With just shy of six months to go until Election Day, the campaign to legalize recreational cannabis in Florida is kicking into high gear as sponsor Smart & Safe Florida announced the release of a batch of new ads aimed to educate voters on the amendment and increase support.

According to a news release from Smart & Safe Florida, four ads are set to air statewide across broadcast, cable, streaming, radio and digital platforms.

The ads feature a variety of Floridians, including mothers, business professionals and a former law enforcement officer and Vietnam War veteran, speaking in favor of Amendment 3 and explaining why residents should have the freedom to consume safe and regulated cannabis.

Smart & Safe Florida spent $5 million on the ad campaign.

Florida’s New Recreational Weed Ad Campaign: A Closer Look

The four ads touch on many of the same themes, though each has its own unique focus surrounding why Florida voters should support Amendment 3 this November.

The “Freedom” ad features retired U.S. Army Col. Wilson Barnes, who references the current policies as “outdated,” costing many Floridians their freedom while highlighting his military service as a means to defend that freedom. 

The “Available” ad primarily highlights the current abundance of illicit cannabis in the state and the potential dangers of consuming unregulated and untested products. The “Clear Choice” ad poses a “no” vote on Amendment 3 as a means to continue allowing “cartel criminals to profit from illegal marijuana laced with toxic chemicals and dangerous drugs” and a “yes” vote as providing more consumer safety.

The “Vote Yes” ad is the only full-minute clip and touches on most of the points of the other three 30-second ads. All of the advertisements also note that the amendment would provide more freedom for residents and generate revenue for schools, police and safer communities.

“A yes vote on Amendment 3 will improve the health and safety of Floridians,” the news release states — a similar message to the verbiage utilized in the four advertisements. “Access to regulated adult-use marijuana would help prevent illicit cartel-trafficked marijuana from making its way into Florida, as well as allow law enforcement to focus on violent crime. Without regulation, these products can be laced with dangerous materials including heavy metals, pesticides, glass, heroin, fentanyl and other illegal substances.”

Upping the Ante and Closing Gaps for Approval

The amendment was approved for the ballot early last month after the Florida Supreme Court ruled that the challenges from Attorney General Ashley Moody — who argued that the measure was misleading and doesn’t inform voters about federal prohibition — were invalid.

A “yes” vote on Amendment 3 supports legalizing adult-use cannabis and permitting possession of up to three ounces of flower and up to five grams of concentrate, and a “no” opposes adult-use legalization and all it would pertain.

The campaign comes after recent polling suggesting that support for legal recreational cannabis in Florida is strong, but may not be enough to actually pass the amendment come Election Day.

In Florida, measures must gain 60% support in order to pass. 

A recent USA Today/Ipsos survey found that 56% of registered Florida voters, and 49% of Florida adults overall, support the measure. Another poll released earlier this month also falls short of the required threshold for approval, finding that 58% of Florida voters support legalizing adult-use cannabis.

“A smart and safe Florida means a regulated marijuana market where Floridians no longer need to turn to illicit cartel-trafficked products on the streets,” said Smart & Safe Florida spokesperson Morgan Hill. “More than half of Americans already enjoy access to safe, regulated marijuana, and we believe Floridians deserve that same freedom. Our campaign in support of Amendment 3 is in full swing, and we’re excited to continue connecting with voters through to November.”

The post Smart & Safe Florida Reveals $5M Ad Campaign To Amp Up MJ Legalization Support first appeared on High Times.

The post Smart & Safe Florida Reveals $5M Ad Campaign To Amp Up MJ Legalization Support appeared first on Paradise Found.

A New York court ruled in favor of Leafly Holdings and other plaintiffs that the state’s ban on third-party cannabis marketing is unconstitutional, striking down advertising rules, after the ruling initially invalidated all of the state’s adult-use regulations.

Last September, a lawsuit filed by the plaintiffs Leafly Holdings, adult-use retailer Stage One Dispensary, and a customer who uses Leafly to inform her decisions about cannabis purchases challenged New York’s ban on third-party advertisers. Specifically, the plaintiffs sued over rules that banned third-party marketing for cannabis companies—think apps and platforms like Weedmaps and Leafly. Leafly documents over 5,000 cannabis strains and shows their terpene profiles, lineage, and effects among other data that can make choosing a strain safer.

The Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) regulations on non-plant-touching third-party platforms, as is, would essentially block Leafly from doing business in New York. In the lawsuit, Leafly cited several allegedly problematic rules including one that bans retailers from paying for “marketing or promotion through a third-party platform, marketplace, or aggregator that lists cannabis products for sale”; and another that bans licensees from contracting with a “person or entity performing any function or activity directly involving the licensed activities authorized for the license type.” 

State Supreme Court Justice Kevin R. Bryant ruled in favor of the plaintiffs Thursday, declaring that the New York cannabis industry’s rules are arbitrary, capricious, and therefore unconstitutional. Bryant’s April 4 decision invalidates OCM cannabis regulations parts 118-121, 123-125, and 131, saying that the OCM failed to show evidence to justify how the rules were developed.

“We are reviewing the decision and exploring all possible legal options,” a representative of the OCM told High Times Friday morning.

Leafly Holdings, Inc., et. al v. New York State Office of Cannabis Management, et. al reads, “For the foregoing reasons, the petition is granted, and the following sections are hereby declared null and void as arbitrary and capricious; The Third-Party Marketing Ban, Parts 9 N.Y.C.R.R. §§123.10(g)(21) and 124.5(a); the Pricing Ban, 9 N.Y.C.R.R. §124.1(b)(5)(ii) the Third-Party Order Ban, 9 N.Y.C.R.R. §123.10(g)(23); the Third-Party All-Licensee Listing Mandate, 9 N.Y.C.R.R. §124.l(b)(2); and the Third-Party Distributor Listing Mandate, 9 N.Y.C.R.R. §124.l(c)(l)-(2),” Honorable Kevin R. Bryant, J.S.C. Ruled. The original sweeping order appeared to invalidate all of New York’s adult-use rules, however the ruling was quickly clarified to apply only to marketing rules by the end of the day.

Leafly was more than pleased with the news. “It’s impossible to overstate the importance of providing consumers with choices, and educational information when making purchasing decisions,” the company said in a statement. “It is critically important that licensed retailers have equal access to important advertising and marketing tools to help them succeed in a competitive landscape.” Leafly didn’t immediately respond to High Times for comment.

Did the Ruling Invalidate New York’s Cannabis Regulations?

For a few hours on Thursday, the ruling invalidated or appeared to invalidate the whole of New York’s cannabis regulations as it was originally written. Syracuse.com reports that Judge Bryant’s “jaw-dropping decision” applied to the regulations broadly, and it “strikes down all New York recreational cannabis rules.” Chris Roberts for MJBizDaily wrote that the decision could send New York’s into “chaos” as it was unclear if cannabis businesses could be operated without any rules in place, or what else might happen.

Some people were happy to see the rules get tossed. Why? Lawsuits and bureaucratic problems have left New York’s adult-use cannabis market in bedlam. Only about two dozen legal dispensaries are open, as oversupply from farmers stacks up and black market shops step in to fill the void. Even Gov. Kathy Hochul called it a “disaster” so some didn’t exactly shed a tear when it appeared the rules were invalid.

State Sen. Jeremy Cooney, chair of the Senate’s cannabis subcommittee, was among those who quickly slammed the ruling, before the ruling was amended.

“Today’s State Supreme Court decision was another setback in a series of blows New York’s adult-use cannabis market has faced since legalization, three years ago,” he wrote in a statement. “While some changes to marketing regulations are needed, the decision by the Court to throw out all agency regulations will ultimately slow progress at a time when we need to more aggressively combat illicit shops to grow a stronger, more-equitable legal market.”

Fox News reports that the court “dramatically scaled back his order from the previous day that had invalidated most of the state’s cannabis regulations in a case challenging rules for advertising marijuana.”

Now that the court has clarified that the ruling only applies to marketing and advertising rules, it demonstrates how Leafly’s win will open up the doors to third-party companies looking to expand into New York’s market.

The post New York Judge Strikes Down Cannabis Marketing Rules appeared first on High Times.

The post New York Judge Strikes Down Cannabis Marketing Rules appeared first on Paradise Found.

Since states across the country first began legalizing cannabis, the ability for cannabis-related businesses to advertise on social media — or even mention or show cannabis products — has remained a contentious issue. 

Many platforms will quickly remove cannabis business accounts once they catch wind of their content, leaving professionals with limited access to their audience and ultimately having to jump through hurdles like self-censorship to maintain their accounts. Some have also questioned if the consistent censorship surrounding cannabis and other drug content may lead to gaps in education or information encouraging harm reduction.

Despite these concerns, there remains a prevailing push to ensure children are not exposed to cannabis marketing and that reform as a whole does not encourage use among people under the legal age.

Colorado is currently caught in the middle of this push and pull, as lawmakers are working to advance legislation that would force social media platforms to ban users for talking positively about, promoting or advertising cannabis and cannabis products online, along with other regulated drugs and substances.

Colorado’s Polarizing Content-Regulation Bill

The bill, SB24-158, is currently facing criticism from multiple angles. 

The legislation was recently amended to include language saying that “a social media platform may allow a user to promote, sell, or advertise medical marijuana or retail marijuana to users who are at least twenty-one years of age,” so long as the content is in compliance with state cannabis laws, Marijuana Moment reports. 

Members of the Senate Committee on Business, Labor and Technology ultimately approved the amended bill unanimously, advancing it to the Appropriations Committee.

Still, some critics argue that the revised legislation does not adequately address concerns around other substances, like psilocybin — which Colorado voters decriminalized and legalized for therapeutic use in 2022 — alongside hemp-derived products or over-the-counter cough syrups.

As it stands currently, the bill would restrict promotion of hemp-derived products with more than 1.25 mg of THC or a CBD-to-THC ratio of less than 20:1. Most other hemp-containing products meant for human consumption that are not a dietary supplement, food, food additive or herb would also be restricted.

R Street Institute’s Shoshana Weismann called out some of the issues in the bill’s initial language, stating that it has some “potentially disastrous quirks.” Speaking with Marijuana Moment, Weismann referenced that the updated bill would prevent social media users from promoting substances like Nyquil or anti-anxiety medications.

“And if you promote those medications, you will be reported to law enforcement,” Weismann told the publication via email. “That is asinine.”

Social Media Age Verification, Data Considerations

So what about the cannabis exemption for those over 21? Does allowing companies to advertise specifically to those of legal age act as a proper workaround?

The bill states that social media companies must “use a commercially reasonable process to verify each user’s age” and “retain any information obtained for age verification purposes only for the purpose of compliance and for no other purpose and to dispose of such information securely after age verification is complete.”

In a recent blog post, Weismann notes that this process is not only expensive for businesses but also would require Colorado social media users to upload sensitive information to any given social media site they use. 

“Although the bill requires platforms to dispose of this information once a user’s age is verified, the rule does not apply to third-party verifiers — rendering enforcement against them nearly impossible. Further, it doesn’t stop nefarious actors who would seek to hack such valuable information,” Weismann writes. 

The bill mandates companies to retain “any data and metadata concerning users’ identities and activities” for one year, and Weismann argues that this only makes data more enticing and accessible for hackers. 

Noting the potential First Amendment and free speech violations of the bill, Weismann also references the bill’s language prohibiting social media companies from alerting users “to the fact that a law enforcement agency is investigating the user’s activity and account,” arguing that this violates Fourth Amendment principles.

“This means that if someone is unaware the government is investigating them due to what is, in effect, a legislatively mandated gag order, they cannot fight government actions or exercise their rights,” Weismann states. “While these orders may be necessary in certain cases, it shouldn’t be an across-the-board call.”

Unanswered Questions and Uncertain Outcomes

There are a number of other potential scenarios the legislation could affect that lawmakers must still answer to. 

For example, it’s still unclear as to whether a medical patient posting about their cannabis use to social media would be banned under the legislation. Even someone posting that an over-the-counter cough syrup helped them to feel better, or Colorado Gov. Jared Polis’ (D) recent touting of the state’s emerging psychedelic industry as a positive and beneficial move, could potentially be banned under the language of the bill. 

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Chris Hansen (D) told Marijuana Moment last month that he was “working on answers” to these questions.

Should the legislation pass, social media companies would need to update their policies and publicly post them on or before July 1, 2025. Companies would also need to submit annual reports to the state attorney general to confirm “whether the current version of the published policies contain definitions and provisions relating to illicit substances.”

The post Colorado Bill Banning Social Media MJ, Drug Posts Raises Constitutional Concerns appeared first on High Times.

The post Colorado Bill Banning Social Media MJ, Drug Posts Raises Constitutional Concerns appeared first on Paradise Found.

It’s open season for flagrant ads to sell illegal drugs like psilocybin, LSD, and other drugs, as Meta works to improve its algorithms to filter illegal content. Because content is being filtered by algorithms, not human beings, sometimes the wrong content—i.e. educational cannabis material—gets taken down while brazen ads to sell drugs remain up.

Some journalists are fed up with the double standard. A Canadian reporter said he was able to get an ad for LSD approved on Facebook, leading a Meta employee to finally remove the ad after the reporter reached out for comment. The National Post reports that Facebook’s automated moderation system approved an ad selling LSD, saying the ad doesn’t violate Meta’s advertising standards. The ad was eventually removed after the reporter contacted Facebook for comment.

Christopher McGrath, a senior manager at Deloitte Canada, said he began seeing ads for drugs on Facebook that he believes were triggered by algorithms while he was researching a recent report  on Canada’s black market cannabis trade.

Deloitte Canada’s report, “Clearing the Smoke: Insights to Canada’s Illicit Cannabis Market,” was supposed to provide data on illegal cannabis sales, but McGrath’s research for it only triggered an onslaught of various cannabis ads on Facebook. So on one hand, Meta wants to filter that content, but on the other, also market ads to users looking for items like cannabis.

University of Toronto media economics professor Brett Caraway, is due to the reliance social media platforms place in machine learning and automated algorithms to police their content.

“When these platforms started, they had departments full of people—actual humans—to sift through the most toxic and horrible parts of the internet,” he said.

“With the amount of content that goes up every minute, there’s just no way humans can put eyes on everything, so they rely increasingly on algorithms and AI for the first round of filtration.”

Facebook responded to The National Post’s inquiries with the following, explaining that when those ads are found they are taken down: “We prohibit content—both in ads and in organic content—that promotes the buying and selling of pharmaceutical and non-medical drugs, and remove it whenever we find it,” the statement reads. “We’ll continue to improve in this area in our ongoing efforts to keep our platforms safe.”

Experts wonder if the decline in online advertising is playing a role and if Meta can’t spend enough on moderation. 

“We’ve seen a lot of major players cut back in the money they’re spending,” Caraway said.

“But Facebook needs that [money]—so if Chrysler or BMW leave, then they have no choice but to take on Jimmy-Bob’s Cannabis Store. Their business model is literally 98-per-cent advertising funded, so they don’t have any wiggle room.”

A History of Censorship

Facebook and Instagram are known for targeting cannabis-related accounts in various waves, taking steps to cut back on illegal drug content. In October of 2018, Facebook placed a pause on cannabis searches. The site justified the ban saying users were selling marijuana products through the social network. Soon, the ban would be lifted

The platforms Facebook and Instagram will close an advertising loophole, joining other tech companies amid the “great vape scare” that took place in 2019. In 2019, an Instagram spokesperson said that Facebook and Instagram will start removing posts that promote vaping, tobacco, or weapons.

Companies that make totally harmless products—such as organic soap and care products manufacturer Dr. Bronner’s—reported posts and ads getting taken down. Dr. Bronner’s experienced similar issues with its boosted posts back in June 2017. 

The company received this response from Facebook after some of its ads were inexplicitly taken down: “This ad isn’t running because it doesn’t follow our Advertising Policies. We don’t allow ads that promote prescription or recreational drugs. Ads like these are sensitive in nature and are usually contrary to local laws, rules or regulations. Please keep in mind that advocacy or awareness ads are allowed…”

Eight Tulsa, Oklahoma-based medical cannabis businesses said that the platform was subjectively censoring their Facebook pages.

A group of cannabis businesses said they have been negatively affected by social media bans, and they are no longer taking the alleged discrimination lying down. Led by the Ye Olde Apothecary Shoppe, eight dispensaries have announced that they are suing Facebook executives over what they call “a pattern of targeting the Oklahoma medical marijuana industry.”

Efforts are being made to control drug ads on social media, particularly in Canada. In Canada, a new online harms bill includes content guidelines for social media platforms and enforcement frameworks meant to hold the tech companies accountable. In newer legislation,  Meta itself would be penalized if it let illegal drug ads stay up.

The post Brazen Drug Ads Wreak Havoc Thanks to Meta’s Facebook Ad Algorithms appeared first on High Times.

The post Brazen Drug Ads Wreak Havoc Thanks to Meta’s Facebook Ad Algorithms appeared first on Paradise Found.

A Brooklyn, New York dispensary moved into the premises of a former church with a wall that depicted iconic rapper Notorious B.I.G., aka Biggie Smalls or by his real name, Christopher Wallace. But due to strict New York rules on cannabis advertising, the dispensary was forced to paint over the mural, and local residents aren’t thrilled about the decision to paint over Brooklyn’s biggest hero.

The tribute to Biggie was painted by Huetek, featuring the artist as a baby with the name “Brooklyn” painted beside it. Huetek is a graphic designer, illustrator, and musician, and his pieces can be found throughout New York City.

“Let me remind ya what this represented…,” Huetek wrote on Instagram. “This wall here was created with one thing in mind … to salute…uplift…all creative souls who walk this earth…we the artist we the creators…we the people……who bring life to this world thru our creativity..and our passion…’destined for greatness’….was a love letter to all …starting from brooklyn …….to look beyond the obstacles and reach [your] goals….to fight for what [you] believe and love ….”

While Notorious B.I.G,. is highly respected in his hometown, the decision to remove the mural wasn’t up to the dispensary team. “We didn’t want to take it down,” The Emerald Dispensary co-founder Christina De Giovanni told The New York Post. The Emerald Dispensary is a minority-owned, social equity license holder.

De Giovanni said the mural was painted on the exterior wall of 85 Suydam St. for about three years before the dispensary moved into the space, which had previously been a church called House of Pray.

The state’s Office of Cannabis Management (OCM), which regulates the sale of adult-use cannabis in New York, warned them that letting the mural remain in place could jeopardize the store’s opening which required an inspection from state officials.

“[The state compliance officer] said, ‘if the inspector sees it and says no, you’re going to have to delay your opening,’” De Giovanni said.

Emerald co-founders De Giovanni and Ray Ramon Roman began the dispensary licensing process in 2022, and were forced to paint over the mural after learning that it had to go. 

De Giovanni said she insisted it be covered in removable anti-graffiti paint in the hopes it could one day be displayed again.

“It was so hard,” she said. “It was the hardest thing I’ve ever done … it’s really unfortunate that we haven’t had the opportunity to get an honest start before getting backlash for something that wasn’t our decision.”

OCM regulations on cannabis retail locations prohibit dispensary signage from displaying anything other than the needed information to provide location and so on.

Per the state’s Cannabis Control Board and written into the rules under the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York, the following restrictions apply to cannabis retail stores in New York.

“Only licensees authorized to conduct retail sales or delivery to consumers may advertise outdoors using signs provided such signs,” the OCM states  Only is the advertisements  “(1) are for the purpose of alerting individuals to the location of a retail dispensary authorized to sell cannabis products to consumers; (2) are limited to, at a maximum, the following information: (i) licensee’s name, entity name, or doing business as name; (ii) dispensary address, phone number, email address, and website URL; and 34 (iii) the nature of the business; (3) are affixed to a building or permanent structure; (4) are not on vehicles; and (5) do not total more than two in number per licensed premises.

Notorious B.I.G.’s Impact in Brooklyn

There are many reasons why Brooklyn residents feel a certain way about 

By the time Notorious B.I.G. was done, he had it all: three No. 1 albums on the Billboard 200 (some posthumously), two No.1 Billboard Hot 100 songs, and numerous other achievements. He was considered Brooklyn’s pride, the East Coast’s finest, and during that time period, only Tupac Shakur came close in terms of success as a solo artist in the rap industry.

Black Cannabis Magazine notes that the son of Notorious B.I.G. launched two cannabis brands recently: Frank White and Think BIG. Frank White is named after one of Wallace’s aliases, a premium cannabis brand that offers a range of products, including pre-rolls, flower, and concentrates. Think BIG, on the other hand, is a social justice-focused cannabis brand with an emphasis on helping those who have been disproportionately affected by the War on Drugs.

Other Brooklyn murals of Notorious B.I.G. were flashpoints when they were being taken down.

In 2017, a two-story mural depicting The Notorious B.I.G. on the side of a building on Bedford Avenue and Quincy was scheduled to be taken down. The artwork titled “King of NY” was painted by the artists Naoufal “Rocko” Alaoui and Scott “Zimer” Zimmerman and has attracted crowds since it went up in 2015. 

The post Brooklyn Dispensary, Notorious B.I.G. Mural Causes Stir appeared first on High Times.

The post Brooklyn Dispensary, Notorious B.I.G. Mural Causes Stir appeared first on Paradise Found.

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a Mississippi medical marijuana dispensary owner challenging the state’s ban on cannabis advertising. In the legal action, Clarence Cocroft II, the owner of Tru Source Medical Cannabis, argued that Mississippi’s regulations prohibiting cannabis advertising in any media amounted to unconstitutional censorship of the industry.

But U.S. District Judge Michael P. Mills disagreed with Cocroft and dismissed the lawsuit on Monday. In his ruling, Mills wrote that because the possession of marijuana remains illegal at the federal level, it is not a “lawful activity” that is protected by the U.S. Constitution like some other forms of commercial speech.

Cocroft opened his dispensary in Olive Branch, Mississippi after the state legislature legalized medical marijuana in 2022. In his lawsuit, he argues that he has faced difficulty reaching potential customers because of the state’s ban on advertising by cannabis businesses. 

The judge, however, said that overturning Mississippi’s ban on cannabis advertising would be a “drastic intrusion upon state sovereignty.”

“This is particularly true considering the fact that, by legalizing marijuana to any degree, the Mississippi Legislature has gone further than Congress itself has been willing to go,” Mills wrote in his ruling, according to a report from the Associated Press. “In light of this fact, on what basis would a federal court tell the Mississippi Legislature that it was not entitled to dip its toe into the legalization of marijuana, but, instead, had to dive headfirst into it?”

State Sued Over Advertising Ban

Cocroft is represented by the Institute for Justice, a nonprofit libertarian law firm. The lawsuit names the Mississippi Department of Health, Department of Revenue and Alcoholic Beverage Control Bureau as defendants in the legal action.

In the suit, Corcroft maintains that Mississippi’s ban on cannabis advertising prevents him from reaching out to customers via television, radio or print ads. He is even forbidden from placing ads on billboards that he owns. 

The judge ruled that the state cannot prohibit cannabis businesses from displaying products on their websites or from using “appropriate signs” on their businesses. The authority to enact other restrictions, however, lies with the state Health Department, which bans dispensaries from advertising or marketing “in any media.” Corcroft’s legal team says the ban amounts to unconstitutional censorship.

“When Mississippi legalized medical marijuana, it relinquished its power to censor speech by medical marijuana businesses,” said Ari Bargil, an Institute for Justice attorney. “If a product is legal to sell, then it is legal to talk about selling it.”

Corcroft’s suit argues that a current review of cannabis policy by the Biden administration and presidential pardons for low-level federal marijuana offenses constitute a de facto legalization of cannabis. But while the president has pardoned thousands of people who have been federally convicted of marijuana possession, cannabis remains illegal under federal law. As long as marijuana remains a federally controlled substance, the judge ruled, the states are free to pass laws that restrict advertising by cannabis businesses.

“Plaintiffs thus argue that Congress and President Biden have ‘all but’ made the possession of marijuana lawful, which strikes this court as a tacit admission that it still remains illegal under federal law,” Mills wrote.

In a statement released after the judge’s ruling and dismissal of the case, Corcroft said that Mississippi’s ban on cannabis advertising is a violation of the First Amendment rights of legal businesses. He added that he plans to appeal the judge’s ruling to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

“I’m prepared to fight this fight for as long as it takes,” Cocroft said. “This case is bigger than me and my dispensary – it is about defending the right of everyone to truthfully advertise their legal business in the cannabis industry.”

Although Mississippi’s regulated medical marijuana businesses still face the state’s ban on advertising, Brian Vicente, founding partner of the cannabis and psychedelics law firm Vicente LLP, noted that some states with similar policies have later modified the restrictions.

“Mississippi’s marijuana laws are still new. In most states, we see advertising restrictions lessen over time as states realize that marijuana, including medical marijuana, is a legitimate product that is not only highly regulated but also legal and safe for sale in the state,” Vicente wrote in an email to High Times. “Mississippi needs to consider that, by severely restricting medical marijuana advertising, they are hurting their medical marijuana patients who need access to this important medication. These restrictions significantly impact patients’ accessibility to information about the program and their medication.”

The post Federal Judge Upholds Mississippi’s Ban on Weed Advertising appeared first on High Times.

The post Federal Judge Upholds Mississippi’s Ban on Weed Advertising appeared first on Paradise Found.

The owner of a cannabis dispensary in Mississippi has filed a lawsuit alleging that state laws which prevent him from advertising his business violate his First Amendment rights.

Clarence Cocroft II of Olive Branch, Mississippi is the owner of Tru Source Medical Cannabis. According to the Associated Press, Cocroft filed a lawsuit Tuesday because he says regulations put in place by the Mississippi Department of Health have made it inordinately difficult for him to run his business. 

Mississippi legalized cannabis for medicinal purposes in 2022 but the laws only allow for people with certain “debilitating conditions” to obtain a recommendation. The Mississippi Department of Health opted to ban cannabis providers from advertising in any way shape or form. Cocroft said this is a violation of his constitutional rights as a business owner. 

“All I want to do, like any other business owner, is have the opportunity to advertise. If I pay taxes in this business, which I do, I should be able to advertise,” Cocroft said at a news conference. “All I’m asking from this state is to provide us with the same liberty that they’ve provided other businesses.”

According to the Mississippi Department of Health website, Mississippi cannabis businesses are allowed to have a sign on their store and have a website with a list of products available but they cannot otherwise participate in any form of communication that could be perceived as advertising. An attorney for Cocroft, Katrin Marquez told the Associated Press that this constitutes unlawful censorship.

“Under the ban, Clarence can’t advertise in any media. He cannot place ads in newspapers or magazines, on television or radio, or even on billboards that he already owns,” Marquez said. “The First Amendment does not allow a state to completely censor a legal business. If it is legal to sell a product, it is legal to talk about that product.”

The list goes on. Legally operating cannabis dispensaries in Mississippi are not allowed to display products in their window, not allowed to send out mass text messages or emails. They can’t offer discounts, promotions or deals of any kind nor can they give away free product or any kind of samples. They also can’t put their business name on an Adopt-a-Highway sign or an electronic interstate sign.

Cocroft told the Associated Press that when he started his business, he actually set aside some money for advertising and even bought high-profile billboards in high-volume areas of the state which he has since been forced to lease out to other businesses. 

“It’s simply unfair that every other legal business in Mississippi is allowed to advertise, while I have to rely on word of mouth,” Cocroft said.

Many states with legal adult-use or medical cannabis markets have enacted regulations restricting cannabis advertising. Most states opt to apply certain restrictions on cannabis advertising on public broadcasts to ensure that the majority of the audience who will see the ad will be of legal consumption age but the particularities vary state to state.

Most of these restrictions are likely not First Amendment Violations based on comparable Supreme Court cases related to tobacco and pornography advertising which have determined that reasonable time, place and manner restrictions are not First Amendment violations, but few states have outright banned cannabis advertising to the degree that Mississippi has. Louisiana, Arkansas and Alabama have similar laws banning cannabis advertising through public mediums, but Marquez argued to the Associated Press that Mississippi’s laws are harsher still. 

“The state government cannot simultaneously authorize the legal sale of a product or service, while forbidding the truthful advertising of said product,” Marquez said. “No law, state or federal, justifies the censorship in this case.”

According to the Associated Press, Cocroft is represented in this lawsuit by the Institute for Justice and his lawsuit is specifically targeted at leadership in the Mississippi Department of Health, Department of Revenue and Alcoholic Beverage Control Bureau. The language of the lawsuit alleges that state regulations unfairly target legally operating cannabis  businesses trying to utilize their First Amendment rights to spread truthful, commercial speech. 

Mississippi state law allows cannabis patients to obtain 3.5 grams of cannabis once per day, six days per week. The list of qualifying conditions is short and limited to illnesses like cancer, HIV and Parkinson’s disease. A full list can be found here. 

The post Mississippi Cannabis Provider Sues For Right To Advertise appeared first on High Times.

The post Mississippi Cannabis Provider Sues For Right To Advertise appeared first on Paradise Found.

Cannabis is so stigmatized that some New Yorker’s don’t even want to see it. One New York Republican wants to remove the eyesore of cannabis billboards and signs throughout the state, and introduced a bill that would do so, increasing penalties for signs that are already restricted.

Assemblyman Scott Gray (R-Watertown) recently introduced A8200, which would punish people with cannabis signs each day the signage is up. It would prohibit the display of ads for cannabis unless the ads are by an authorized dealer on the site of an authorized business. 

New York already restricts cannabis-related billboards, extensively. Regulations that were established recently by the state’s Office of Cannabis Management include a ban on cannabis billboards for all cannabis businesses except those with retail sales or delivery. And those signs can only be used to alert consumers of the location.

The proliferation of cannabis billboards raised alarm—but one particular ad that mimicked the “Got Milk?” campaign, saying “Got Weed?” especially irked the lawmaker, who said it appeals to teens.

“The rollout Office of Cannabis Management has included many delays, turmoil, and confusion,” Gray said, The Post-Journal reports. “A concern of many New Yorkers is that advertisements of many cannabis products will be geared towards adolescents, including those who may not even be of legal age to possess cannabis or cannabis products. For example, in my district there is a large billboard with a pronounced ‘Got Weed?’ advertisement, closely resembling the ‘Got Milk?’ campaign that was directed towards teenagers.”

To that end, “Got Milk?” isn’t exactly healthy advice either: It turns out that drinking cow milk everyday could be harmful as well, as dairy is the number one source of saturated fat—leading to heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and Alzheimer’s disease. It can also up your chances of getting ovarian or prostate cancers, and the four advised food groups including dairy were tossed out decades ago.)

The bill would prohibit roadside signage for the sale of cannabis or cannabis products on roads and highways, and establish a civil penalty of $1,000 for the first offense and a subsequent fine of up to $2,500 for each day that a violation continues.

“Numerous scientific studies have shown serious effects from marijuana on teenagers brain’s, and this legislation will ensure that products are not advertised in a harmful way, while protecting the rights of authorized establishments to have signage acknowledging the location of their venue. This legislation does not prohibit the signage for retail operations, rather specific product advertising,” Gray wrote.

Three states with adult-use cannabis—including New York—ban cannabis advertising on public property. Oregon restricts the distribution of handbills on public property while eight of the states prohibit cannabis advertising on public vehicles and mass transit. Six states ban cannabis advertising at locations related to transportation, i.e. roads. Three more states, also including New York, restrict general visibility on signs and billboards. Alaska restricts cannabis business to a maximum of three signs that are visible from a public right of way.

Other States Take Action on Cannabis Signage

Several states have implemented restrictions on cannabis-related ads and billboards to date. Michigan State Representative Mary Whiteford, a Republican based in Allegan County, introduced a bill in 2021 that would ban cannabis billboards in Michigan.

House Bill 4609 would do just that, but it didn’t initially pick up steam. Like New York, Michigan also restricts cannabis billboards, which are regulated by the state’s Marijuana Regulatory Agency.

“About four years ago, when medical marijuana and recreational marijuana were legalized, I had a great concern among our youth that they would find using marijuana as an acceptable form of recreation, and that really bothered me,” said Whiteford. “I got a niece who was addicted to drugs who took her life when she was 23 years old. And I know that she was exposed to marijuana as a teenager and was using it. So I do find in my heart that it’s not good for children to be using marijuana.”

California has gone back and forth on the issue. A 2021 regulation, which comes from the California Bureau of Cannabis Control, overturns a previous ruling, which provided that billboards were allowed unless they were within a 15-mile radius of the state border. 

California’s previous ruling allowed for cannabis billboard advertising along state and interstate highways. While cannabis billboards are still allowed, they are prohibited on any highway that crosses state borders.

In Utah, billboards urged state voters to successfully approve the state’s Prop. 2, which legalized medical cannabis in the state.

Now it’s up to New York legislators to determine what’s appropriate for cannabis-related signage and billboards along roadsides.

The post New York Republican Aims To Ban Pot Billboards, Roadside Signs appeared first on High Times.

The post New York Republican Aims To Ban Pot Billboards, Roadside Signs appeared first on Paradise Found.

As of the California State Legislature ended on Sept. 14, more than 17 cannabis or psychedelic bills were sent to California Gov. Gavin Newsom to potentially be signed. The bills include a wide variety of proposals, which Newsom must either sign, veto, or refuse to sign and allow them to be approved without his signature.

In the past, Newsom has expressed support for cannabis and psychedelics, but it is currently unclear which of these 17 bills he will support. However, he has under one month, or until Oct. 14, to address the following bills.

SB-51: Cannabis provisional licenses: local equity applicants

Social equity applicants would be permitted to apply for or renew their provisional licenses between now and January 1, 2031. Currently, provisional licenses are not being accepted in California.

SB-58: Controlled substances: decriminalization of certain hallucinogenic substances.

This bill was passed on to the Gov. on Sept. 13, and would legalize possession, cultivation, and transportation of substances such as psilocybin, psilocyn, DMT, and mescaline. The bill is led by Sen. Scott Weiner, who believes that it will help many patients, especially military veterans, within the state. “California’s veterans, first responders, and others struggling with PTSD, depression, and addiction deserve access to these promising plant medicines,” said Wiener when the bill passed in the Assembly. “SB-58 has prudent safeguards in place after we incorporated feedback from three years of deep engagement with a broad array of stakeholders. We know these substances are not addictive, and they show tremendous promise in treating many of the most intractable conditions driving our nation’s mental health crisis. It’s time to stop criminalizing people who use psychedelics for healing or personal well-being.”

SB-302 Compassionate Access to Medical Cannabis Act

While only terminally ill patients are currently allowed to use medical cannabis at healthcare facilities, this bill would allow anyone over 65 to treat chronic illness with medical cannabis if they choose. The bill is an expansion of the currently existing Compassionate Access to Medical Cannabis Act, or Ryan’s Law.

SB-540: Cannabis and cannabis products: health warnings

If passed, SB-540 would instruct the Department of Cannabis Control to make an education brochure that would be given to consumers when they purchase products from a dispensary for the first time (both at a retail store or upon delivery). The info would be updated on January 1, 2030, and every five years after that date.

SB-622: Cannabis regulation: plant identification program: unique identifier

A proposal from Sen. Ben Allen and Juan Alanis would change how cannabis products are identified with “a unique identifier to be recorded in a manner as determined by the department by regulation.” The bill doesn’t directly mention removing the plastic tags that are currently used to track cannabis plants, but it could allow digital tags to be utilized in the future for a more sustainable, ecofriendly approach.

SB-700: Employment discrimination: cannabis use

This bill would ban employers from inquiring about an applicant’s personal cannabis use, which is added to current applicant protections from the already existing California Fair Employment and Housing Act. According to Sen. Steven Bradford, 

SB-753: Cannabis: water resources

With the preservation of groundwater and environmental harm, this bill would make it a felony to grow and harvest more than six cannabis plants, especially if it is grown “Intentionally or with gross negligence causing substantial environmental harm to surface or groundwater, public lands, or other public resources.”

SB-833: Cannabis licensing: cultivation licenses: changing license type: inactive status

Currently, cannabis cultivators who wish to change their license status to a smaller grow to inactive (whether permanently or just temporarily), must redo the complete process through the Department of Cannabis Control (DCC). This bill would allow them to make this change through the DCC without resubmitting their application in its entirety.

AB-374: Cannabis: retail preparation, sale, and consumption of non cannabis food and beverage products

Presented to the governor on Sept. 15, AB-374 would make “Amsterdam-style” cannabis cafes legal. With approval, dispensaries will be able to offer non-cannabis food and drinks, as well as “live musical or other performances on the premises of a licensed retailer or microbusiness in the area where the consumption of cannabis is allowed.” According to the bill sponsor, Assemblymember Matt Haney believes the bill would benefit consumers and also cities. “Lots of people want to enjoy legal cannabis in the company of others,” Haney said. “And many people want to do that while sipping coffee, eating a scone, or listening to music. There’s absolutely no good reason from an economic, health or safety standpoint that the state should make that illegal. If an authorized cannabis retail store wants to also sell a cup of coffee and a sandwich, we should allow cities to make that possible and stop holding back these small businesses.”

AB-623: Cannabis: citation and fine

According to current California law, cannabis laboratory testing is conducted by testing a batch of products to ensure that “the chemical profile of the sample conforms to the labeled content of compounds.” In order for licensed labs to test edibles and issue a certificate of analysis, the report must show “that the milligrams of THC per serving does not exceed 10 milligrams per serving, plus or minus 10%.” In other words, the certificate excludes products with less than 10 mg THC (such as low-dose edibles with only 5 mg THC). If passed, AB-623 would require new DCC regulations that keep low-dose edibles in mind.

AB-993: Cannabis Task Force

This bill would add representatives from the Civil Rights Department and the Department of Industrial Relations, the existing cannabis task force in California.

AB-1021: Controlled substances: rescheduling

This bill would allow California health care professionals to prescribe cannabis if it reschedules any Schedule I substance. Current Schedule I substances include cannabis, as well as LSD, heroin, peyote, ecstasy, and more.

AB-1126: Cannabis: citation and fine

This proposal would ban the use of the universal cannabis symbol on cannabis packaging for products that are not authorized to use it. Any companies using the symbol without approval will be seized by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.

AB-1171: Cannabis: private right of action

Legal action would be permissible for cannabis business license owners against illegal cannabis businesses in the California Supreme Court.

AB-1207: Cannabis: labeling and advertising

This bill would potentially alter the definition for cannabis product packaging, by “prohibiting the sale, distribution, or manufacture of cannabis, cannabis products, packaging, or labeling that are attractive to children, as defined.” It further prohibits imagery including cartoons, toys, robots, real or fictional humans, fictional animals or creatures, as well as fruits or vegetables (unless it’s used to describe the flavor of the product).

AB-1448: Cannabis: enforcement by local jurisdictions

A person currently engaging in illegal cannabis without a license is subject to civil penalty funds ($10,000 per day per violation but not to exceed $30,000 per day). This bill would take some of those civil penalty money and move them to treasurers of local jurisdictions.

AB-1684: Local ordinances: fines and penalties: cannabis

In this bill, fines attributed to illegal cannabis cultivators would also apply to other illegal businesses such as processors and distributors.

In the past, Newsom has expressed support for cannabis and psychedelics, but it is currently unclear which of these 17 bills he will sign. However, he has under one month, or until Oct. 14, to address these bills.

Newsom has signed three bills since July that are cannabis-related. In July, he signed SB-250 which provides immunity to people who test positive for a controlled substance, such as fentanyl, specifically in regards to working with law enforcement and sharing where they received the drug. Also in July, Newsom signed AB-128, which added cannabis event organizers to the list of license classifications, and updated requirements for background checks for cannabis-related businesses. He also signed SB-756 on Sept. 1, which allows the California State Water Board to investigate and take action against illegal cannabis cultivation.

The post California Gov. Gavin Newsom To Review 17 Cannabis, Psychedelics Bills appeared first on High Times.

The post California Gov. Gavin Newsom To Review 17 Cannabis, Psychedelics Bills appeared first on Paradise Found.

Chicago-based marijuana company Cresco Labs Inc. announced on Thursday that it will become the “first cannabis company to launch cannabis advertisements on Spotify, the world’s most popular audio streaming subscription service with more than 551 million users and 220 million subscribers.”

The ad campaign will promote Sunnyside, a chain of dispensaries operated by Cresco Labs and will include “30 second audio and in-app digital banners that drive to the retailer’s proprietary e-commerce platform,” the company said in a press release.

Those ads will be specifically targeted to Spotify listeners (and would-be Sunnyside customers) in Illinois, where recreational cannabis is legal.

“Audio streaming services represent a major opportunity for brands to reach large audiences in a targeted manner, and we’re excited to collaborate with Spotify to launch the first-ever cannabis ads from our Sunnyside national retail brand,” Cory Rothschild, Cresco Labs’ National Retail President, said in a statement on Thursday. “Our Sunnyside advertising strategy is built on a data ecosystem enabling best-in-class targeting and measurement. Spotify’s platform will enable our marketing team to target our ads compliantly and profitably to our core shoppers in Illinois where we have a leading share in retail. This important partnership is not only a step in normalizing cannabis, but it also showcases the sophistication and quality of marketing that we have unlocked at Cresco Labs.”

Advertising has been a tricky area to navigate for cannabis companies looking to market in the United States, where marijuana remains subject to federal prohibition. 

Marketing Brew ran a story in 2021 detailing those challenges, and highlighted how the publicly traded Cresco Labs “has a podcast advertising strategy that is just as nuance-filled as you’d expect,” and that its “core strategy hits at the intersection of host-read and programmatic ads.”

The outlet reported that the company “only advertises in states where cannabis—and therefore, marketing cannabis products—is legal.”

“We follow the letter of the law in terms of our content in our delivery,” Matt Pickerel, senior director of performance marketing at Cresco Labs, told Marketing Brew. “So, because we’re dynamically inserting podcast ads, we only serve in the states where we have a footprint and where we have all the licenses that we need.”

Pickerel explained that the podcast company Headgum allowed Cresco Labs to “dynamically insert pre-recorded host-read ads in states Cresco wants to advertise in.”

“Because podcast measurement is still ‘in its infancy,’ Pickerel said, Cresco tracks success with ‘some pretty elementary metrics.’ Those include number of impressions, completes, discount-code redemptions, and website visits if the podcast mentions Cresco’s URL,” Marketing Brew reported at the time.

“While Cresco hasn’t jumped into the podcast advertising landscape headfirst due to those measurement concerns, Pickerel told us it’s doing more than dipping a toe in, with about 15% of its marketing budget going toward podcasts.”

Cresco says that its mission is to “normalize and professionalize the cannabis industry through a CPG approach to building national brands and a customer-focused retail experience, while acting as a steward for the industry on legislative and regulatory-focused initiatives.”

“As a leader in cultivation, production and branded product distribution, the Company is leveraging its scale and agility to grow its portfolio of brands that include Cresco, High Supply, FloraCal, Good News, Wonder Wellness Co., Mindy’s and Remedi, on a national level. The Company also operates highly productive dispensaries nationally under the Sunnyside brand that focus on building patient and consumer trust and delivering ongoing education and convenience in a wonderfully traditional retail experience. Through year-round policy, community outreach and SEED initiative efforts, Cresco Labs embraces the responsibility to support communities through authentic engagement, economic opportunity, investment, workforce development and legislative initiatives designed to create the most responsible, respectable and robust cannabis industry possible,” the company said in Thursday’s press release.

According to Business Insider, Cresco Labs CEO Charlie Bachtell “is a keynote speaker at the upcoming Benzinga Cannabis Capital Conference in Chicago on September 27 and 28, where he will undoubtedly share more insights regarding the new partnership with Spotify.”

In addition to the Benzinga conference in Chicago later this month, Cresco Labs said that Bachtell will also appear at the ATB 2023 Life Sciences Institutional Investor Conference on September 20 in New York City, and the AGP Annual Virtual Cannabis Conference on October 4.

Sunnyside has dispensaries across seven states: one in Arizona, 33 in Florida, ten in Illinois, four in Massachusetts, four in New York, five in Ohio and 14 in Pennsylvania.

Sunnyside opened a new location last month in Palm Bay, Florida.

“We continue to expand the Sunnyside brand and increase access to top-quality cannabis products in the most meaningful Florida markets,” Bachtell said at the time. “Palm Bay is the most populous city in Brevard County with over 129,000 residents, and the city’s location just southeast of Orlando will enable Sunnyside Palm Bay, along with our many other stores in the East Central Florida region, to serve tens of thousands of patients with their cannabis needs.”

The post First Cannabis Ads Coming Soon to Spotify appeared first on High Times.

The post First Cannabis Ads Coming Soon to Spotify appeared first on Paradise Found.