Cannabis News

Intoxicating Hemp Product Laws are More Complicated Than They Seem

Published

1 year ago

October 5, 2023

admin

When Congress passed the 2018 Farm Bill, did it intend to legalize intoxicating hemp products? If it did, why didn’t it just legalize marijuana? And why didn’t it address the manufacture or sale of intoxicating hemp products?

I think the answer to all of these questions is clearly “no.” Congress did not intend to open Pandora’s Box to any form of legal intoxicating hemp product. But does what I think – or what Congress intended – even matter? Not to some courts, who think that the 2018 Farm Bill is so patently clear that it really doesn’t even matter what Congress intended.

These issues are admittedly very complicated. There are plenty of folks out there who claim that intoxicating hemp products are completely legal with no caveats. That in my view, is wrong. The law is not settled, the text of the 2018 Farm Bill is anything but clear, and whole lot can (and probably will) change with the upcoming Farm Bill. Let’s take a look at some of the issues below.

The Ninth Circuit didn’t legalize delta-8 nationally

A few years back, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit held as much in AK Futures v. Boyd Street Distro (we wrote about that case here). That case is widely misquoted as having declared delta-8 THC legal nationwide. It did not. The Ninth Circuit is the appellate court for a group of western states and its rulings have no binding precedential value elsewhere.

What AK Futures actually did was affirm a preliminary ruling in a trademark dispute where legality of delta-8 products was one of a number of issues at play. In order to have a protectible trademark, the good or service must be lawful in commerce. The infringer argued that delta-8 products were not lawful. As part of the preliminary injunction, the Ninth Circuit agreed that the plaintiff was “likely” to succeed in establishing that the products were lawful, if they came from hemp and if they contained under 0.3% delta-9 THC. This was a preliminary ruling, but it’s likely that the court would rule similarly on some sort of final ruling. However, to claim that this case is the be-all-end-all for delta-8 is just, well, wrong. The case is not precedential anywhere outside of the Ninth Circuit.

An Arkansas District Court didn’t legalize intoxicating cannabinoids nationally, either

More recently, hemp attorney Rod Kight posted a blog post entitled “DID A FEDERAL COURT ORDER JUST LEGALIZE THCA AND DELTA-8 THC IN ALL 50 STATES?” Rod referred to Bio Gen LLC v. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, a district (lower) court decision out of the Eastern District of Arkansas that only ruled on a specific Arkansas law. So to answer the titular question, no, the court did not legalize anything in all 50 states. The court did, however, strike down a rather poorly drafted Arkansas law that restricted intoxicating cannabinoids on a number of grounds. (As an aside, I think Rod’s analysis is often right, but in this case we diverge.)

Most relevant to this post was the Bio Gen court’s “conflict preemption” analysis. Conflict preemption is a doctrine that finds a state law invalid if it contradicts federal law – i.e., when it is impossible to comply with both state and federal law. Imagine a state law that said you did not have to comply with a federal law. You get the idea.

Now in Bio Gen, the court took the position that the state and federal definitions of “hemp” were in conflict. The court recognized that “Clearly, under the 2018 Farm Bill, Arkansas can regulate hemp production and even ban it outright if it is so inclined.” But while the state could ban hemp production, the court thought that bans on intoxicating hemp products were legal. I don’t get it either. And for some reason, the court forgot to cite the following 2018 Farm Bill provision in its conflict preemption analysis, even though it cited it elsewhere in the opinion: “No preemption. Nothing in this subsection preempts or limits any law of a State or Indian Tribe that . . . regulates the production of hemp . . . and is more stringent than this subtitle.”

While I think the Bio Gen court still had ample reasons to strike down the Arkansas law on different grounds, I just don’t get the conflict preemption argument, and I don’t think an appellate court would agree that states could not enact more stringent laws or prohibit intoxicating cannabinoids. Taking this case to its logical end point would likely result in massive re-writes of hemp laws in all states.

So are intoxicating hemp products legal?

This is not an easy thing to answer and depends on many factors. What intoxicating hemp cannabinoid are we talking about? How is it produced? Is it “synthetic” (and what does “synthetic” even mean)? And what state are we talking about?

Let’s take delta-8 as an example. Delta-8 is generally not expressed in high quantities naturally and is created by converting CBD via a chemical or similar process. The Controlled Substance Act prohibits synthetic THCs, and DEA’s 2020 interim final rule stated that any quantity of synthetic THC is controlled. So according to DEA, delta-8 is illegal. On the other hand, I’ve long argued that under the text of the 2018 Farm Bill, there’s a good argument that delta-8 is legal – even in spite of what seems like clear Congressional intent to the contrary. That’s because the 2018 Farm Bill defines “hemp” as follows:

The term “hemp” means the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant, including the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and salts of isomers, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis.

In other words, if you take hemp and make something with it, that thing is legal. This is not the position of DEA, but is evidently the opinion of the aforementioned three-judge Ninth Circuit panel. I tend to think that court was right, but at the end of the day, this is by no means a conclusive ruling. Other courts of appeal or the Supreme Court may disagree.

Let’s take another common intoxicating hemp product: THCA flower. I wrote a longer post about that recently here. In a nutshell, people argue that because THCA flower has less than 0.3% delta-9 THC, it is “hemp” even if it has 5% or 20% THCA – even though THCA converts into delta-9 THC. DEA has pretty vocally disagreed with this. In this case, I think the THCA advocates are wrong. I outlined my position in the prior post and we’re well over 1,000 words by now so I won’t recite it again.

Moreover, for any intoxicating cannabinoid or intoxicating hemp product, we also need to look at state law. A number of states outright ban smokable hemp or delta-8 products. Other states (like California) have total THC limits that de facto ban many intoxicating hemp products. No matter what you may think about federal law, those states have their own laws. And unless and until courts in those states start issuing conflict preemption rulings, those laws will be upheld.

Is it wise to sell intoxicating hemp products?

This is a hard question to answer but there is no way to be 100% safe or 100% legal. If someone is in a state that allows such products, and has a good federal law argument, the risks are lower. If someone sells THCA flower online in all 50 states, for example, the risks are very high. Moreover, there are a million different practical risks that people almost never consider when looking at the laws. As I mentioned in my THCA post:

[P]ractically speaking, claiming that THCA products are legal is a tough sell to law enforcement or a court that is not familiar with the nuances of federal hemp laws. Imagine a truck driver gets pulled over with a car full of THCA products with 25% THCA. Those products, when tested, will have levels of THC in the double digits. That driver is going to jail, and will have to do their best to persuade a court that a gap in testing requirements under the 2018 Farm Bill makes their product lawful. Even assuming that argument is solid, there are just too many possibilities that law enforcement won’t agree. This is an issue that would likely need to be resolved in the appellate courts, which would be expensive, time consuming, and risky.

Even if someone has what they believe are airtight legal arguments why their intoxicating hemp product is legal, they often fail to consider how costly it would be to get a court to agree. And how long it would take. And how hard it would be to explain to a court or jury. Thinking about the law is not sufficient. You have to consider reality. And reality isn’t cheap or easy.

Indeed, this kind of thing seems to keep happening. Take this example, where a South Carolina man was reportedly arrested for allegedly selling THCA flower that tested over 0.3%. Or this similar example out of Texas. These are just a few reported examples. The point is that being on the right side of the law doesn’t mean you won’t have to pay a boatload of money to be proven right.

When it comes to intoxicating cannabinoids, nothing is easy. Be very skeptical of folks who say that X is legal in all 50 states or that there is no risk with Y. Stay tuned to the Canna Law Blog for more updates on intoxicating hemp products.

Source link

Cannabis News

Webinar Replay: Post-Election Cannabis Wrap – Smoke ’em if You’ve Got ’em

Published

15 hours ago

November 13, 2024

admin

On Thursday, November 7th, Vince Sliwoski, Aaron Pelley and Fred Rocafort held a post election discussion “Post-Election Cannabis Wrap – Smoke ’em if You’ve Got ’em”. Watch the replay!

Key Takeaways from the “Smoke ’em if You’ve Got ’em – 2024 Post Election Cannabis Wrap” Webinar:

Panelists:
- Vince Sliwoski: Oregon Business lawyer specializing in cannabis and commercial real estate.
- Aaron Pelley: Experienced in cannabis law since Washington’s legalization in 2012.
- Fred Rocafort: Trademark attorney working closely with the cannabis team.
Election Results Overview:
- Most 2024 cannabis ballot measures did not pass.
- Florida, South Dakota, and North Dakota saw failures.
- Nebraska became the 39th state to legalize cannabis for medical use when it passed two cannabis initiatives, Initiatives 437 and 438.
Federal and State-Level Developments:
- Medical use is currently legal in 38 states, and 24 states allow recreational use.
- Republican support for marijuana legalization is growing.
Federal Policy Implications:
- Schedule III Rescheduling: The process to move cannabis to Schedule III is ongoing, which could significantly impact the industry.
- Importance of Federal Appointments: The future of cannabis policy depends heavily on who is appointed to key positions in the administration.
International and Domestic Trade:
- Schedule III status could ease import/export restrictions on cannabis.
- Unified control of House, Senate, and presidency might expedite legislative progress.
Economic and Industry Impact:
- Cannabis stocks experienced volatility post-election, reflecting investor uncertainty.
- Federal legalization and banking reforms are crucial for industry stability and growth.
Future Outlook:
- The potential for federal rescheduling remains strong, with hearings scheduled for early 2025.
- State-level initiatives and regulatory developments will continue to shape the industry.

Watch the replay!

Source link

Cannabis News

I Had Just One Puff

Published

16 hours ago

November 13, 2024

admin

one puff of a joint a drug test

“How Long Does One Puff of Weed Stay in Your System?”… This topic can be difficult to answer since it is dependent on elements such as the size of the hit and what constitutes a “one hit.” If you take a large bong pull then cough, it might linger in your system for 5-7 days. A moderate dose from a joint can last 3-5 days, whereas a few hits from a vaporizer may last 1-3 days.

The length of time that marijuana stays in the body varies based on a number of factors, including metabolism, THC levels, frequency of use, and hydration.

Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is the primary psychoactive component of cannabis. THC and its metabolites, which remain in your body long after the effects have subsided, are detected by drug tests.

Since these metabolites are fat-soluble, they cling to bodily fat molecules. They could thus take a while to fully pass through your system, particularly if your body fat percentage is higher.

THC is absorbed by tissues and organs (including the brain, heart, and fat) and converted by the liver into chemicals such as 11-hydroxy-THC and carboxy-THC. Cannabis is eliminated in feces at a rate of around 65%, while urine accounts for 20%. The leftover amount might be kept within the body.

THC deposited in bodily tissues ultimately re-enters the circulation and is processed by the liver. For frequent users, THC accumulates in fatty tissues quicker than it can be removed, thus it may be detectable in drug tests for days or weeks following consumption.

The detection time varies according to the amount and frequency of cannabis usage. Higher dosages and regular usage result in longer detection times.

The type of drug test also affects detection windows. Blood and saliva tests typically detect cannabis metabolites for shorter periods, while urine and hair samples can reveal use for weeks or even months. In some cases, hair tests have detected cannabis use over 90 days after consumption.

Detection Windows for Various Cannabis Drug Tests

Urine Tests

Among all drug tests, urine testing is the most commonly used method for screening for drug use in an individual.

Detection times vary, but a 2017 review suggests the following windows for cannabis in urine after last use:

– Single-use (e.g., one joint): up to 3 days

– Moderate use (around 4 times a week): 5–7 days

– Chronic use (daily): 10–15 days

– Chronic heavy use (multiple times daily): over 30 days

Blood Tests

Blood tests generally detect recent cannabis use, typically within 2–12 hours after consumption. However, in cases of heavy use, cannabis has been detected up to 30 days later. Chronic heavy use can extend the detection period in the bloodstream.

Saliva Tests

THC can enter saliva through secondhand cannabis smoke, but THC metabolites are only present if you’ve personally smoked or ingested cannabis.

Saliva testing has a short detection window and can sometimes identify cannabis use on the same day. A 2020 review found that THC was detectable in the saliva of frequent users for up to 72 hours after use, and it may remain in saliva longer than in blood following recent use.

In areas where cannabis is illegal, saliva testing is often used for roadside screenings.

Hair Tests

Hair follicle tests can detect cannabis use for up to 90 days. After use, cannabinoids reach the hair follicles through small blood vessels and from sebum and sweat surrounding the hair.

Hair grows at approximately 0.5 inches per month, so a 1.5-inch segment of hair close to the scalp can reveal cannabis use over the past three months.

Factors Affecting THC and Metabolite Retention

The length of time THC and its metabolites stay in your system depends on various factors. Some, like body mass index (BMI) and metabolic rate, relate to individual body processing, not the drug itself.

Other factors are specific to cannabis use, including:

– Dosage: How much you consume

– Frequency: How often you use cannabis

– Method of consumption: Smoking, dabbing, edibles, or sublingual

– THC potency: Higher potency can extend detection time

Higher doses and more frequent use generally extend THC retention. Cannabis consumed orally may remain in the system slightly longer than smoked cannabis, and stronger cannabis strains, higher in THC, may also stay detectable for a longer period.

How Quickly Do the Effects of Cannabis Set In?

When smoking cannabis, effects appear almost immediately, while ingested cannabis may take 1–3 hours to peak.

The psychoactive component THC produces a “high” with common effects such as:

– Altered senses, including perception of time

– Mood changes

– Difficulty with thinking and problem-solving

– Impaired memory

Other short-term effects can include:

– Anxiety and confusion

– Decreased coordination

– Dry mouth and eyes

– Nausea or lightheadedness

– Trouble focusing

– Increased appetite

– Rapid heart rate

– Restlessness and sleepiness

In rare cases, high doses may lead to hallucinations, delusions, or acute psychosis.

Regular cannabis use may have additional mental and physical effects. While research is ongoing, cannabis use may increase the risk of:

– Cognitive issues like memory loss

– Cardiovascular problems including heart disease and stroke

– Respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis or lung infections

– Mood disorders like depression and anxiety

Cannabis use during pregnancy can negatively impact fetal growth and development.

Duration of Effects

Short-term effects generally taper off within 1–3 hours, but for chronic users, some long-term effects may last days, weeks, or even months. Certain effects may even be permanent.

Bottom Line

The amount of time that cannabis remains in your system following a single use varies greatly depending on individual characteristics such as body fat, metabolism, frequency of use, and mode of intake. Frequent users may maintain traces of THC for weeks, whereas infrequent users may test positive for as little as a few days. Hair tests can disclose usage for up to 90 days, while blood and saliva tests identify more recent use. Urine tests are the most popular and have varying detection durations. The duration that THC and its metabolites are detectable will ultimately depend on a number of factors, including dose, strength, and individual body chemistry.

PEE IN A CUP COMING UP, READ ON..

HOW LONG DOES WEED STAY IN YOUR URINE FOR A DRUG TEST?

Source link

Cannabis News

Is Kratom Addictive? Understanding Dependence, Risks, and Safe Usage

Published

2 days ago

November 12, 2024

admin

is kratom addictive

Is kratom addictive? Discover the potential for dependence on Kratom, the risks involved with its use, and how to approach its consumption responsibly.

From 2011 to 2017, over 1,800 calls to poison centers involved kratom in the U.S. This significant number highlights the concern regarding kratom addiction.

However, without Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight, and due to various consumption methods like teas and capsules, there are significant health risks. Safe use of kratom is now in question due to these issues.

Research debates how dependence develops, outlining signs like loss of control and withdrawal symptoms. These signs are seen in regular kratom users. Ironically, some people switch from drugs like heroin to kratom, looking for a legal alternative.

Understanding Kratom: Origins and Prevalence

Kratom comes from the Mitragyna speciosa tree in Southeast Asia. It can act like a stimulant or like opioids, based on how much you take. People use it in different ways, for a small energy boost or stronger effects at higher doses.

The legal status of kratom in the U.S. is complicated and changing. It’s a hot topic because some worry about its misuse. It’s still legal in several states. This shows how different places handle drug rules. The National Institute on Drug Abuse is looking into its medical benefits. But, the FDA hasn’t approved it for medical use yet. The DEA calls it a “drug of concern,” which means policies might change.

From 2011 to 2017, poison control centers in the U.S. got over 1,800 reports about kratom. This shows it’s widely used and might pose health risks.

Kratom’s main ingredients bind to opioid receptors very strongly, stronger than morphine even. This fact is key to understanding its effects.

As more people use kratom, more are reporting serious health problems. These include liver and heart issues, and tough withdrawal symptoms, particularly in those already sick.

The statistics show mounting worries about kratom in the U.S. As its use grows, it’s becoming more important to health policies and laws. What happens next will depend on further research and legal decisions.

Is Kratom Addictive: Investigating the Substance’s Nature

The question of kratom’s addictiveness focuses on how it affects brain receptors and its long-term health implications. The ongoing debate highlights concerns about dependence and the risk of addiction. Scientists are closely looking at these issues.

How Kratom Works in the Brain

Kratom’s main alkaloids, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, bind to the brain’s opioid receptors, similar to painkillers and narcotics. This connection suggests a potential risk of dependence. These alkaloids are key to kratom’s pain relief but also point to possible addiction concerns, especially with frequent, high-dose usage.

Patterns and Consequences of Long-term Use

Using kratom often, especially in large doses, can increase the risk of dependence and intense withdrawal symptoms, similar to opioid withdrawal.

Although some use it for pain or to improve mood, long-term kratom users might see serious health problems, like liver damage and mental health issues.

Withdrawal symptoms, including irritability, nausea, and sleep problems, show kratom’s impact on one’s physical and mental health.

Assessment of Addiction Risks

Studies indicate a significant risk of addiction to kratom, especially with high doses or frequent use. Dependence develops as the body gets used to kratom, leading to tolerance and a need for more to feel its effects. Withdrawal symptoms emphasize this risk, as highlighted by health experts.

Physiological Effects: Kratom’s Impact on the Body

There is a lot of debate about the safety and use of kratom. This herbal extract comes from the Mitragyna speciosa plant. It has drawn attention for its possible harmful effects on the body. The FDA has issued many warnings about kratom, raising safety concerns.

Kratom Adverse Effects: Kratom users have reported side effects like nausea, vomiting, and confusion. More serious issues include high blood pressure and liver damage. These problems highlight the risks of using kratom.

Herbal Extract Safety: Some kratom products contain heavy metals and pathogens. These can cause severe health issues, including death. This shows the importance of safety in herbal products.

FDA Warnings and Regulations: The FDA has linked kratom to over 35 deaths and warns against using it. They point out the lack of medical uses and the risk of addiction.

Physiological Impact: Kratom’s effects depend on the dose and the user’s body. Yet, it can lead to dangerous outcomes like liver damage and seizures.

Safety Concerns from Authorities: Federal agencies like the DEA are worried about kratom’s safety. Although not a controlled substance, monitoring suggests users should be careful.

Kratom might offer temporary relief for some ailments, but it comes with significant risks. The FDA’s warnings should make people think twice. If considering kratom, it’s crucial to talk to a doctor first. Experts stress the need for safety and caution with herbal extracts.

Conclusion

Kratom’s role in health and regulation is complex, with views and research findings widely varied. Some people use kratom for its claimed health benefits, but it’s a hot topic. Experts advise caution and suggest consulting a doctor before using kratom due to the unclear effects.

Clinical studies using scores like SOWS and COWS haven’t confirmed withdrawal symptoms from kratom. This adds to the debate, especially when some users report withdrawal. This makes kratom a controversial subject among different findings and user experiences.

When it comes to treating opioid addiction, kratom can be both helpful and harmful. Some have used it successfully to fight addiction. Yet, some states have banned it. This highlights the need for regulations and consistent product quality. It also raises questions about kratom’s legal status due to mixed actions by authorities.

The situation shows how complex kratom is in the realm of substance use and law. Without clear evidence supporting either its benefits or risks, it poses a challenge. More research is needed to guide regulations and health advice. For now, anyone thinking of using kratom should be careful, seek medical advice, and keep up with laws and health guidelines.