned by the 1970s comedy duo Cheech and Chong. The Nevada-based company specializes in hemp-derived THC drinks.

The emergency legislation aims to halt the sale of THC-infused cannabis in stores or other retail outlets until legislation provides a long-term solution. The regulations, which came into force on September 23, also impose an age restriction on anyone under 21 purchasing cannabis edibles.

California Assemblywoman Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, D-Winters, has pledged to reintroduce the legislation next session after Assembly Bill 2223, written to regulate this area, was rejected by the Appropriations Committee last session on March 31. August.

Hemp and hemp advocates in North Bay reacted to the proposal.

“We have a very long chance because it was done incorrectly,” said Patrick Shatzer, senior manager of regulatory affairs for Sunmed CBD, which operates retail stores in Petaluma, Lafayette and Concord.

Shatzer has indicated that he would prefer to work on another project with Curry, who he says “cares” about the industry.

“This emergency order is absurd and is ruining the industry,” he said.

Mercy Wellness CEO Brandon Levine, who operates dispensaries in Sonoma County, expressed his support for cannabis reform.

“Other states have introduced bans. “I think we should have a chance to legislate on this because it’s gotten a bit out of hand,” he said.

The state departments of Public Health and Cannabis Control, along with a group of growers, have declared their support for cannabis reform.

“Intoxicating industrial hemp products may cause illness and injury to consumers in California,” Public Health Director Tomas Aragon said in a statement. Aragon had the support of the Institute of Public Health.

“We are deeply dismayed by the cannabis industry’s lawsuit seeking to block California’s emergency laws,” said Institute Senior Advisor Dr. Lynn Silver. “This legal action is another egregious attempt by the cannabis industry to put profit over public health.”

But hemp advocates lament that removing their products from shelves, regardless of their THC levels, would seriously harm the $250 million industry and limit access to “therapeutic CBD products.” They also labeled the cannabis industry as a failure, wondering why they would want to be lumped into the same space.

The lawsuit opposes a moratorium that hemp advocates say violates the 2018 U.S. Farm Bill allowing hemp sales. One area of ​​contention is what constitutes an acceptable level of THC.

The lawsuit also challenges the state over the intent of Assembly Bill 45, which Newsom signed into law in October 2021. It was designed as a legal avenue for the sale of cannabis in food, beverages and a variety of products throughout the state.

“Gub. “Newsom’s misguided efforts to destroy a thriving cannabis industry – one he helped create when he signed AB 45 three years ago – clearly violate state and federal law,” Roundtable General Counsel Jonathan Miller said in a statement. “We are confident that the courts will agree that the Governor cannot demonstrate that an ‘emergency situation’ exists.”

Since AB 45 went into effect, the number of hemp products has increased, prompting hemp producers competing with hemp to voice their opposition. The cannabis industry is regulated, taxed and offered through registered dispensaries, and cannabis advocates say they want a level playing field.

California Cannabis Industry Association (CCIA) spokeswoman and lobbyist Amy O’Gorman Jenkins said, “As one of the stakeholders and coalition partner that debated AB 45, we did not discuss intoxicating (cannabis) products containing THC. There was no way CCIA would co-sponsor such a bill.”

The legal complaint explains that “Plaintiffs do not oppose fair and reasonable regulation of hemp-based THC-containing intoxicating products (and) increasing age restrictions.

As such, O’Gorman Jenkins agreed that the CCIA would be open to reconsidering Curry’s expected legislative repeat.

“We are open to discussing new paths,” she said.

The voivode’s office does not want to comment on the ongoing proceedings.

Sam Rodriguez, policy director at Good Farmers, Great Neighbors, agrees with the state’s action, saying these THC-containing hemp products are too easy to obtain.

“I found these THC products containing hemp – drinks and gummies being sold at a beverage shop in Corte Madera,” he said, sharing a photo. He added that the store is five blocks from the school.

“These rules are a critical step in ensuring that products available on the market comply with the original intent of the law,” Nicole Elliott, director of the California Department of Cannabis Control, said in a statement. “We are committed to working with our state partners to enforce state law.”