Hemp Industry Leaders Call Missouri Governor’s Order an ‘Overreach’

On August 1, 2024, Missouri Governor Mike Parson issued an executive order banning hemp-derived THC products, effective September 1. The order, which targets intoxicating hemp edibles and beverages, has sparked significant backlash from the hemp industry and retailers across the state.

Impact on the Hemp Industry

The executive order has immediate repercussions for businesses like Mighty Kind Co., a St. Louis-based producer of hemp seltzers. Joshua Grigaitis, the company’s owner, reported that hemp-derived THC products have become a major revenue stream, accounting for up to 50% of some bar sales. He and other industry leaders argue that the order constitutes an “overreach” that threatens to stifle a burgeoning sector.

“It’s a big hit to just make an executive order without any kind of voting or legislation,” said Grigaitis. He contends that the ban fails to address the broader impact on thousands of Missouri businesses and consumers who have embraced hemp-derived products.

Governor’s Rationale and Public Safety Concerns

Governor Parson’s administration has cited public safety concerns as the primary reason for the ban. During a press conference, Parson displayed hemp-derived THC gummies and criticized the packaging, which he claimed could be mistaken for candy by children. “These companies and these people that are profiting off of this type of material to give it to our children need to stop,” Parson stated.

Health officials, including Paula Nicholson, director of the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, have supported the ban, citing concerns over the lack of regulation and potential health risks associated with unregulated products.

Legal and Industry Reactions

The order has prompted a strong response from industry leaders and legal experts. Steve Busch, owner of Krew Distributing, described the order as “disingenuous” and “bordering unethical,” noting that it unfairly penalizes retailers without addressing the problematic products. Busch is leading an effort to draft legislation that would provide clearer regulations for hemp-derived products.

Legal experts, including Chuck Hatfield, anticipate lawsuits challenging the executive order. Hatfield, a veteran cannabis attorney, described the move as “very unusual” and predicted significant legal challenges as the industry seeks to overturn or modify the order.

Future Prospects and Industry Adjustments

Despite the controversy, some industry leaders remain optimistic. Grigaitis believes the order could lead to increased national scrutiny and potential legal battles that may eventually benefit the hemp industry. He argues that the move could push for more comprehensive regulations rather than an outright ban.

Brian Dix, founder of Craft Republic, expressed disappointment over the immediate impact on his business but remains hopeful for a regulatory compromise. Dix, like others in the industry, advocates for regulation that ensures safety while allowing the market to continue growing.

Regulatory Context and National Trends

The distinction between hemp and marijuana, established by the 2018 Farm Bill, has led to unintended consequences, including the proliferation of synthetic THC products. Missouri’s ban reflects a broader trend, with at least 17 states implementing similar restrictions over the past year.

As other states explore regulatory frameworks for hemp-derived THC, Missouri’s approach may influence national policy discussions. Meanwhile, industry stakeholders in Missouri are rallying for legislative solutions and pushing back against the executive order’s sweeping impact.

Governor Parson’s executive order banning hemp-derived THC products has ignited debate and resistance within the Missouri hemp industry. As the state prepares for the order’s September 1 effective date, stakeholders are mobilizing to challenge the policy and seek alternative regulatory approaches that balance safety with market opportunities.