Why a cannabis tax cut is sending some child-care advocates into panic

Why a cannabis tax cut is sending some child-care advocates into panic

A fight over taxes consumers pay for cannabis products has prompted a standoff between unusual adversaries: child-care advocates and the legal weed industry.

On July 1, California’s cannabis excise tax increased from 15% to 19% as part of a political deal struck in 2022 to help stabilize the fledgling legal market. But the industry now says the increase is untenable as it faces a sharp decline in revenue and unfair competition from the growing illicit market.

An industry-sponsored bill moving through the Legislature — and already passed by the Assembly — would eliminate the tax increase and lower the rate back to 15% for the next six years. This would reduce by $180 million annually the tax revenue that the state contributes toward law enforcement, child care, services for at-risk youth and environmental cleanup.

The losses include about $81 million annually that would have specifically funded additional subsidized child-care slots for about 8,000 children from low-income families.

“They are choosing the cannabis industry over children and youth,” said Mary Ignatius, executive director of Parent Voices California, which represents parents receiving state subsidies to help pay for child care.

Child care faces setbacks

The tension over taxes for legal weed versus child care — both industries in crisis — highlights the inherent pitfalls of funding important social services with “sin taxes,” whether it’s alcohol, weed or tobacco — funding that experts say is often unstable and unsustainable.

Engage with our community-funded journalism as we delve into child care, transitional kindergarten, health and other issues affecting children from birth through age 5.

The measure’s next stop is the Senate. All bills in the Legislature must be passed by Sept. 12, and the governor must sign them by Oct. 12.

“We can both support the legal cannabis industry and protect child care. If the measure reaches the governor’s desk and is signed into law, we will work with the Legislature to ensure there are no cuts to child care due to this policy change,” said Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom.

But it’s unclear where money to backfill the losses would come from, as the state grapples with declining finances and federal funding cuts.

The money from cannabis taxes represents a fraction of California’s $7-billion annual child care budget. But as federal cuts to social services for low-income families, including Head Start, continue, any potential loss creates a sense of panic among child care advocates who say California ought to be shoring up revenue options right now — not reducing them.

“Every single dollar needs to remain in the programs that are serving our children and families. What may seem like a small amount to some is everything for advocates who are fighting for it,” said Ignatius.

The past decade has been a time of progress for child care advocates, as the state rebuilt a child care industry decimated by cuts during the Great Recession. California has more than doubled spending on child care since the recession low, added about 150,000 new subsidized child care slots, eliminated the fees paid by families, increased pay for child care workers and added a new public school grade level for 4-year-olds.

But despite these efforts to bolster the market, California’s child care industry still suffers from low pay for workers, unaffordable costs for families, and a shortage of spaces for infants and toddlers.

The waiting list for subsidized child care slots is still so long that some parents have taken to calling it the “no hope list,” said Ignatius. Those who join the list know they could wait years before a spot opens up, and by that time their child may already be in kindergarten or beyond.

Jim Keddy, who serves on an advisory committee to help determine what programs the tax will finance, opposes the proposed reduction.

“If you don’t work to promote and hold on to a funding stream for children, someone eventually takes it from you,” said Keddy, who is also executive director of Youth Forward, a youth advocacy organization.

The cannabis industry, however, argues that while the causes the tax supports may be worthwhile, market conditions are so abysmal that it cannot weather an increase.

“It is sad that the cannabis industry is being pit against social programs, childhood programs and educational programs,” said Jerred Kiloh, president of United Cannabis Business Assn. and owner of the Higher Path dispensary in Sherman Oaks. “The reality is, if our legal industry keeps declining, then so does their tax revenue.”

In 2022, when the cannabis industry agreed to increase the excise tax, quarterly cannabis sales were at their peak. The agreement offered the new industry temporary relief by eliminating the cultivation tax passed by voters under Proposition 64, the 2016 initiative that legalized cannabis. In exchange, state regulators would be able to increase the excise tax after three years to make the change revenue neutral.

But since then, sales have plunged to their lowest levels in five years, due in part to the growing illicit market that is siphoning off sales from legal dispensaries.

In L.A., Kiloh said that between state and local taxes, his legal dispensary customers end up paying 47% in taxes on their purchase. But if they shopped instead at any of the thousands of stores in L.A. selling cannabis products without a license, they could avoid state and local cannabis taxes entirely.

“A 30% increase in an excise tax that is already egregious is just kind of the breaking point for a lot of consumers,” said Kiloh.

Even before the excise tax hike went into effect, just 40% of the cannabis consumed in California was obtained from the legal market, according to the California Department of Cannabis Control.

The measure to drop the excise tax, AB564, received widespread support from Assembly members, including stalwart supporters of early childhood education like Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D-Winters), chair of the Legislative Women’s Caucus.

“Revenues from legal sales of cannabis are already dropping and if we keep raising the tax they’ll drop even more. That penalizes cannabis businesses who are doing the right thing and working within the legal market. And, it makes illegal sales from cartels and criminals more competitive,” she said in a statement. “We need to fund our kids’ education through the State General Fund, but if we want to supplement education and youth programs, cannabis tax dollars will only exist if we steady the legal market and go after those illegal operators.”

How reliable are sin taxes?

Lucy Dadayan, a researcher who studies sin taxes at the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank based in Washington, D.C., said the California predicament reflects a larger problem with sin taxes.

If a sin tax is successful and consumption drops — as it has with tobacco — “the tax base shrinks. And in the case of cannabis, there’s the added wrinkle that a high tax rate can push consumers back into the illicit market, which also reduces revenue,” she said.

This is not the first time services for the state’s youngest children have been affected by reductions in a sin tax.

In 1998, California voters slapped cigarettes with a hefty surcharge to pressure smokers to give up their habit. The state used the money to fund “First 5” organizations in every county, which are dedicated to improving the health and well-being of young children and their families. But the less people smoked over time, the less money was available for early childhood programs, and the First 5 system now finds itself confronting an existential crisis as it faces a rapidly declining revenue source.

Meanwhile, the critical social services like child care that come to depend on sin taxes tend to get more and more expensive, creating a “mismatch” in the tax structure versus the need, said Dadayan.

“In the short term, these taxes can raise a lot of money and help build public support for legalization or regulation. But in the long term, they can leave important programs vulnerable because of shifting consumption patterns,” she said.

This article is part of The Times’ early childhood education initiative, focusing on the learning and development of California children from birth to age 5. For more information about the initiative and its philanthropic funders, go to latimes.com/earlyed.

Source link

Richard Lee: Cannabis activist, founder of Oakland's Oaksterdam University dies at 62, school says

Richard Lee: Cannabis activist, founder of Oakland’s Oaksterdam University dies at 62, school says

OAKLAND, Calif. (KGO) — Richard Lee, the founder Oaksterdam University in Oakland, died last month. He was 62.

Lee passed away after a battle with cancer in Houston, Texas, on July 27, after a lifetime of cannabis activism that included founding the trade school in 2007 preparing students for careers in the cannabis industry.

Richard Lee, president of Oaksterdam University, speaks at a news conference in Oakland, Calif., Wednesday, April 18, 2012.

Richard Lee, president of Oaksterdam University, speaks at a news conference in Oakland, Calif., Wednesday, April 18, 2012.

AP Photo/Jeff Chiu

Oaksterdam University officials said on its website, “Lee is best known as the founder of the world’s first cannabis training school, Oaksterdam University, and for financing and spearheading California’s Proposition 19 in 2010, the first attempt to legalize cannabis for all adults over 21 in the modern era. Although the ballot measure failed by a slim margin, the election led to successful initiatives in 2012 in Colorado and Washington, setting off a wave of legislative change throughout the United States and the rest of the world. In California, it forced the passage of Senate Bill 1449, which decriminalized cannabis statewide and reduced possession arrests by 89% by the following year.”

Lee left Oaksterdam University in April 2012 after federal DEA agents raided the school.

He told now-retired ABC7 News reporter Wayne Freedman following the raid, “I’ve been doing this over 20 years, so I think I’ve done my duty. I think I’ve done my time on the front lines and others can take over,” he said. He said he is not giving up the fight to legalize marijuana. “Well, I’m not leaving the fight. I’m going to still be campaigning more than ever for legislation, maybe going to Washington and Colorado that both have legalization on the ballot this year,” he said.

The school said “no charges were ever pressed against him, the motivation for the raid likely came from Lee’s outspoken activism and public statements that he had used profits from his cannabis business to fund his political actions.”

The school reopened.

The school said in 1990, when Lee was 28 years old, he suffered a workplace injury which left him paraplegic and wheelchair-bound. The incident also caused chronic severe nerve pain, for which he turned to cannabis.

After leaving Oaksterdam University, Lee moved to Houston to be closer to his family and become primary caregiver for his mother Ann Lee, the school said.

A celebration of life is being planned for November 9 and organizers are calling on the public for help.

Planners are asking people to share photos, videos, and stories of Lee.

Now Streaming 24/7 Click Here

Copyright © 2025 KGO-TV. All Rights Reserved.

Source link

South Dakota Medical Marijuana Industry Cheers Sting Operations On Hemp Product Sellers

South Dakota Medical Marijuana Industry Cheers Sting Operations On Hemp Product Sellers

“Why do I go to a doctor and pay him, and why go pay the state to pay even more money, when I can go to the vape shop, or I can go to the hemp store and they’re selling exactly what I need?”

By John Hult, South Dakota Searchlight

South Dakota’s medical cannabis industry voiced its support for sting operations targeting sellers of hemp products that create a marijuana-like high.

The comments from Jeremiah Murphy, a lobbyist for the Cannabis Industry Association of South Dakota, came during Tuesday’s meeting of the state’s Medical Marijuana Oversight Committee.

Murphy’s association represents the state’s 116 licensed medical cannabis cultivators, manufacturers and dispensaries.

The industry “commends the Pennington County Sheriff’s Office” for its sting operation targeting hemp-based THC products at eight Rapid City-area smoke shops and convenience stores, Murphy said.

Law enforcement bought samples of gummies, THC drinks and other products with “hemp-derived” ingredients. Strains of THC is a family of high-inducing molecules found in large concentrations in the cannabis plant.

The hemp plant is a cousin to cannabis that contains tiny quantities of THC. Hemp-derived intoxicants often get their THC from chemically modified or distilled CBD. CBD is a different, nonintoxicating molecule found in cannabis and hemp.

Hemp is legal to cultivate under the 2018 farm bill, and hemp-derived products are legal under federal law. Since mid-2024, however, South Dakota has barred the sale–but not the possession–of products made with chemically synthesized versions of THC.

The Rapid City compliance check followed a July 10 letter from Pennington County State’s Attorney Lara Roetzel to businesses suspected of unlawful hemp sales.

Katy Urban, spokeswoman for Roetzel’s office, says the agencies are waiting for testing results to determine if any laws were broken.

Sioux Falls Police Department spokesman Aaron Benson said the SFPD has performed one compliance check, and is waiting on results from a lab test to determine how to proceed with one case. Benson declined to say how many businesses were visited, citing the open investigation.

Committee hears support for compliance

At Tuesday’s medical marijuana committee meeting, Murphy repeated an assertion he’s used for nearly two years now:  The availability of hemp-derived alternatives to medical cannabis puts the state’s highly regulated medical marijuana industry at a disadvantage.

“Why do I go to a doctor and pay him, and why go pay the state to pay even more money, when I can go to the vape shop, or I can go to the hemp store and they’re selling exactly what I need?” Murphy said.

The number of medical marijuana cards issued in the state stands at around 14,000, but changes slightly every day, Whitney Brunner of the Department of Health told the medical marijuana committee Tuesday.

“Any data point presented on patient cards is representative of a snapshot in time,” Brunner said.

Cards issuance has picked up slightly since voters rejected a ballot measure to legalize recreational cannabis last fall, but remained at about 14,000 as of this week. A little more than 70 percent of the cards have been issued to people for the management of chronic pain, Brunner told the committee.

Medical cannabis purveyors supported the law banning the sale of synthetically altered hemp products, but the law hasn’t led to a crush of cases against sellers. Around 100 charges had been filed as of last month, between juvenile and adult cases, according to the Unified Judicial System. Several of those charges were attached to individual defendants.

Hemp industry sees future beyond consumables

John Peterson, president of the South Dakota Industrial Hemp Association, said his organization doesn’t have a problem with the rules on consumables.

“They passed the rules, and we want to have only the good players in the game,” said Peterson, whose Dakota Hemp is one of two companies in South Dakota building hemp processing facilities.

South Dakota leads the nation in hemp production. Legally, hemp plants need to be tested and have less than .3 percent THC. In a typical pre-rolled, smokable cannabis joint, Peterson said, “you’re looking at a 30 percent THC level.”

“You’re going to want your money back if it’s not that high,” he said.

Peterson said consumable products, with or without intoxicating properties, were among the first to catch on. CBD products, including products like lotions, are often marketed to humans and their pets for their purported health benefits.

Hemp-derived THC products, made “when somebody will take it and process it down to make an unnatural compound,” took off just a few years ago.

“That has been the industry that has financially led the way, but as the industry is taking off, we see the grain, fiber and textile areas as leading products into the future,” Peterson said.

Speaking from a booth at Dakotafest in Mitchell, Peterson listed off a dozen products from a hemp association brochure, including building materials like hempcrete and decking material.

As far as consumables, Peterson said, “we’re not going to scream and holler and say, ‘you’ve got to let us have those back.”

He said he hopes the consumable concerns don’t hamstring the rest of the industry.

“As long as they’re not going out of their way to discriminate against the hemp industry, I’ve got no issues with it.”

This story was first published by South Dakota Searchlight.

Photo courtesy of Pexels.

Marijuana Moment is made possible with support from readers. If you rely on our cannabis advocacy journalism to stay informed, please consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Become a patron at Patreon!

Source link

Cannabis dispensary approved for Lake Placid | News

Cannabis dispensary approved for Lake Placid | News

LAKE PLACID — The Mellow Moose cannabis retail dispensary was approved by the Lake Placid-North Elba joint Planning Review Board on Wednesday for the property at 2192 Saranac Ave., formerly CrossFit Lake Placid. It will be for off-site consumption only and is the first dispensary to open in the village since local voters approved dispensaries and on-use sites in a 2021 referendum.

The review board discussed the plans for the dispensary at both of its meetings during August. They focused on aspects of the plan that fall under the board’s jurisdiction, including aesthetics and safety. The board worked with Freedom 35 Cannabis Company LLC owner Gregory Johnson to refine a parking plan.


This page requires Javascript.

Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

kAm%96 3@2C5 96=5 2 AF3=:4 962C:?8 7@C E96 A=2?D @? yF=J `e[ H96? {2<6 !=24:5 C6D:56?ED A24<65 E96 E9:C5\7=@@C >66E:?8 C@@> 2E }@CE9 t=32 %@H? w2== E@ 6IAC6DD D@>6 DFAA@CE[ 3FE >@DE=J @AA@D:E:@? E@ E96 A=2?] r@?46C?D C2?865 7C@> D276EJ 2?5 EC277:4 E@ E96 AC@I:>:EJ @7 D49@@=D 2?5 ?6:893@C9@@5D] ~E96CD E9@F89E 92G:?8 2 5:DA6?D2CJ[ 6DA64:2==J 😕 2 9:89=J\G:D:3=6 =@42E:@?[ H2D 2E @55D H:E9 E96:C :>286 @7 {2<6 !=24:5]k^Am

kAm%96 5:DA6?D2CJ 😀 2? 2==@H65 FD6 😕 E92E =@42E:@?[ 6?23=65 3J a_ac 2>6?5>6?ED E@ E96 =2?5 FD6 4@56 😕 255:E:@? E@ E96 a_a` C676C6?5F>] pD DF49[ E96 C6G:6H 3@2C5 H2D @?=J 23=6 E@ 4@?D:56C E96 A=2? 244@C5:?8 E@ 6I:DE:?8 =2HD[ 3@2C5 r92:C #:4< %9@>AD@? D2:5]k^Am

kAm“%96 AC@A@D65 5:DA6?D2CJ[ E96C67@C6[ 42? @?=J 36 C6G:6H65 244@C5:?8 E@ E96 DA64:7:4 C6BF:C6>6?ED @7 E96 =2?5 FD6 4@56[ :?4=F5:?8[ 3FE ?@E =:>:E65 E@ 26DE96E:4D[ =:89E:?8[ A2C<:?8[ EC277:4[ 4:C4F=2E:@? 2?5 =2?5D42A:?8[” 96 D2:5 5FC:?8 =2DE >@?E9’D 962C:?8] “x’> WD2J:?8X E9:D D@ E92E 6G6CJ3@5J F?56CDE2?5D H96C6 @FC C@=6 😀 2D 2 3@2C5]”k^Am

kAm|65:42= 42??23:D H2D =682=:K65 😕 }6H *@C< 😕 a_`e[ H:E9 C64C62E:@?2= FD6 =682=:K65 😕 |2C49 a_a`] %96C6 😀 4FCC6?E=J @?6 @E96C =:46?D65 5:DA6?D2CJ 😕 E96 %C:\{2<6D[ t=6G2E6 psz[ H9:49 @A6?65 😕 E96 E@H? @7 }@CE9 t=32 😕 a_ab] %96 E2I C6G6?F6 92D AC@G:565 2 3@@DE E@ E96 E@H?[ H:E9 8C2?E >@?6J 7C@> E96 42??23:D E2I2E:@? 7F?5D 8@:?8 E@ DFAA@CE 2 G2C:6EJ @7 AC@;64ED F?56C E96 42E68@C:6Di J@FE9[ 6=56C=J 4@>>F?:EJ >6>36CD 2?5 =2H 6?7@C46>6?E]k^Am

Source link

TEAMSTERS LOCAL 469 WINS BIG IN CANNABIS

Trump Holds the Rescheduling Key: Will Marijuana Reform Follow the Patient’s Right to Try Path?

From ‘Right to Try’ to Cannabis: Trump’s Next Breakthrough Could Unlock FDA Trials.

“President Trump’s marijuana decision must go beyond politics-patients suffering from Huntington’s disease and Multiple Sclerosis have waited nearly a decade for access to MMJ International Holdings’ FDA-approved clinical trials. With capsules manufactured and science in place, all that’s missing is the DEA stepping aside.” stated Duane Boise, CEO MMJ International Holdings.

WASHINGTON, D.C. / ACCESS Newswire / August 24, 2025 / As national discourse intensifies around President Trump’s forthcoming decision on marijuana rescheduling, MMJ International Holdings CEO Duane Boise urges the administration to finally align federal cannabis policy with science, patients, and the FDA drug approval process.

Duane Boise CEO, MMJ International Holdings

The conversation on drug reform is expanding beyond cannabis. Just this month, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) requested a scientific review of psilocybin-a breakthrough for patients and advocates who have fought for decades to access novel therapies. With Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. signaling support for veterans’ access to psychedelics, the political and scientific momentum for reform is undeniable.

For cannabis, however, progress has been stalled for years. President Biden ordered a review in 2022, HHS recommended Schedule III placement in 2023, yet the DEA has dragged its feet-continuing to block FDA approved clinical trials like those proposed by MMJ International Holdings for Huntington’s disease and Multiple Sclerosis.

President Trump has the opportunity to change that. He already championed the Right to Try Act-granting terminally ill patients access to experimental treatments. The same principle should apply to cannabis science. If rescheduling moves forward, the nation must prioritize companies like MMJ International Holdings that have spent years building legitimate, FDA-compliant therapies.

“The President’s decision can’t just be about rescheduling-it must be about patients,” said Duane Boise, President & CEO of MMJ International Holdings. “Just as the Right to Try law will break open access to innovative treatments, the marijuana fix should finally clear a path for FDA clinical trials that have been blocked for nearly a decade. MMJ is ready-we have the softgel capsules manufactured, the FDA orphan designations secured, and the science built. All we need is for the DEA to step aside and let the research happen.”

Unlike state-legal operators chasing recreational markets, MMJ is pursuing the traditional pharmaceutical pathway. With two Investigational New Drug (IND) applications already filed, the company stands as the only U.S. entity prepared to conduct FDA-sanctioned clinical trials with cannabis-derived medicines.

As the nation awaits President Trump’s announcement, MMJ International Holdings calls for immediate action:

  • Reschedule marijuana to Schedule III in line with HHS’s recommendation.

  • Direct the DEA to stop obstructing federally compliant researchers like MMJ.

  • Prioritize FDA pathways over political gamesmanship to deliver real medicines to patients suffering from debilitating diseases.

About MMJ International Holdings
MMJ International Holdings, through its subsidiaries MMJ BioPharma Cultivation and MMJ BioPharma Labs, is a pioneering U.S.-based pharmaceutical company developing cannabis-derived therapies for Huntington’s disease and Multiple Sclerosis. With FDA Orphan Drug Designations, manufactured softgel capsules, and INDs filed, MMJ is positioned to bring the first cannabis-based prescription medicines to market through the FDA approval process.

MMJ is represented by attorney Megan Sheehan.

CONTACT:
Madison Hisey
MHisey@mmjih.com
203-231-85832

SOURCE: MMJ International Holdings

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

Source link

Why founders of marijuana testing company were banned from Michigan’s industry

Why founders of marijuana testing company were banned from Michigan’s industry

The founders of a marijuana testing company in Michigan have been banned from the state’s industry.

The Cannabis Regulatory Agency (CRA) announced a settlement with Viridis Laboratories and Viridis North, ending a years-long legal dispute.

The settlement immediately revokes Viridis’ Lansing licenses and requires its Bay City location to close by Sept. 28, 2025, according to a release. Viridis Laboratories and Viridis North are collectively known as Viridis.

As part of the agreement, Viridis’ three majority owners — Todd Welch, Gregoire Michaud, and Michele Glinn — will be permanently banned from participating in the state’s marijuana industry.

Viridis also agreed to dismiss its administrative complaint alleging the CRA disrupted its business, along with two appeals pending in the Court of Appeals.

One of the appeals involved the Court of Claims’ dismissal of Viridis’ efforts to reopen a 2021 lawsuit against the CRA, and the other involved the Ingham County Circuit Court’s dismissal of the labs’ lawsuit against current and ex-CRA staff.

“This is justice, plain and simple,” said Brian Hanna, CRA executive director. “Viridis failed to uphold the standards required of marijuana safety compliance facilities in Michigan. Viridis circumvented the rules. Their majority owners will never operate in this space again, and the Michigan cannabis industry will be stronger for it.”

This comes after the agency found evidence that Viridis didn’t follow approved testing procedures, which resulted in “inaccurate or unreliable test results.”

Multiple competitors said “they were pushed to the brink – some even out of business – as a result of Viridis’ disregard for the rules,” according to the release.

“This wasn’t just a single misstep,” Hanna said. “It was a sustained, deliberate pattern of noncompliance that shook confidence in the entire regulated cannabis system.”

Claire Patterson, director of the CRA’s reference laboratory, emphasized the importance of scientific integrity in the industry.

“We are at a pivotal moment, where scientific progress in cannabis is unfolding under our watch,” Patterson said. “Here, we had a responsibility to get this right and set a critical precedent. Scientific integrity isn’t a formality — it’s the foundation of the cannabis industry. The future of this industry depends on ethics, transparency, and science we can all trust.”

Click here to see the formal complaints, consent order and stipulation documents, and the stipulated order of dismissal.

The CRA said it will continue working with stakeholders, lawmakers, and industry leaders to hold those who disregard the rules accountable.

Copyright 2025 by WDIV ClickOnDetroit – All rights reserved.

Source link

Woman, 38, arrested after cannabis seizure

Woman, 38, arrested after cannabis seizure

A 38-year-old woman has been arrested after suspected Class B drugs with an estimated street value of £200,000 were seized at George Best Belfast City Airport.

It happened on Saturday after an air passenger was detected with cannabis in their luggage, police said.

The woman was arrested on suspicion of possession of a Class B controlled drug with intent to supply and remains in custody.

Det Insp Kelly said it was a “great example of partnership work conducted by agencies within the Organised Crime Task Force (OCTF)”.

“We are aware organised criminal groups seek to exploit any route into Northern Ireland to distribute drugs and profiteer from their criminality,” Det Insp Kelly said.

“The Police Service of Northern Ireland and our law enforcement partners within OCTF continue to detect and deter these groups from operating here.”

Source link

Bill Maher Applauds Donald Trump’s “Genius” Strategy To Win Over Single-Issue Voters—Starting With Cannabis

Bill Maher Applauds Donald Trump’s “Genius” Strategy To Win Over Single-Issue Voters—Starting With Cannabis

Bill Maher isn’t usually one to throw compliments Donald Trump’s way—but this week, even he couldn’t resist applauding the former president’s savvy play at winning over single-issue voters.

On a recent episode of Real Time, Maher laid it out: Trump knows how to “pick off voters issue by issue,” and now cannabis legalization could be the one that wins him over. His tone was gleefully defeated—like a parent watching a kid beat their high score.

Maher quipped, “I’ve been telling Democrats for years, the Republicans are gonna steal pot from you as an issue.” It wasn’t a rallying cry—it was the sound of a cynic admitting the game was one.

He drove it home with a riff on Trump’s playbook: “He’s the master at winning votes from small groups who are passionate about one issue, picking up a couple percent here, a couple there…” until Election Night turns into something like a bizarre Y-M-C-A celebration.

And when it comes to timing, Maher confessed—with tongue in cheek—that Trump finally swung by his own camp. “Finally, he got around to me,” he teased during his “New Rules” segment—comparing his own potential shift to that of single-issue Black voters who helped Trump make gains in key cities.

“What did you expect?” he shrugged. “He’s the master…” And amid all of this, Trump has already said he’ll have a decision on cannabis rescheduling “in the next few weeks”—a move that would send seismic ripples through the cannabis industry and potentially benefit Maher personally, since he co-owns The Woods, a West Hollywood consumption lounge.

You can watch Maher’s full “New Rule” segment from Friday’s Real Time with Bill Maher above.

This isn’t Maher’s first polit-comedy tightrope with Trump. Earlier this year, he had dinner with the president at the White House—sparking backlash from fans who accused him of going too soft. But even then, he shrugged off the critics, calling the dinner an act of engagement—and noting Trump’s unexpectedly gracious demeanor.

Source link

ABCA Clarifies Medical Cannabis Rules in Washington, D.C. — Patient & Business Guidance

ABCA Clarifies Medical Cannabis Rules in Washington, D.C. — Patient & Business Guidance

Reader Q&A with Fred Moosally

Fred Moosally, the Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Administration (ABCA) director, recently responded to a wide range of stakeholder questions regarding medical cannabis data security, licensing, social equity, and product availability in the District of Columbia. Below are ABCA’s responses.

Legal Liability & Data Handling

When individuals apply for temporary (3-day to 1-month) medical cannabis cards, what personal data is retained by ABCA, and for how long? How does the agency protect this data, especially for out-of-state patients or those concerned about federal disclosures (e.g., gun ownership)?

Program participant information is self-provided to ABCA and maintained securely by the agency in accordance with the District’s data and records retention policy. ABCA does not disclose personal data submitted by patients or caregivers to any government or private entity including licensed Retailers. Retailers complete product transactions using unique patient numbers through Metrc, which is ABCA’s seed-to-sale medical cannabis tracking platform. No personally identifiable information is used by or stored in Metrc. Additionally, face photos are no longer being included on digital or physical registrations.

Will ABCA consider allowing anonymous or pseudonymous registration for individuals hesitant to join the program due to privacy or data security concerns?

Patients and caregivers must present a valid government-issued photo identification that includes the name matching their registration to be able to purchase medical cannabis products from licensed Retailers in DC. Accordingly, program participants must register using their legal first and last name. Additionally, ABCA must be able to verify each applicant’s age and residency, and match healthcare recommendations if submitted. Patient information is securely maintained and protected by the agency and not shared with other District or federal agencies.

Agency Response & Program Operations

What systems are in place to ensure licensees and applicants receive timely responses from assigned case managers? (Several stakeholders report unanswered voicemails and emails over extended periods.)

ABCA employs a team of highly trained and professional licensing specialists responsible for responding to email and phone inquiries. If a communication is overlooked, program participants should follow up on their initial inquiry by emailing ABCA.CannabisInfo@dc.gov or calling 202.442.4423.

Will ABCA consider waiving or reducing registration and renewal fees for D.C. residents, especially those applying for patient cards, to encourage greater participation?

Patient registration in the medical cannabis program is currently free for DC residents until November 6, 2025. Non-DC residents may register in the program for a fee ranging between $10-$100 based on the valid period they select.

Licensing & Compliance

Can a social equity license be transferred to another individual who also qualifies under the social equity criteria?

Yes, a license approved for a social equity applicant or an unlicensed establishment can be transferred three (3) years after issuance. If the
license is transferred to a non-medical cannabis certified business enterprise or non-social equity applicant, the new owner is required to repay any grants or loans provided by the District to the medical cannabis certified business enterprise or social equity applicant and pay ABCA any waived licensing and application fees.

Will ABCA provide clearer pathways for forming social equity collectives, particularly for cultivation and manufacturing operations where zoning and property constraints make multi-tenant use difficult?

The medical cannabis regulations currently permit separately licensed medical cannabis businesses to locate in the same building or space, provided they maintain separate books and records, maintain separate inventory, and ensure that they have their own secure and distinct premises that is separated at a minimum by a fixed boundary.

ABCA previously committed to allowing cultivators to obtain manufacturing licenses through endorsements. Will similar vertical integration pathways be made available to retailers to support brand development?

The Medical Cannabis Retailer Craft Preparation Endorsement Act of 2025 proposes to create a new endorsement type that would support brand development by allowing licensed Retailers to engage in some aspects of manufacturing. This includes licensed retailers being able to make prerolls, baked goods, beverages, chocolates, confections, lotions, soaps, ointments, and other products. This legislation was introduced at the Council of the District of Columbia on May 22, 2025.

Will ABCA extend conditional licenses (cultivation/manufacturing) that are set to expire in October 2025?

The two-year period for conditional licenses is established by statute and would require legislation adopted by the Council of the District of Columbia to be extended.  ABCA will notify conditional license holders in the event that legislation is enacted that extends the existing two-year period.

What is the agency’s position on automatic or needs-based extensions of expiration dates?

The District’s medical cannabis laws contain both automatic and case-by-case extension provisions.  ABCA is able to implement both automatic and case-by-case expiration date provisions.

Some patients receive multiple temporary (30-day) cards without being upgraded to a permanent 2-year card. Is there a fix or timeline for resolving this issue?

To address this issue, the valid period for temporary patient and caregiver registrations was extended from 30 to 90 days from the date of issuance, effective July 17, 2025. Temporary patient registrations issued on or after April 18, 2025, and prior to July 17, 2025, are now valid for ninety (90) days after the date of issuance, regardless of the expiration date printed on the temporary patient registration. Impacted patients or caregivers do not need to request an updated temporary registration. 

Can ABCA provide a simple method for licensees to verify whether their licenses are in good standing and whether any fees are due?

ABCA plans to launch an online system powered by Salesforce in FY 2026 that will allow licensees to check on the status of their account with the agency. The new system will significantly enhance how business owners, program participants, and residents interact with ABCA.

Craft Cannabis & Endorsements

When will ABCA issue guidance on the Craft Cannabis Cultivation Endorsement?

The Medical Cannabis Retailer Craft Preparation Endorsement Act of 2025 was introduced at the Council of the District of Columbia on May 22, 2025. The legislation needs to be adopted by the Council and signed by the Mayor prior to taking effect. ABCA will issue guidance regarding this endorsement should the legislation be enacted by the Council and signed by the Mayor.

Social Equity Fund Implementation

ABCA and city leadership previously promised to establish and fund a social equity program. What steps are being taken to fulfill this commitment, and will the FY2026 budget include allocations for such a fund?

The District’s FY26 budget and the corresponding Fiscal Year 2026 Budget Support Act of 2025 eliminated the Medical Cannabis Social Equity Fund.

Accountability & Market Oversight

What safeguards exist to prevent grant recipients — particularly those with prior illicit market histories — from misusing public funding or diverting product to the unregulated market?

ABCA does not have a grant making or grant administration role or function. 

In a limited market with only 7–8 cultivators, how does ABCA justify exclusive partnership agreements (e.g., first access to drops)? Will ABCA implement purchase quotas or equitable distribution rules to ensure a level playing field for all retailers?

A prohibition on partnership agreements or the implementation of purchase quotas would require the adoption of legislation by the Council of the District of Columbia.

Multi-State Operators

What is ABCA’s policy regarding the entry of MSOs (e.g., Cookies) into the D.C. market?

ABCA supports a business environment that provides for a diverse variety of product options for licensed retailers to sell to meet the needs of registered medical cannabis patients.

Will MSOs be permitted to launch exclusive products with D.C.-based cultivators/manufacturers before the local market reaches stability and equity for small businesses?

Current district law does not prohibit licensed cultivation centers and manufacturers from entering into written agreements with other cannabis brands provided the cannabis product is cultivated and manufactured in the District of Columbia at the licensed facility.

Product Availability & Consumer Access

Will ABCA issue guidance or updates to support organic growers who meet health and safety standards?

ABCA does not currently plan to issue specific guidelines for organic cultivators. All licensed Cultivation Centers and Manufacturers regardless of niche are required to adhere to DC’s manufacturing laws and regulations including product testing requirements.

Is there a pathway for home growers to have their product tested and sold through licensed dispensaries, especially considering their foundational role in D.C.’s cannabis culture?

Not currently. There are several factors that preclude home growers from entering the licensed market including zoning restrictions, security requirements, seed-to-sale tracking requirements, and the need for ABCA investigators and other District agencies to be able to access grow facilities to conduct inspections without notice.

What steps is ABCA taking to improve product variety and affordability in medical dispensaries, particularly those that transitioned from the I-71 market? Many dispensaries are struggling due to lack of inventory diversity — how will ABCA address this?

The Medical Cannabis Retailer Craft Preparation Endorsement Act of 2025 was introduced at the Council on May 22, 2025 to help address this issue.  The legislation helps to increase product variety by creating a new endorsement type that allows licensed Retailers to engage in some aspects of manufacturing.  This includes licensed retailers being able to make prerolls, baked goods, beverages, chocolates, confections, lotions, soaps, ointments, and other products.

Can dispensary check-in areas or adjacent spaces be monetized as ancillary (non-THC) businesses focused on health and wellness? Is there an official list of non-cannabis products that medical dispensaries are permitted to sell (e.g., accessories, supplements, health items)?

The Alcoholic Beverage and Cannabis Board will be issuing proposed rules later this year that set forth the types of non-cannabis products that can be sold at licensed dispensaries.  The proposed rules will be published in the D.C. register and undergo a 30-day public comment period that will provide an opportunity for businesses and the public to provide feedback to the Board.

Thank you to all our readers who submitted questions.

Employment Opportunity: DC Licensed Internet Retailer Dispensary Now Hiring. Contact info@getlocald.com to Learn More.

Source link

Supreme Court Faces Decisions on Marijuana

The U.S. Supreme Court is facing decisions in two cases dealing with marijuana in the coming months.

Why It Matters

The legalization of marijuana, for medicinal and recreational purposes, continues facing legal questions. It remains a Schedule I drug in the eyes of the federal government, but dozens of states have either decriminalized or legalized its possession or sale. President Donald Trump this month said he would consider reclassifying marijuana as a less dangerous drug.

Two cases the Supreme Court has been asked to weigh in on could have further implications for marijuana users or producers. One case asks the High Court to rule on whether marijuana users can be in possession of firearms, while the other is a more broad challenge to the federal regulations on marijuana.

Supreme Court Faces Decisions on Marijuana
Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty

What To Know

The Supreme Court justices have been asked to take up two marijuana-related cases, U.S. v. Hemani and Canna Provisions v. Bondi.

U.S. v. Hemani deals with whether a federal law prohibiting anyone who is using any controlled substance, which would include marijuana, from purchasing a firearm. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has asked for the case to be taken up by the court.

Canna Provisions v. Bondi deals with whether the Controlled Substances Act violates the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. A writ of certiorari has been filed asking the court to consider it.

Michael McAuliffe,a former federal prosecutor and former elected state attorney, told Newsweek that the core issues being litigated in these types of cases “involve important, but very specific, legal disputes that are separate from the general subject matter of the case.”

“The fact that the cases also involve a controversial topic, like marijuana use and regulation, is almost secondary,” he said. “Upcoming cases that address marijuana use/addiction and the prohibition of possessing firearms, and congressional authority to regulate intrastate cultivation and local sale of marijuana are fundamentally about the Second Amendment and the Commerce Clause.”

The legal issues at play in these cases “don’t require much judgment or parsing about marijuana itself,” he said.

“As a result, it’s difficult, if not impossible, to match views about marijuana with the results of the cases,” he said.

U.S. v. Hemani

The Hemani case centers around Ali Danial Hemani, a Texas man who came under scrutiny from the FBI over alleged connections to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. The government has accused him of using promethazine and cocaine in a court filing. He was prosecuted, however, for allegedly owning a firearm while being a regular use of marijuana.

Hemani’s attorneys have argued that he cannot be charged under that law because he was not intoxicated on marijuana when FBI agents found a firearm at his home.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled that the law cannot apply to him because precedence does “not support disarming a sober person based solely on past substance usage.”

The DOJ has asked the Supreme Court to clarify that regular users of illegal drugs should be prohibited from owning a firearm.

“The Fifth Circuit’s analysis also conflicts with the historical evidence marshaled above. For example, founding-era laws restricted the rights of drunkards, even during sober intervals, based on their habitual use of alcohol,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in a petition for a writ of certiorari.

“And for about as long as legislatures have regulated drugs, they have prohibited the possession of arms by drug users and addicts—not just by persons under the influence of drugs. The Fifth Circuit did not address those laws in its historical analysis.”

Hemani’s attorneys responded to the petition by highlighting that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals made a narrow decision and that the DOJ “failed before this Court to identify any founding-era laws or regulations that address the why and how of the restrictions imposed by the law.”

“Americans who lawfully use cannabis under state law and possess a firearm are in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) could be charged and sentenced to a term of imprisonment up to 15 years. Under Petitioner’s interpretation of the statute, millions of Americans are currently violating Section 922(g)(3) and do so on a continuing basis,” his attorneys warned.

Zachary Newland, an attorney representing Hemani, told Newsweek that he believes the government is seeking to gain “a ruling from the Supreme Court that any person who owns a firearm and is a ‘user’ of marijuana is committing a federal felony punishable by up to 15 years of federal prison time.”

The problem is that the term “user” is “so nebulous that a grandmother who uses marijuana legally under state law to treat her glaucoma is prohibited from owning a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3),” he said.

“The term is so vague that it could be interpreted to prohibit individuals who use marijuana once a year, once a month, or every day from exercising their Second Amendment rights,” he said.

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek that the case gives marijuana advocates “an opportunity to chip away at federal marijuana restrictions.”

“The Justices have been very pro-Second Amendment, so they would have to reconcile thar stance with Congress‘ outdated marijuana laws. They have upheld felon in possession restrictions, however, so it’s very possible they uphold the ban,” he said.

McAuliffe said the most interesting aspect of this case “isn’t that it involves marijuana, but that it appears to cut against the grain of the administration’s position regarding firearm regulation.”

“In most other fronts, the Trump leadership circle has vehemently opposed any firearm possession limitations,” he said.

A panel on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals this week handed down a ruling in a separate case that the law was incorrectly applied to a group of Florida residents that uses medical marijuana, Reuters reported. The court ruled that applying the law to theme would violate their Second Amendment rights.

Supreme Court faces marijuana decision
The U.S. Supreme Court is pictured in Washington, D.C. on July 30, 2024. A marijuana plant is seen at the International Cannabis and Hemp Expo April 18, 2010 in Daly City, California.

Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images and Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Canna Provisions v. Bondi

The second case was filed by four businesses involved in marijuana production or distribution in Massachusetts, which has legalized marijuana. They have argued that the Controlled Substance Act is in violation of due process.

A petition has been submitted, but it’s unclear if the court will pick up this case.

“This case challenges Congress’s authority to criminalize the intrastate farming, possession, and sale of marijuana grown and sold entirely in Massachusetts and which is not fungible with interstate marijuana, is readily distinguishable from interstate marijuana, and is responsible for reducing the amount of interstate traffic in marijuana over the last decade,” the petition reads.

It challenges the court’s 2005 ruling in Gonzales v. Raich, which upheld Congress’ authority to criminalize cannabis. They argued that many changes have occurred since the case was decided that warrant its revisitation.

“Applicants allege that the express predicates of this Court’s Raich decision [a comprehensive Congressional scheme to ban totally the production and sale of marijuana, the danger that permitting intrastate production and possession would increase interstate marijuana commerce, and the conclusion at the time that all marijuana was fungible and that as a result intrastate and interstate products were indistinguishable] are no longer true,” the petition reads.

Rahmani said that broader marijuana prohibitions “will likely withstand the Court’s scrutiny notwithstanding state laws that have legalized the drug.”

“Expect the conservative majority to lean on the Supremacy Clause and the federal government’s current classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug with no medicinal value to continue to enforce federal marijuana laws in the face of inconsistent state law,” he said.

McAuliffe said the justices “could hold that regulating purely in-state activities [like cultivating marijuana for local sale] isn’t or is subject to congressional power without any conclusion about pot itself.”

What People Are Saying

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek: “The Supreme Court has been largely deferential when it comes to Congressional regulation of controlled substances, including marijuana, under the Commerce Clause. Even purely intrastate marijuana laws have been upheld. The Court has resolved marijuana cases related to sentencing and immigration on statutory grounds rather than engaging in public policy arguments about legalization.”

Zachary Newland, an attorney representing Ali Danial Hemani, told Newsweek: “The government likens marijuana use to founding-era laws committing ‘lunatics’ to insane asylums. Perhaps this administration took Reefer Madness a little too seriously. The fact of the matter is over 50 million Americans have used marijuana and approximately 32 percent of Americans own firearms. In the government’s myopic view, millions of Americans are at this very moment committing federal felonies by exercising their Second Amendment rights and using marijuana.”

What Happens Next

How the justices approach these two cases is yet to be seen, but their decisions may have implications for some marijuana users. Supreme Court terms begin on the first Monday of October. This year, it’s October 6.

Source link