Cannabis News
Supreme Court Should Hear Marijuana Case That Could Affect Other Issues, Man In Endangered Species Act Dispute Says
A public interest law firm representing a man who says federal law unconstitutionally violated his property rights has joined a chorus of voices calling for the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case challenging a key foundation of the federal marijuana ban.
In an amicus brief filed with the court Wednesday, the Pacific Legal Foundation — representing Florida-based Michael Colosi — said its client’s property dispute “exemplifies” how the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution has been misinterpreted and misapplied, giving the federal government unauthorized authority over intrastate commerce.
In Colosi’s case, his local government told him he had to pay a $200,000 development fee to build a home on a specific property in Charlotte County because a species of bird known as the Florida scrub might someday populate the area. That’s because the federal government classifies the species as “threatened.”
“Colosi argued that the federal government lacks the authority to regulate an intrastate species without a direct connection to interstate commerce,” the brief states. “Colosi and petitioners face the same dilemma: they are aggrieved by federal regulation of activities that the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to regulate.”
Until then, the Massachusetts marijuana companies urging the Supreme Court to take up their case also argue that federal law unconstitutionally prohibits intrastate cannabis activity in violation of the Commerce Clause.
“Canna Provisions is not the first petitioner to ask this Court to clarify the scope of the Commerce and Necessary and Appropriate Clauses, but its case presents a unique opportunity to temper past wrongly decided precedents and protect property rights,” the filing states.
“Colosi’s effort to build a house was blocked by federal regulations because an endangered species within the state, the Florida scrub jay, can nest on the land. When questioned about the condition it placed on Colosi’s intended land use, the federal government used the Commerce and Necessary Clause to justify regulation of intrastate commerce by its impregnable Commerce and Clause argument. This Court’s adoption of its Commerce and Clause in Necessary and Appropriate Jurisprudence is not the first, And he won’t be the last landowner to be harmed by government overreach under federal laws.
“This court should take this opportunity to correct federal precedent in its Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses before more people are harmed,” he says, noting that the policy’s dissonance “has far-reaching negative effects on property owners, local governments, and the freedom that enumerated jurisdictions seek to protect. This court should grant the request.”
The filing highlights how the cannabis case, if taken up by the Supreme Court, could have far-reaching implications beyond the marijuana issue specifically, depending on what the justices decide.
Amicus short presented in one day by The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, likewise, beg the courts to examine the case, Canna Provisions v. bond the court has scheduled a closed-door meeting for next month to address the issue.
Power law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP filed the writ of certiorari last month on behalf of its clients and the Department of Justice. he declined the opportunity to present a brief for or against the case the judges
A The lead attorney representing the petitioners told Marihuana Moment that he is “hopeful.”— even if a little “nervous” — about the judges ultimately deciding to take up the matter and address the key legal question of the constitutionality of the federal ban on cannabis.
“Time is of the essence,” said Josh Schiller, noting the dramatic shift in public opinion and state laws governing cannabis. “We believe the timing of this case is right out of necessity; the industry needs to get relief from federal oversight at this time.”
Before the conference was organized, it was founded by Koch The Americans for Prosperity Foundation also filed an amicus brief encourage judges to take up the case.
US Court of Appeals He rejected the arguments of the state’s illegal cannabis companies the company is being replaced in May. One of the final blows of the high-profile case was a dismissal of the claims by the lower court. But it has been widely reported that the plaintiffs’ legal teams have long intended to end the case before the nine high courts.
Four justices must vote to approve the cert petition for the court to hear the case.
While it’s unclear whether SCOTUS will ultimately take up the case, it’s a sign that they may at least be interested in appealing to the courts. 2021 Statement of Justice Clarence Thomasas the court denied review of a separate dispute involving a medical marijuana dispensary in Colorado.
Thomas’s comments at the time suggested that it would be appropriate to revisit the precedent-setting case, Gonzales vs. Raichwhere the Supreme Court specifically determined that the federal government could enforce a ban on the cultivation of cannabis that took place entirely in California under Congress’s authority to regulate interstate commerce.
The initial complaint in the current case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, argued that the government’s continued prohibition of marijuana under the CSA was unconstitutional because Congress had it for decades. “The states have rejected any hypothesis that federal control of regulated marijuana is necessary.”
—
It’s Marijuana Moment tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelic and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters by pledging at least $25/month, you’ll get access to our interactive maps, charts, and audio calendars so you never miss a development.
Learn more about our marijuana bill tracking and become a Patreon supporter to gain access
—
At oral arguments in the appeal late last yearDavid Boies told the justices that under the Constitution, Congress can only regulate commercial activity within a state—in this case, marijuana—if not regulating that state activity would “substantially interfere with or undermine Congress’s statutory authority.” interState trade”.
Boies, the firm’s president, has a long list of past clients, including the Justice Department, former Vice President Al Gore and the plaintiffs in a case that overturned California’s same-sex marriage ban.
The judges, however, said they were “unconvinced” that “the CSA remains entirely intact in terms of the regulation of commercial activity involving marijuana for non-medical purposes, which is the activity carried on by the appellants, on their own.”
The district court, meanwhile, said in the case that while there are “compelling reasons to reconsider” current cannabis programming, its hands were effectively tied by the US Supreme Court’s past precedent. go.
He is behind a decision by the Trump administration to re-regulate marijuana. President Donald Trump said in late August that within weeks cannabis would be subject to Section III of the CSA.
Meanwhile, last month the Supreme Court agreed to hear a A separate case on the constitutionality of a federal law prohibiting people from using marijuana or other drugs for the purchase or possession of firearms. The Trump administration has argued that the policy “targets a category of people who are at clear risk of firearm misuse” and should be upheld.
Marijuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.
CPC of Missouri-Smithville, LLC and GF Saint Mary LLC, licensed cannabis growers and manufacturers in Missouri, filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Jackson County on behalf of independent wholesalers, alleging that Good Day Farm (GDF) and its network of conspiring companies and investors were harmed by an intentional, coordinated and unconstitutional scheme. The complaint alleges that the “GDF Cartel” illegally controls or manages the state’s share of dispensary licenses and uses that market power to manipulate Missouri’s $1.52 billion cannabis market for its own profit.
GDF and its co-conspirators allegedly built the cartel by arranging for third parties to invest in limited liability companies (LLCs) that then acquire additional dispensaries, cultivation and processing facilities, all of which are owned, operated or controlled by GDF. The result: The alleged cartel exercises effective control over at least 61 dispensaries, nearly triple the 22 allowed by the Missouri Constitution, with more than 10% of dispensary licenses “under substantially common control, ownership or management.” With 224 dispensaries currently licensed statewide, the alleged GDF Cartel controls more than one in four dispensary licenses in Missouri. But its influence is even greater, with alleged Cartel dispensaries accounting for more than 40% of wholesale cannabis in the state, giving it significant — and illegal — influence over all independent growers and manufacturers forced to sell through its network.
To avoid the Missouri Constitution’s 10% licensing limit and avoid regulatory oversight, the alleged cartel operates under five different brand names:
- Good Day Farm (21 dispensaries),
- CODES (20 dispensaries),
- Green light (10 dispensaries),
- Fresh Karma (6 dispensaries), and
- 3 Fifteen Primo (4 medications).
But they’re all part of a single, coordinated operation, the complaint says.
- Purchase cannabis products from non-Cartel wholesalers at artificially depressed prices;
- They supply their 61 dispensaries with the same products—mainly those produced by Cartel growers—significantly excluding products from independent wholesalers;
- Force independent drug wholesalers to purchase the Cartel’s finished products as a condition for their wholesale products to be placed on the Cartel’s drug store shelves; and
- Boycott non-cartel wholesalers who refuse to agree to anti-cartel demands.
Bob Hoffman, one of the attorneys leading the case, said: “The GDF Cartel is removing competition from the wholesale cannabis market and enriching itself with illegal profits through a counterproductive, clandestine business conspiracy. Missouri growers and manufacturers have been suffering under this scheme for a long time; many of them know something is wrong, but we don’t realize how the cartel has manipulated the market through this manipulation framework. Missourians to approve recreational cannabis in 2022 They voted for a fair and competitive market. Missouri licensed cannabis businesses that have suffered these practices should join us because they may be entitled to substantial damages.”
The complaint alleges the financial toll the Cartel has taken: Since the Cartel began illegal price-fixing, it has used its collective market power to lower wholesale prices by more than 20%, and continues to squeeze wholesalers and threaten the viability of their operations.
The unconstitutional complaint alleges that GDF knew its plan to build cartels could create legal risks for the company under the Constitution’s 10% licensing limit. The complaint quotes from a document provided by GDF to potential investors: “There can be no assurance that the Missouri Department of Cannabis Regulation will not dispute the number of marijuana dispensaries operated or supervised by the operator or its affiliates…”.
This action is brought on behalf of a putative class that includes all licensed independent wholesalers in Missouri that are not members of the alleged GDF Cartel for purposes of injunctive relief. Wholesalers who believe they have been financially harmed by the alleged Cartel’s practices should join the case because they may be entitled to substantial damages. The putative class is represented by the law firms of Feuerstein Kulick LLP and Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP.
Source: Feuerstein Kulick LLP and Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
Cannabis News
State-Licensed Marijuana Businesses Can Now Apply For Federal Protections Using New DEA Form
After fifteen years of successful cooperation, managing director Moritz Böcking and the shareholders of Klasmann-Deilmann GmbH have mutually agreed to part ways. As of May 1, 2026, Moritz Böcking will hand over the position of managing director to Jan Astrup, who served as the company’s CEO in 2021/2022. Jan Astrup and Damian Ikemann will form the Board of Directors of the Klasmann-Deilmann Group from now on.
© Klasmann-Deilmann Benelux
Klasmann-Deilmann thanks Moritz Böcking for his cooperation and the progress achieved in the transformation of the Klasmann-Deilmann Group. Moritz Böcking expanded Klasmann-Deilmann beyond the growing media business into new areas of commercial horticulture and promoted innovation and digitalization within the company. In addition, its achievements include the expansion of resources derived from renewable raw materials, as well as the acquisition of a subsidiary in Australia and production facilities in France and Canada, which operate in cooperation with external partners. He also significantly advanced Klasmann-Deilmann’s positioning as a global pioneer of sustainable development in the growing media industry, thereby making a decisive contribution to the company’s economic growth.
With Jan Astrup, Klasmann-Deilmann is getting an internationally experienced manager who has proven himself in the company and has extensive experience in raw materials, production, process optimization and technology. With the new CEO, raw materials and technology-driven areas for the substrate industry are now increasingly important at senior management level. Jan Astrup will strengthen the core commercial horticulture business and help develop the company for the future.
For more information:
Klasmann-Deilmann GmbH
(email protected)
www.klasmann-deilmann.com
Centurion Pro Solutions Spannabis 2022
Federal Court Calls DEA’s Definition of Hemp, Ambiguous! Cannabis Coast to Coast with Alaina Pinto
🌱The Secret to Starting Seeds Successfully
THE MARIJUANA CONSPIRACY | DIRECTOR CRAIG PRYCE [new release film]
Marijuana Retail Report
Missouri cannabis growers file class action against Good Day Farm
State-Licensed Marijuana Businesses Can Now Apply For Federal Protections Using New DEA Form
MJ Unpacked Is Coming Home to the Boardwalk
Spannabis 2022 Cannabis Garden
The B Block of Cannabis Coast to Coast News with Alaina Pinto – State reports from WA, VA, ON, DC
“Our system can manage equipment across 10,000+ m² using just a few wires”
Florida Workshop to Discuss What Constitutes a ‘Cartoon’ in Hemp Packaging
Mazar-i-Sharif Hash Wednesday
Re-release of the full show of Cannabis Coast to Coast news. Republican Texas DA Fires Up vs. laws;
From Finance to Wellness: Brad Zerman’s Impactful Pivot
Weak Michigan Cannabis Sales Again in July – New Cannabis Ventures
DEA’s Cole Reverses His “priorities” ; Prohibitionists Dig In; Dead & Co Celebrates 60 years in SF
Your Cannabis Business: Consistent Filings Are Critical
Afghan Black Hash Wednesday
Curaleaf Q2 Revenue Falls 8% – New Cannabis Ventures
-
Cannabis News8 months ago“Our system can manage equipment across 10,000+ m² using just a few wires”
-
Florida9 months agoFlorida Workshop to Discuss What Constitutes a ‘Cartoon’ in Hemp Packaging
-
Video7 months agoMazar-i-Sharif Hash Wednesday
-
Video9 months agoRe-release of the full show of Cannabis Coast to Coast news. Republican Texas DA Fires Up vs. laws;
-
Video9 months agoFrom Finance to Wellness: Brad Zerman’s Impactful Pivot
-
aawh9 months agoWeak Michigan Cannabis Sales Again in July – New Cannabis Ventures
-
Video8 months agoDEA’s Cole Reverses His “priorities” ; Prohibitionists Dig In; Dead & Co Celebrates 60 years in SF
-
Best Practices9 months agoYour Cannabis Business: Consistent Filings Are Critical