Cheech & Chong Fight Gov Newsom’s Controversial Hemp-THC Ban

Gov. Newsom’s Ban on Hemp Products Containing Any THC Could Devastate California’s Hemp Industry

Governor Gavin Newsom’s emergency ban on all hemp products containing any “detectable amount of total THC” has caused uproar in California’s hemp and cannabis industries. On Friday, The U.S. Hemp Roundtable, Cheech and Chong’s Cannabis Company, along with several California hemp farmers and businesses, filed a petition in state court seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent enforcement of the new regulations. The plaintiffs argue that the ban could severely harm the state’s hemp sector, from farmers to consumers.

Plaintiffs Seek Legal Relief from Devastating Ban

The emergency regulation, which went into effect on September 23 after receiving approval from the Office of Administrative Law, prohibits the manufacturing and selling of hemp products that contain any detectable amount of THC. This includes nonintoxicating hemp products widely sold across California. The plaintiffs argue that this ban will eliminate 90-95% of the hemp products currently available in the state, leading to significant losses for businesses and consumers alike.

In their filing, the plaintiffs emphasized the urgent need for the court to halt the ban while the legal battle proceeds. They contend that the new rules will result in irreparable harm to the hemp industry, with small businesses particularly at risk. “If allowed to remain in effect, the Emergency Regulations will eliminate nearly every ingestible hemp product currently for sale in California, including the vast majority of nonintoxicating products,” the petition states. “Many small businesses will have to close operations immediately with millions in losses.”

Legal Arguments Against Newsom’s Emergency Regulations

The lawsuit, first filed in late September, challenges the basis of the “emergency” declared by the state to justify the ban. The plaintiffs argue that the state failed to properly implement the 2021 hemp legislation that had already been passed. According to the TRO request, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) had ample time—nearly three years—to develop a regulatory framework for the industry, making the sudden emergency regulation unfounded and unlawful.

The plaintiffs assert that the new regulations, adopted with little to no stakeholder engagement, are “substantially unlawful” and were enacted through “drastically unlawful means.” They also question why the state is suddenly imposing such drastic restrictions on an industry that had been operating under established guidelines, potentially violating state and federal laws.

Hemp Roundtable Criticizes Newsom’s Approach

Jonathan Miller, General Counsel for the U.S. Hemp Roundtable, expressed hope that the court would block Newsom’s regulations. In a statement shared with Benzinga, Miller criticized the governor’s actions as misguided and harmful. “We are hopeful that the Court will temporarily block – and then ultimately, permanently enjoin – Governor Newsom’s misguided efforts to devastate hemp farmers, businesses, and product consumers in California,” Miller said. “It’s high time that the Governor abandon this punitive effort and sit down with all stakeholders to appropriately address his stated mission: to develop a robust regulatory regime that promotes health and safety and keeps hemp products out of the hands of minors.”

Miller’s comments reflect broader concerns within the hemp community, which views the ban as an overreach that could set a dangerous precedent for the industry, not only in California but nationwide.

Potential Fallout for Interstate Commerce

Newsom’s emergency regulations also extend to banning the manufacture and sale of hemp products containing THC intended for distribution outside California. This raises concerns about the impact on interstate commerce and potential violations of federal law. Experts in the industry argue that this could disrupt the entire national hemp supply chain, creating chaos for businesses that rely on California for hemp production and distribution.

The plaintiffs also believe the ban could significantly affect consumers. Many nonintoxicating hemp products, such as CBD oils, edibles, and supplements, are used for wellness purposes and do not produce psychoactive effects. The elimination of these products from the market could limit consumer access to alternative health options and drive businesses out of the state.

What’s Next? Court to Hear TRO Request

The court hearing for the temporary restraining order is set for 9:30 AM PDT (12:30 PM EDT) on Thursday, October 10. Nolan Jackson, regulatory counsel for the U.S. Hemp Roundtable, will be arguing the case on behalf of the plaintiffs. They hope to convince the judge to put a hold on Newsom’s regulations while the legal challenge moves forward.

Should the TRO be granted, the hemp industry in California will gain some temporary relief, but the broader fight over the legality and impact of Newsom’s ban is far from over. The decision could have far-reaching implications for both the state’s economy and the national hemp industry, especially as stakeholders and legal experts weigh in on the balance between regulation, consumer safety, and business viability.

As the legal battle unfolds, the hemp industry, from farmers to consumers, awaits the court’s decision, which could shape the future of hemp products in California for years to come.