Martha’s Vineyard is an island off the coast of Massachusetts that’s known for its 23 miles of scenic hills and beaches. It’s a popular destination for summer vacationers enjoying the quaint Victorian architecture, as of July 2021, it had one medical cannabis dispensary (Fine Fettle Dispensary) which until recently was also the only cannabis cultivator on the island, in addition to one adult-use only dispensary (Island Time) which opened in August 2021.

The cost of living is high in Martha’s Vineyard, and for business owners, it’s expensive to transport goods from the mainland across the Vineyard Sound (aka the stretch of ocean that sits between Cape Cod, Massachusetts and Martha’s Vineyard). For cannabis businesses, it’s also federally illegal to have cannabis products delivered from the mainland.

Recently, the owner of Island Time, Geoff Rose, filed a lawsuit against the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) regarding a rule that bans him from transporting cannabis by boat from the mainland. “For more than 11 years, my efforts have centered on providing safe and responsible cannabis to local residents and visitors alike,” Rose explained to the Vineyard Gazette. “I’m hoping that the court will mandate the commission take immediate action to allow us to transport the product from the mainland.” He added that the rule puts a burden on him as a business owner, since he can only sell cannabis that he cultivates on the island.

This rule was put in place because of state and federal regulations about cannabis being moved across water or through airspace. Rose’s lawsuit claims that Vineyard Sound is still within the state’s jurisdiction.

Earlier in May, the other dispensary and sole owner of the island’s only cannabis production license, Fine Fettle Dispensary, announced that it would be shutting down operations. “Very sadly, we have had to make the decision to slow down and then ultimately shut down operations on the Vineyard,” Fine Fettle Dispensary president Benjamin Zachs said to the Vineyard Gazette. Up until now, Island Time obtained all of its cannabis products from Fine Fettle Dispensary.

To bypass this new change, Rose inquired with the CCC about ordering cannabis from the mainland, but the CCC rejected the idea, stating the limitations of violating federal law. In March, Rose had cannabis delivered by boat anyway, and the products were delivered on a Steamship Authority ferry, which is run by the U.S. Coast Guard and falls under federal authority.

The unnamed supplier that Rose worked with later received a warning. He was told not to sell the products delivered via ferry, but that order was later lifted, and Rose was able to sell out of all of the products.

Last week, Rose officially closed his dispensary and told customers that he is unable to receive any new product. “We will reopen when we are able to source products from the mainland,” Rose wrote. “I am hopeful for a resolution soon that will result in more products, choices, and value for you, our valued customer.” 

Through the lawsuit, Rose is calling for the Suffolk County Superior Court to grant an injunction so that he can have cannabis delivered to the island. “[Island Time] is being starved to death by the Commission’s arbitrary, unreasonable and inconsistent policy against transporting marijuana and marijuana products over state territorial waters,” Rose explained, warning that his employees will seek other jobs if his business is closed for two weeks or more.

On May 9, the CCC met to discuss the situation and potential courses of action. Not only would the lack of delivery cause Island Time to close permanently, but it would also leave medical cannabis patients living on the island without any access to medicine. “If we do nothing, you are going to have 234 patients with no medical access on the Island. That’s the reality of it,” said commissioner Kimberly Roy.

Additionally, local resident Sally Rizzo filed an affidavit with the supreme court as well. “If I have no retail source of marijuana for my medical needs, my quality of life will suffer significantly,” she wrote. “I am unwilling—and should not be compelled—to risk purchasing untested marijuana from the illicit black market or purchasing marijuana from the Massachusetts mainland and transporting it to my home via the Steamship Authority to treat my documented medical condition.” 

The commission itself didn’t provide any comment to Vineyard Gazette due to ongoing litigation, and only verified what the current law allows or doesn’t allow. “At this time, transportation of marijuana from the Commonwealth mainland to the island counties is not one of those accommodations,” the CCC stated. “To the extent permitted by law, the Commission has been discussing what may be possible in terms of extending additional accommodations to these licensees and will be scheduling a public meeting on Martha’s Vineyard within the next month to continue the conversation.”
However, there are examples of products being delivered in some other states, such as New York, where ferry delivery over water is still counted as “ground transport.” Similar rules are in place for the delivery of cannabis from mainland California to Catalina Island.

The post Martha’s Vineyard Dispensary Sues To Allow Delivery of Cannabis From Massachusetts Mainland first appeared on High Times.

The post Martha’s Vineyard Dispensary Sues To Allow Delivery of Cannabis From Massachusetts Mainland appeared first on Paradise Found.

An Arizona church has reached a settlement in a lawsuit against the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and other federal agencies that allows the Indigenous religious organization to use the psychedelic brew ayahuasca for sacramental purposes. Under the agreement, the Church of the Eagle and the Condor (CEC) will be permitted to import, prepare and distribute ayahuasca to its members at religious ceremonies.

“The Church of the Eagle and the Condor has reached a settlement to secure its religious freedom and the right to use Ayahuasca as its sacrament,” the church wrote in an announcement of the settlement. “This is the first Indigenous-based church to receive recognition and protection.”

In 2022, the CEC filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Customs and Border Protection and the DEA after DHS officials seized shipments of ayahuasca intended for sacramental use by church members. The lawsuit also cited government threats that the church and its members could face prosecution under federal drug charges if they continued to import ayahuasca, which contains the psychedelic drug and Schedule I controlled substance DMT (N, N-Dimethyltryptamine).

The settlement allows the CEC and its members to obtain and use ayahuasca in paste or liquid form under an exemption to the Controlled Substances Act. The concentrate will then be diluted with water into a ceremonial tea by church members for religious ceremonial purposes held in Phoenix. The settlement permits the DEA to take samples of imported shipments to confirm they contain ayahuasca and no controlled substances other than DMT. 

“This Agreement permits CEC to import, receive, manufacture, distribute, transport, securely store, and dispose of ayahuasca solely for CEC’s religious purposes,” the settlement reads. “CEC may not conduct any of these activities for non-religious purposes, including but not limited to recreational purposes. CEC may not use any DEA registrations subject to this Agreement to import, receive, manufacture, distribute, store, or use any other controlled substance.”

Ayahuasca is used in South America by Indigenous cultures and folk healers in spiritual and religious ceremonies. In recent years, the psychoactive brew has gained popularity with American celebrities including Aaron Rodgers, Will Smith, Miley Cyrus and others, who have used ayahuasca to take advantage of its purported mental health benefits.

CEC Ayahuasquero (sacramental practitioner) Joseph Tafur, M.D. said in a statement that the ceremonial use of ayahuasca “is an essential sacrament for our church.”

“Our ceremony is rooted in the Shipibo Amazonian tradition which has been passed down by countless generations,” he said. “Now, in fulfillment of the ancient Prophecy of the Eagle and the Condor, this tradition has come to North America.” 

“I am honored to be an Ayahuasquero with the CEC, and bring to our ceremony the care, respect, and reverence that it deserves,” Tafur continued, adding, “Our ancestral practice will continue to support the community and nourish our holistic well-being.” 

Belinda P. Eriacho, a CEC board member of Diné and A:shwii lineages, said that the settlement with the DEA “reaffirms our right to practice our spirituality as we have always known. It is a recognition by the U.S. government and an important milestone in honoring and validating indigenous belief systems. Prior to contact, indigenous peoples have used sacred plant medicines for healing and ceremony since time immemorial.”

“Our relationship with our plant relatives has always been an extension of our worldview. This has been interrupted by the imposition of governmental policies that have suppressed our way of life and demonstrated religious intolerance,” Eriacho continued. “This settlement is a significant step and acknowledgment of our spiritual beliefs as original peoples of the Americas.” 

The post Arizona Church Reaches Settlement with DEA To Allow Sacramental Use of Ayahuasca appeared first on High Times.

The post Arizona Church Reaches Settlement with DEA To Allow Sacramental Use of Ayahuasca appeared first on Paradise Found.

A new decision of an appeal in a trademark dispute, initiated by the RAW Rolling Papers manufacturer, has widespread implications for the rolling paper industry that dismiss the claim that rolling papers are “drug paraphernalia.” It’s also good news for non-cannabis-touching companies that want to protect trademarks.

BBK, manufacturer of RAW rolling papers, announced on April 9 that it won an appeal in its trademark dispute with Delaware-based Central Coast Agriculture, Inc. (CCA) as the Court sided with the popular rolling paper brand on its counterclaim.

According to the lawsuit, CCA’s employment of the “RAW GARDEN” name for its cannabis products, was an infringement of BBK’s “RAW”  trademark. In the past, several other brands have allegedly attempted to rip off the likeness of the RAW trademark in one way or another. RAW GARDEN applied for a trademark at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), beginning in 2017 with subsequent applications.

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued rulings in two decisions on April 1 that could reshape the landscape of trademark law within the cannabis industry: The district court dismissed BBK’s false advertising claim and ruled in favor of CCA on BBK’s trademark claims. But the district court also ruled in favor of BBK on its counterclaim to invalidate several of CCA’s trademark applications and on CCA’s counterclaim to cancel BBK’s trademark applications for unlawful use.

“BBK is very pleased with the outcome of this appeal. Setting a precedent for the rolling paper industry, the appeals court rejected the suggestion that rolling papers are ‘drug paraphernalia’ and reaffirmed the trial court’s decision that BBK’s RAW^® rolling papers and other RAW^® smoking products are not prohibited by the Controlled Substances Act,” a spokesman for BBK said in an April 9 press release.

“It is equally important that the appeals court confirmed the trial court correctly invalidated the trademark applications improperly filed by CCA,” the spokesman continued. “After years of pursuing efforts in and out of court to protect consumers from being confused and misled by CCA’s unauthorized use of the RAW^® name for CCA’s cannabis products, BBK looks forward to a final resolution after a trial to a jury.”

RAW Black rolling papers were voted the best by the Daily High Club, as well as upvoted to the top in the comments on a Reddit thread, “What papers do y’all generally consider the best?”

Benzinga reports that the rulings could “reshape the landscape of trademark law within the cannabis industry.” Read the appeal ruling in its full text here.

The appellate court’s rulings sent BBK’s trademark infringement claim against CCA back to the district court for a full trial.

BBK representatives say the ruling protects consumers from confusion and misleading practices associated with the unauthorized use of the “RAW” name on rolling paper and other cannabis-adjacent products.

BBK’s team is preparing to present its case to a jury for a final resolution, however this ruling has widespread implications on how lawsuits in the industry will play out.

Not RAW Rolling Paper’s First Rodeo

There are other legal precedents for alleged trademark infringements regarding RAW Rolling Papers. RAW also won a game-changing lawsuit in 2023 when a rolling paper brand Republic Tobacco appeared to rip off RAW’s signature logo design with similarities in color, shape, and so forth.

RAW (BBK/HBI) issued a statement about the final resolution of the seven-year court battle with Republic Tobacco which had brought a series of lawsuits against HBI International, the company that owns the RAW brand.

The ruling on June 5, 2023 finalizes that jury’s decisions after a weeks-long trial, ruling that Republic Tobacco willfully infringed on RAW’s copyright and trade dress, and awarded to HBI damages of more than $1 million. 

When it includes a prejudgment interest award, the Court ordered Republic to pay RAW nearly $1.5 million in total compensation. Today’s conclusion came after both sides agreed on legal fees that RAW will pay to Republic based on only one of Republic’s multitude of claims.

In that case, the judge ruled that “Republic requests the disgorgement of every cent of profit from HBI’s RAW brand during that time period… This extraordinary request, however, is not supported by adequate evidence, nor is it appropriate considering the other factors of the case.”

RAW has also been involved in advocacy efforts. For instance in August 2023, the brand  announced a donation of $100,000 to The JUSTÜS Foundation, a 501c3 non-profit organization that is dedicated to facilitating the entry of legacy cannabis operators to the legal cannabis market. The RAW Seeds Fellowships aim to provide opportunities to legacy cannabis operators to navigate the legal cannabis market.

The new ruling adds another dimension to the protections that RAW Rolling Papers and BBK are entitled to, pending the appeal’s final ruling.

The post RAW Rolling Papers Manufacturer Reigns Triumphant in Trademark Dispute appeared first on High Times.

The post RAW Rolling Papers Manufacturer Reigns Triumphant in Trademark Dispute appeared first on Paradise Found.

Last year in October, a group of cannabis companies filed a federal lawsuit claiming that a federal ban on cannabis is unconstitutional, but the suit was dismissed in January. On Friday, March 15, a new federal lawsuit was filed in court as Canna Provisions, Inc. et al v. Garland.

The case is represented by Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, is pursuing the rights of Verano Holdings Corp, Canna Provisions Inc., Wiseacre Farm Inc., and Gyasi Sellers, who owns a delivery service—all of which operate cannabis businesses in Massachusetts. The plaintiffs claim that the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) has hindered their businesses and prevents them from accessing legal, reliable banking services, and requires that they operate under constant threat of federal prosecution.

The new lawsuit claims that the intention behind the CSA was to prevent illegal cannabis from being moved across state lines, but now that so many states have implemented cannabis laws, legislators are no longer trying to enforce that. “Dozens of states have implemented programs to legalize and regulate medical or adult use marijuana,” the lawsuit stated, and continued on to explain that this has led to “safe, regulated, and local access to marijuana” for consumers, while also having “reduced illicit interstate commerce, as customers switch to purchasing state-regulated marijuana over illicit interstate marijuana.”

“The ground-shaking shifts in marijuana regulation… together with the nation’s long history of marijuana cultivation and use prior to the CSA, demonstrate the widely-held understanding that Plaintiffs’ marijuana activities implicate a liberty interest that requires protection,” the lawsuit continued. “Today, almost every state permits some form of marijuana that is illegal under federal law, and the majority of the nation’s population lives in states where both medical and adult-use marijuana is legal.”

Both the dismissed lawsuit and the newly filed lawsuit hinges on the 2005 court case Gonzales v. Raich in order to demonstrate how the CSA is outdated. “The federal criminal prohibition on intrastate marijuana remains in place, an unjustified vestige of a long-abandoned policy,” the 2023 lawsuit stated. “This unjustified intrusion of federal power harms Plaintiffs, threatens the communities they serve, and lacks any rational purpose.”

In January, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) called the original lawsuit a “transparent entreaty.” “Neither Plaintiffs’ contention that they are harmed by other federal laws and policies whose constitutionality is not challenged here, nor Plaintiffs’ allegations that some third parties have independently chosen not to transact with them, suffice to provide Plaintiffs with standing to challenge the CSA,” wrote the DOJ.

In response to this, the new lawsuit added text alleging that Congress was trying to prevent interstate cannabis. “Congress was intent on eradicating interstate marijuana, and the factual circumstances that existed in 2005 supported the Government’s position that banning intrastate marijuana was necessary for achieving that goal,” the lawsuit stated. “That legislative and factual landscape no longer exists. It has changed in the proceeding 18 years in ways that even the most ardent advocates of marijuana reform in 2005 would never have imagined possible.”

Law 360 spoke with Joshua Schiller of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, who explained that the newest litigation more directly challenges the Gonzales v. Raich case. He explained that the government has made recent movements contradicting the policy since October 2023.

One of the plaintiffs, Verano Holdings Corp, is a multi-state operator. While its business spans multiple states, Schiller explained the importance of its inclusion. “We like having a multistate operator just to show a different business, to show a different story about a different business,” Schiller told Law 360. “And even though it’s a multistate operator, each of its markets are intrastate. They’re not even allowed to bring a seed [across state lines].”

The news outlet inquired about why there was no mention of tax code Section 280E, which is a tax policy that prevents deductions and credits from being utilized by “illegal” businesses. “It’s a different case,” Schiller said. “That’s not to say [280E] is not punitive and damaging and therefore unfair. But it’s not the harm we’re seeking to redress. It’s a separate harm that would have to be litigated in a separate case.”

The timing of this case aligns with the recent shifts in federal policy. Last August, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) called on the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to reclassify cannabis as a Schedule III substance. NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano responded to the announcement with hesitance. “It will be very interesting to see how DEA responds to this recommendation, given the agency’s historic opposition to any potential change in cannabis’ categorization under federal law,” said Armentano. “Further, for decades, the agency has utilized its own five-factor criteria for assessing cannabis’ placement in the CSA—criteria that as recently as 2016, the agency claimed that cannabis failed to meet. Since the agency has final say over any rescheduling decision, it is safe to say that this process still remains far from over.”

It’s been approximately seven months since that HHS recommendation. Although there hasn’t been any updates from the DEA regarding the recommendation, Vice President Kamala Harris recently held a roundtable conversation about cannabis reform, alongside rapper Fat Joe, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, and more. “I cannot emphasize enough that they need to get to it as quickly as possible, and we need to have a resolution based on their findings and their assessment,” Harris said.

The post New Cannabis Lawsuit Filed Against Federal Government appeared first on High Times.

The post New Cannabis Lawsuit Filed Against Federal Government appeared first on Paradise Found.

A lawsuit has accused an Oregon nurse of replacing a patient’s fentanyl IV with tap water, leading to a bacterial infection that killed him.

Horace Wilson, known to his family and friends as “Buddy” was a founding member of an award-winning Oregon cannabis company called Decibel Farms. He fell off a ladder in January of 2022, which ruptured his spleen causing him to be hospitalized. He underwent several surgeries after which he started experiencing complications, including sepsis. A blood test revealed a bacterial growth later identified as Staphylococcus epidermidis, according to the Oregonian. Wilson died on February 25 from treatment-resistant sepsis related to this infection.

At the time of Wilson’s death, his family and business partner passed it off as basic incompetence on the hospital’s part mixed with bad luck, but two years after Wilson’s death, some shocking new developments began to unfold implicating that a nurse working for Asante Rogue Regional Medical Center where Wilson was receiving care may have been siphoning fentanyl out of IV bags and replacing it with tap water, leading to the bacterial infection that ultimately killed him. His estate filed a lawsuit against the nurse in question this past Monday. The Medford Police Department released a statement about the matter on January 3.

“In early December 2023 the Medford Police Department was contacted by officials from Asante in regard to a former employee that they believe was involved in the theft of controlled substances prescribed to patients. Additionally, there was concern that this behavior resulted in adverse patient care, though the extent of the impact on those patients is yet to be determined. MPD is actively working on investigating these claims,” a Medford Police Department Facebook post said. “MPD has received numerous calls from individuals asking if they or a family member have been impacted by the suspected actions of the former Asante employee. Asante has informed MPD that they have identified the involved patients and have notified or are in the process of notifying them or their families.

It is unclear exactly how many patients may have been affected by the nurse’s alleged actions but a lawyer representing the estate of Horace Wilson told the Oregonian he has at least nine clients whose medications may have been swapped out for tap water. The nurse in question was named in the $11.5 million lawsuit as Dani Marie Schofield, though Medford police have not confirmed that she is a suspect nor has Asante released a statement about her. 

Shaun Bishop of Decibel Farms and Horace Wilson’s business partner before he passed told High Times that his friend Buddy has been dearly missed, and the recent news about the possibility that his death may have been avoidable has “added insult to injury.”

“When it came to the time of his death, we all just kind of threw our hands up and we’re like, yeah, hospitals suck, you know. That’s a good place to go if you want if you wanna die,” Bishop said. “We just saw through it and figured it was incompetence just from modern medicine and hospitals and the way they operate. But finding out that it was from criminal activity brings a whole ‘nother source of pain to the situation for me and primarily his children.”

Bishop stressed that Wilson was a great business partner, great friend, lover of cannabis and loved his kids more than anything else in the world. He left behind five children, one of whom, Bishop told High Times, was at his side the entire time he was in the hospital. To Bishop’s knowledge, that same child wrote a letter of complaint to Asante Rogue Regional Medical Center regarding Schofield and her perceived incompetence at the time, though none of them necessarily suspected criminal activity at the time.

“[Wilson’s daughter] spent the month he was in the hospital. She was there primarily by herself for most of that time except when the other kids or I would come visit. So she was the closest to the nurse,” Bishop said. “She knew that nurse on a daily basis and had really weird feelings about her since the beginning. She voiced it early, early on that there’s something wrong with that nurse. We were like, yeah, we know, [name redacted] It’s frustrating being in the hospital, but we didn’t know it was a criminal vibe she was picking up.”

The child in question whose name I’ve left out of this out of an abundance of respect for the privacy of the family declined to comment for this article because it could affect the integrity of the lawsuit. No criminal charges have yet been announced against Schofield. The business Wilson left behind is a multiple award-winning cannabis producer that helped pioneer the very early days of Oregon’s legal market. Bishop told High Times that Wilson dying was incredibly hard on the company but also that he helped lay down a solid framework so Decibel Farms could continue on without him.

The post Oregon Cannabis Grower Dies After Nurse Allegedly Replaces his Fentanyl IV with Tap Water appeared first on High Times.

The post Oregon Cannabis Grower Dies After Nurse Allegedly Replaces his Fentanyl IV with Tap Water appeared first on Paradise Found.

On Feb. 6, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court in Georgia by resident Hannah Ledbetter against 12 cannabis companies. The claim alleges that all of the companies mentioned have sold cannabis products as delta hemp products instead of cannabis products and is asking for a total of $150 million. The companies listed include STIIIZY, LLC; Cookies Creative Consulting and Promotions; Cloud 9 Online Smoke & Vape, LLC; Green Rush LLC dba Xhale City; TheSY LLC dba Element Vape; Savage Enterprises; Delta Extrax; L&K Distribution; Columbia Laboratories; PharmLabs; Encore; and Pur ISO Labs LLC.

The plaintiff claims she was deceived by the companies into buying federally illegal products that were being sold as federally legal hemp products (with 0.9% THC or less). “Defendants have conspired to import, manufacture, distribute, and possess illegal (delta-8) THC vape pens that are marijuana,” the lawsuit stated. “This scheme could only be accomplished through a pattern of racketeering activity.”

According to Justia, a “racket” refers to a single fraudulent service, while “racketeering” defines multiple illegal activities, usually done collaboratively through a group via organized crime. The Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act describes racketeering activity with crimes such as fraudulent offenses, murder, kidnapping, drug trafficking, bribery, and more. 

Ledbetter purchased delta-9 THC products from Cloud 9, Element, Xhale City and/or Xhale Franchise locations in and near Atlanta, Georgia. She alleges that the products contained far more than what is legally acceptable by law. The lawsuit claims that all cannabis companies named “have facilitated the manufacturing, distribution, and/or sale of illegal marijuana to thousands of people over the course of the last four years.”

Ultimately, the lawsuit summarizes its accusation. “In essence, [customers of the defendants] are paying for legal hemp-derived THC but are receiving illegal marijuana, which has created millions of dollars of fraudulent profit,” it stated.

Ledbetter’s team is accusing the defendants of finding third party testing labs Columbia Laboratories in Oregon, and Encore and Pharmalabs SD in California, that would issue false certificates of analysis for the five products. Results showed that “the hemp-derived D9 variance levels that was in excess of the legal limit” included hemp-based vape pens with the following strains: Cookies’ Huckleberry “Gelaot” (assumedly Gelato but there is a typo in the lawsuit text), Extrax’s Forbidden Jelly and Power Plant, Looper’s Blue Gusherz, and STIIIZY Hemp’s OG Kush.

“To facilitate this fraud, the Lab Defendants knowingly created false test results that were advertised over the internet hundreds of times for publication and marketing through the wires, and such activity is wire fraud,” the lawsuit continued.

According to an article published by Green Market Report, a STIIIZY spokesperson said in an email statement that the lawsuit “contains absolutely no factual evidence to support its conclusory and baseless claims against STIIIZY. We intend to defend ourselves vigorously against this meritless lawsuit and seek to have it dismissed since it has no factual basis.” At the time of publishing, Cookies and other defendants had not yet provided a statement.

The lawsuit calls on the court to determine it as a class action lawsuit, which must first be granted by a federal judge. RICO lawsuits state that plaintiffs are entitled to three times the listed damages, and this lawsuit requests $50 million for damages, referencing “treble” damages, which means that a successful lawsuit could lead to the plaintiff receiving up to $150 million.

A similar lawsuit was filed in California last summer between the state of California and nine individual cannabis companies based in California, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, or Wyoming. The lawsuit claimed that cannabis products should include a Proposition 65 warning label on delta-9 THC cannabis products, because it is “known to cause harm to the developing fetus.”

According to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, the potential dangers of illegal hemp products should be addressed. “I want to be clear: The sales of industrial hemp products that do not comply with California law, and the illegal sale of inhalable hemp in California will not be tolerated,” said Bonta. “The dangers of these products must be communicated for sale to the public, and the sale of all industrial hemp inhalable products must cease altogether. The California Department of Justice will continue to protect the legitimate businesses who are operating responsibly in this space. There is no room for illegal inhalable hemp products in our state.”

The rise in hemp-derived cannabis products began after the 2018 Farm Bill was passed. It authorized the use and sale of hemp-based products, mainly CBD. Since then, many state legislators have introduced bills to regulate such products. One of the latest examples of this was seen in Missouri last December, when Sen. Nick Schroer introduced Senate Bill 984, also titled the “Intoxicating Cannabinoid Control Act.” If passed, the bill would regulate delta-8 THC products as cannabis, not hemp. The most current action for SB-984 includes Senate Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee hearing held on Feb. 12.

The post Georgia Lawsuit Claims 12 Cannabis Companies Mislead Consumers With Delta Products appeared first on High Times.

The post Georgia Lawsuit Claims 12 Cannabis Companies Mislead Consumers With Delta Products appeared first on Paradise Found.

On Feb. 17, 2023, a Georgia-based Black family of seven (two parents, Deonte Williams and Bianca Claymore and five children, one of which was an infant at the time) were driving to a funeral and traveling through Tennessee to Chicago, Illinois, when they were detained at a traffic stop. Law enforcement initially pulled them over for dark tinted windows and traveling in the left lane while not passing, but after finding five grams of cannabis in the pocket of the Williams, he was arrested, Clayborne was cited, and they spent four hours at the Coffee County Justice Center.

The children were terrified, and DCS caseworkers asked to obtain a urine sample from Clayborne, who refused because she didn’t want to leave her kids alone. They compromised to have her give a urine sample in her car, while surrounded by law enforcement, and she attempted to do so, but ultimately could not. DCS told her that not complying “made matters worse” for her, and an emergency order from Coffee County Judge Greg Perry was issued for the children; they were removed from Bianca’s side at the justice center and taken into state custody.

The children were placed in temporary separate foster homes, where Clayborne was not allowed to visit them, and later they were allowed to stay with a family friend while the case was ongoing. Finally, after 55 days of separation, the children were returned to their parents on April 13. Clayborne’s misdemeanor was dismissed, Williams pled guilty to a misdemeanor, and the Department of Children’s Services dismissed the case.

According to the Tennessee Lookout, the sudden separation caused Clayborne to suffer from intense anxiety, depression, and mental anguish, and she stopped producing breast milk during that time. The news report shared that the children have also shown signs of trauma because of the incident, including one child having nightmares, wetting the bed, and another child now “has a visceral reaction to seeing police.”

Nearly one year later on Feb. 8, the family is suing the three DCS caseworkers, four Tennessee Highway Patrol officers, 10 Coffee County Sheriff Department officers, all of which played a part in the incident. “These public officials illegally tore apart and terrorized Clayborne’s family. They acted outrageously and unlawfully. Their actions caused severe emotional trauma to Clayborne and each of her five children,” the lawsuit stated. “Clayborne and the children bring this lawsuit to vindicate their rights against people that harmed them, though the full extent of the harm to their family may never be undone.”

The lawsuit claims that the family’s fourth amendment rights were violated, that there is evidence of multiple counts of false arrest and imprisonment, in addition to many other counts. The family is represented by Herzfeld, Suetholz, Gastel, Leniski, and Wall, PLLC, and Rubenfeld Law Office, PC.

Last year, Williams’ and Claymore’s attorney, Jamaal Boykin, expressed the sheer horror of such an event taking place. “It’s just so shocking to the conscience that in 2023 this is happening,” said Boykin. “I just have to believe if my clients looked different or had a different background, they would have just been given a citation and told you just keep this stuff away from the kids while you’re in this state and they’d be on their way.”

Legislators who heard about the incident also stood up for the family, such as Tennessee Sen. London Lamar. “DCS, Coffee County, y’all need to do the right thing before the situation gets worse, and we have a nation of people coming to the rescue of this Black family,” said Lamar. “Give them their children back. It’s borderline discrimination, because if this was any other family, as their attorney said, we don’t even think this would be the outcome.”

Tennessee Sen. Raumesh Akbari also exclaimed her disappointment in the events that tore the family apart. “It is outrageous that the state forcefully separated Bianca Clayborne, a breastfeeding mother, and Deonte Williams from their kids and have allowed this to continue for nearly a month,” Akbari said. “The state exercised extreme and flawed judgment in taking their children and it seems they’ve doubled down on this poor decision. No family is perfect, but an imperfection, like a simple marijuana charge, is no excuse for tearing a family apart. The state is supposed to support reunification. If they don’t have a better reason, they must immediately return these five children to their parents.”

Cannabis laws in Tennessee are incredibly strict, even for the limited number of patients who are permitted to use medical cannabis as residents. In the 2022 State of the States Report written by Americans for Safe Access, Tennessee received an “F” grade for its medical cannabis program. “Tennessee policymakers should avoid delaying implementation of a medical cannabis program; patients in the state are actively harmed by the state’s inaction,” the ASA wrote. Other states with an “F” rating included Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

The post Mother Sues Tennessee Agencies for Using Cannabis Arrest To Separate Family appeared first on High Times.

The post Mother Sues Tennessee Agencies for Using Cannabis Arrest To Separate Family appeared first on Paradise Found.

The saga continues for four Massachusetts-based business owners who filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Justice Department in an attempt to overturn cannabis prohibition.

The plaintiffs include owners of Canna Provisions, Inc., Gyasi Sellers, Wiseacre Farm, Inc., and Verano Holdings Corp., who are represented by David Boies and Josh Schiller of Bois Schiller Flexner LLP. The lawsuit was first issued in October 2023, and used the results of a court case from 2005, Gonzales v. Raich, to showcase how federal prohibition of cannabis is outdated. “The federal criminal prohibition on intrastate marijuana remains in place, an unjustified vestige of a long-abandoned policy,” the lawsuit states. “This unjustified intrusion of federal power harms Plaintiffs, threatens the communities they serve, and lacks any rational purpose.”

According to a news report published by The Boston Globe, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland filed a motion to dismiss the case on Jan. 23, stating that the plaintiffs have no standing on which to sue, and have presented no evidence that prohibition has caused them injury (such as being arrested or prosecuted). The motion stated that “Even if the court were free to disregard Raich ’s holdings (it is not), Plaintiff’s attacks on that holding are unpersuasive,” that the “Plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the CSA [Controlled Substances Act],” and “Courts have consistently, and correctly, held that no fundamental right exists to distribute, possess, or use marijuana.”

The Boston Globe noted that the Department of Justice declined to comment, as of Jan. 29.

In defense of the business owners, Schiller described how there is evidence that the longstanding illegality of cannabis from a federal standpoint is “well-established.” Schiller cited examples such as cannabis businesses being heavily taxed, forced to pay insurance premiums, cannot take credit cards as a form of payment, and usually pay a higher price for rent or mortgages, “Almost like they are illegal businesses.”

James Smith, of Smith, Costello, & Crawford, commented on the lawsuit and told The Boston Globe that winning a case like this one is a “high hill to climb.” Even still, Smith described Massachusetts’ regulatory framework for legalization as “pretty pristine.” The federal government has yet to make a move on federal legalization and has made no constructive decisions regarding major industry issues, such as banking. Smith added that with a lack of action from the federal government, that leaves state legislators to act—and courts are waiting for them to do so.

Another comment was provided by Boston University professor and author, Jay Wexler, who told the news outlet that if legislators lose interest in regulating cannabis federally, then expecting the federal government to take on the role of cannabis business in all states “falls apart.” Wexler also stated that this current case could eventually reach the Supreme Court. “These are cases where plaintiffs are aiming for the Supreme Court because there are precedents,” said Wexler. “It’s pretty unlikely that lower courts will feel comfortable agreeing with the plaintiffs.”

Schiller estimated that the lawsuit could take two years to reach a conclusion. But one of the plaintiffs, Gyasi Sellers, who owns a delivery service called Treevit, explained that it’s worth the wait. The opportunity to freely and legally take credit cards as a form of payment would improve his entire business, making delivery quicker and also maintaining a safe work environment for employees. Sellers described how prohibition would be “like getting our training wheels taken off, or our handcuffs taken off, depending on how you want to look at it. It’d be nice to say our fate is actually in our hands, and we have the ability to reach our true potential.”

The support for putting an end to prohibition continues to grow. Following the recommendation to move cannabis from a Schedule I to a Schedule III substance by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the industry eagerly awaits the decision of the Drug Enforcement Administration. Meanwhile, multiple House representatives and Senators are calling out to President Biden to make a move as well.

In a High Times exclusive interview, New York Senator Kristen Gillibrand called for an end to prohibition. “Studies show that legalizing marijuana could help reduce violence in international drug trafficking and generate billions of dollars for the economy,” Gillibrand said. “The vast majority of Americans agree that marijuana should be legalized—that’s why I’m calling on the Attorney General and the Drug Enforcement Administration to swiftly deschedule marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act.”

Many predict that rescheduling cannabis could give Biden a huge boost in the upcoming election later this year. A survey conducted by Lake Research Partner showed that Biden could benefit from an 11% boost from younger voters (based on the opinions of 900 voters used in the survey, spread out across the U.S.).

The post Massachusetts Cannabis Business Owners’ Lawsuit Against the U.S. Government Continues appeared first on High Times.

The post Massachusetts Cannabis Business Owners’ Lawsuit Against the U.S. Government Continues appeared first on Paradise Found.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Wednesday filed lawsuits against five cities that have passed marijuana decriminalization measures. The legal action was filed against the cities of Austin, San Marcos, Killeen, Elgin, and Denton “for adopting amnesty and non-prosecution policies that violate Texas laws concerning marijuana possession and distribution,” according to the attorney general’s office.

In 2022, the five cities each adopted ordinances or civic policies that instruct police officers not to enforce state laws prohibiting the possession or distribution of cannabis. After filing the lawsuits this week, Paxton said that such policies are prohibited by the Texas Local Government Code, which bars municipal and county governments from adopting “a policy under which the entity will not fully enforce laws relating to drugs.”

“I will not stand idly by as cities run by pro-crime extremists deliberately violate Texas law and promote the use of illicit drugs that harm our communities,” Paxton said in a statement on Wednesday. “This unconstitutional action by municipalities demonstrates why Texas must have a law to ‘follow the law.’ It’s quite simple: the legislature passes every law after a full debate on the issues, and we don’t allow cities the ability to create anarchy by picking and choosing the laws they enforce.”

The attorney general also noted that under Article 9, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution, it is illegal for municipalities to adopt ordinances that are not consistent with the laws enacted by the Texas Legislature. With the lawsuit, Paxton has asked the district court to overturn the city ordinances and instruct local officials to enforce state law.

Progressive Leaders Push Back

Julie Oliver, executive director for Ground Game Texas, a group that works to advance progressive issues including local marijuana decriminalization ballot measures, said that the attorney general’s legal action seeks to undermine the right of Texans to govern themselves at the local level.

“Ken Paxton’s lawsuits represent an anti-democratic assault on the constitutional authority of Texas Home Rule cities to set local law enforcement priorities,” Oliver told local media. “In each of the cities sued, a supermajority of voters adopted a policy to deprioritize marijuana enforcement in order to reduce racially biased law enforcement outcomes and save scarce public resources for higher priority public safety needs.”

In Denton, a city of about 140,000 people in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, voters passed an initiative to decriminalize misdemeanor marijuana offenses in November 2022. The ballot measure received the approval of more than 32,000 votes and the election marked the highest voter turnout recorded in the city’s history.

“This ordinance has now received more votes than any council member or mayor in the history of Denton,” Nick Stevens from Decriminalize Denton, a grassroots organization behind the ordinance, told the Denton Record-Chronicle after the election in 2022. “We’re ecstatic that Republicans, Democrats and independents came together to reclaim their power in the city.”

Denton’s marijuana decriminalization policy, however, has not yet been fully implemented and the city’s police have still been issuing citations for misdemeanor marijuana offenses. In June, the Denton City Council considered an ordinance that advocates said would have strengthened the measure approved by voters but voted 4-3 against the proposal.

New Law Restricts Local Control

The attorney general’s lawsuit is partly based on HB 2127, a bill passed last year that restricts so-called home rule authority. Attorneys for cities including Denton, San Antonio, Waco and Plano that filed suit against the law last year explained that home rule allows local governments “to create policies that address local concerns that vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction based on many factors such as demographics, population density, environmental concerns and public safety issues.”

But Stevens said that HB 2127 does not cover the city marijuana decriminalization measures because it states that it only applies to municipal or county codes involving agriculture, finance, insurance, labor, natural resources and occupations.

“Ken Paxton should read this law before wasting Texans’ tax dollars with another frivolous lawsuit that distracts from the work we have done to deliver for the people of Denton,” Stevens said.

Ground Game Texas is currently sponsoring a campaign to decriminalize marijuana in Dallas. Known as the Dallas Freedom Act, the measure would end most arrests and citations for Class A and Class B misdemeanor marijuana possession. The proposed ordinance, which is similar to the one passed in Denton, would also require city leaders to report on cannabis enforcement and forbid the use of city funds for laboratory testing to distinguish hemp from marijuana.

“The Dallas Freedom Act is a dynamic initiative that will reduce unnecessary arrests, address racial disparities in marijuana enforcement, and save millions of dollars in city and county resources for much-needed public safety programs,” Tristeza Ordex, campaign manager of Ground Game Texas, said in a statement about the proposal.

The post Texas Attorney General Sues 5 Cities Over Weed Decriminalization appeared first on High Times.

The post Texas Attorney General Sues 5 Cities Over Weed Decriminalization 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.