Authored By: Heidi Urness, Strategic Legal Counsel at Cultiva Law Prior to the enactment of the 2018 Farm Bill, there was intense conflict and confusion regarding whether or not transporting hemp and CBD across state lines was permitted under state or federal law....
Through the Narcotic Drugs Amendment Act 2016 (Cth) and its amendments to the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 (Cth) (NDA), the Australian Government commenced the legalisation of medicinal cannabis products in Australia under federal law in 2016. The Commonwealth Parliament’s legislation is in line with a trend towards medicinal legalisation across the developed world in recognition of a growing medical consensus concerning the therapeutic role that “cannabinoids” (chemical compounds derived from plants of the genus cannabis) can play in treating disease and illness.
In February of this year, the California Bureau of Cannabis Control (“CBCC”) sent a letter to Weedmaps.com alleging that the website was “engaging in activity that violates state cannabis laws.”1 The CBCC claimed Weedmaps was hosting advertisements “from persons offering cannabis and cannabis products for sale that are not licensed to conduct commercial cannabis activity,” and was therefore “aiding and abetting in violations of state cannabis laws.”2 It demanded that Weedmaps “cease all activity that violates state cannabis laws” or face “criminal and administrative penalties, as well as civil penalties for each violation.”3
Europe’s booming CBD market is at risk of going bust after food officials recategorised cannabidiol as a novel food, effectively outlawing its sale across the union.The European Food Safety Authority said the substance must undergo further testing before it is approved, a process which could take two years.
Currently, the categories of cannabis that can be legally sold by holders of a federal licence and by distributors and retailers authorized by a province or territory are dried cannabis, fresh cannabis, cannabis oil, cannabis plants, and the seeds of cannabis plants. However, the federal government recently confirmed its intention to amend the Cannabis Actin order to authorize the sale of three new categories of cannabis.
With thirty-three states and the District of Columbia legalizing marijuana in some form or another in the United States it is safe to say marijuana use is gaining social and cultural acceptance. But as public acceptance of marijuana use continues its mainstream march forward there are still bastions of resistance that maintain a dissimilar approach to marijuana and see it as a detrimental element to their organizations. These holdouts prohibit marijuana use and take punitive measures against members of their organization that engage in marijuana use. One such stronghold is professional sports.
The 2018 U.S. Farm Bill has opened the gates to industrial hemp farming. Hemp, a crop that has been banned in the United States since 1937, now may be legally grown. While the most popular product of hemp − oils containing cannabidiol (CBD) and other naturally occurring non-psychoactive cannabinoids −are still subject to conflicting federal and state regulations, the plant itself may be grown across the United States.
California’s fluid regulatory climate and dual licensing framework has created one of the most challenging business environments participants have ever seen. Doesn’t matter if you are an attorney, an operator, an investor or a CPA …. it just doesn’t matter. The kicks are hard and the hits keep coming.
While the 2018 Farm Bill removed hemp from the Drug Enforcement Administration’s regulatory oversight, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continues to oversee foods, drugs or cosmetics that contain hemp or hemp products, the most popular of which is currently CBD. Meanwhile, states, farmers and other interested parties are clamoring for guidance on hemp commercialization, driven by the steadily increasing demand for CBD products among consumers who believe the hemp derivative is an effective treatment for a wide range of ailments.
Numerous attempts to introduce legislation to relax the provisions that placed cannabis on Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act [“CSA”] have been made beginning in 1981[i].Similar bills have been introduced perennially since then, most recently by Rep. H. Morgan Griffith [R-VA] (H.R. 4498).All have died in committee. In 2011, Reps. Ron Paul (R-TX) and Barney Frank (D-MA) introduced a bill to remove marijuana from the schedules entirely (“de-scheduling”). This Bill also died in committee[ii].Our understanding of the background of “re-scheduling” is that there are two paths that could be taken: a “legislative path” through Congress; and an “administrative path” through the Executive Branch. Both paths are complex processes in which scientific, medical, policy and political forces have influence.