Cannabis

Subscribe to Cannabis via RSS

Though controversial, cannabis[1] has steadily grown into a booming industry. Despite this rapid growth and the legalization of cannabis in numerous states[2], cannabis is still classified as a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). As cannabis is illegal under federal law, individuals and companies involved or related to the cannabis industry face an uphill battle when insolvency issues arise. Federal forums that traditionally address insolvency matters, such as bankruptcy, have historically been unavailable to those engaged in the cannabis industry, forcing them to seek state-controlled alternatives, such as receivership. However, as more and more states have legalized commercial transactions involving cannabis in some form, bankruptcy courts have begun to adopt two distinct paths: one for individuals and entities directly engaged in growing, processing, distributing, or selling cannabis products, and one for entities that are associated with cannabis more indirectly, which the bankruptcy system recently has been more open to.

On October 2, the Virginia Board of Pharmacy posted a general notice indicating that it had voted to rescind the request for applications (RFA) for a Pharmaceutical Processor license in Health Service Area I. The RFA will now be conducted by the Virginia Cannabis Control Authority (the CCA) sometime after it assumes oversight of the state’s medical cannabis program on January 1, 2024.

Since its first recreational marijuana dispensary opened in 2014, Colorado has been at the forefront of the burgeoning adult-use cannabis industry, setting a precedent for other states considering the legalization of recreational marijuana, and reaping significant tax benefits for the state in the process.

The Georgia Board of Pharmacy has begun accepting applications from independent, licensed pharmacies for authorization to dispense authorized medical marijuana products, and nearly 120 pharmacies reportedly have agreed to provide medication from Botanical Sciences, one of the state’s two licensed production companies, according to a company statement.

State attorneys general (AG) are continuing their push for cannabis banking reform, underscoring the need for action to promote public health and safety in legal cannabis markets. On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of 22 state AGs sent a letter to Congress urging passage of the Secure And Fair Enforcement Regulation (SAFER) Banking Act, coinciding…

The Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to mark up a new version of the SAFE Banking Act, now known as the “Secure And Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act” or the SAFER Banking Act (SB 2860). The revised bill addresses concerns around potential bad actors, but also establishes guardrails in the case that federal regulators may want to put pressure on banks to not service certain customers, such as “marijuana-related businesses” or other high-risk industries.

Introduction

On September 12, the New York Cannabis Control Board (CCB) approved final regulations governing the adult-use cannabis industry in New York,[1] marking a long-awaited moment for industry participants and state regulators alike. The CCB’s approval signifies a significant step forward for the state’s cannabis market. The regulations are designed to govern all aspects of the industry, from cultivation and processing to distribution, retail, on-site consumption, and delivery services. Among these regulations, one rule stands out for its complexity and potential impact on industry participants: the definition of a “true party of interest.”

On August 9, a lawsuit was filed in Connecticut that aims to stop all legal cannabis activity in the state and declare the state’s 2021 legalization framework as unconstitutional.[1] The complaint, filed by a local homeowners advocacy group against the Zoning Board of the City of Stamford and the Stamford Mayor, alleges that Connecticut’s legalization framework, the Responsible and Equitable Regulation of Adult-Use Cannabis Act (RERACA), violates both the state and federal constitutions by legalizing federally prohibited conduct, and is therefore preempted under both. In addition, the complaint alleges that the state’s social equity council violates the Connecticut constitution by providing exclusive public emoluments or privileges to certain groups based on race, and that the approval by certain board members of changes in zoning regulations was invalid due to several board members terms having previously expired.

Jean Smith-Gonnell, Nick Ramos, and Christina Sava published the article, “Troutman Pepper Provides Hemp Derivatives Insight” in Vapor Voice on September 15, 2023.

Across the United States hemp products seem to be everywhere. From corner stores to spas, one can find a hemp- or CBD-infused version of almost anything. Hemp and its derivatives are…

Introduction

The cannabis industry in the U.S. is on the cusp of a potential transformation. On August 29, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) made a significant recommendation that could reshape the legal and regulatory landscape surrounding cannabis. In this post, we will delve into HHS’s groundbreaking proposal to reschedule cannabis from its current classification as a Schedule I substance to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and the effect that rescheduling may have on cannabis industry participants. While this recommendation represents only the first step in the rescheduling processes, it is essential to understand the implications for various stakeholders.