No it wasn’t. The 2018 farm bill removed Hemp from the list and specific it as different from marijuana, and derivatives as long as they have less than 0.3% Delta-9 THC. This is also why CBD products are available essentially across the board. CBD is excluded and listed as separate from THC, because it is not psychoactive.
There have been multiple subsequent court rulings that have had differing conclusions regarding various products that came on the market after that. More specifically around arguments about Delta-8 THC derived from <0.3% Delta-9 products and natural vs synthetic derivatives.
Marijuana in general was by no means “legalized” by the 2018 Farm Bill.
So they’re not actively enforcing the weird grey area they made by defining only one THC cannabinoid, and allowing derivatives that don’t have to conform to the same level.
Is it that surprising that they fucked up trying to define something they don’t actually understand? Although it’s more likely the loophole was intentionally made by the lobbyists for the various cannabis companies that actually wrote that part of the bill, as is tradition now.
No it wasn’t. The 2018 farm bill removed Hemp from the list and specific it as different from marijuana, and derivatives as long as they have less than 0.3% Delta-9 THC. This is also why CBD products are available essentially across the board. CBD is excluded and listed as separate from THC, because it is not psychoactive.
There have been multiple subsequent court rulings that have had differing conclusions regarding various products that came on the market after that. More specifically around arguments about Delta-8 THC derived from <0.3% Delta-9 products and natural vs synthetic derivatives.
Marijuana in general was by no means “legalized” by the 2018 Farm Bill.
There are many many farms and vendors who sell online and legally ship via usps to most states. Hoku, Flow, wildwood, holy city, and dozens more.
So they’re not actively enforcing the weird grey area they made by defining only one THC cannabinoid, and allowing derivatives that don’t have to conform to the same level.
Is it that surprising that they fucked up trying to define something they don’t actually understand? Although it’s more likely the loophole was intentionally made by the lobbyists for the various cannabis companies that actually wrote that part of the bill, as is tradition now.
Definitely intentional. DEA tried to argue against thca years ago and courts said to follow as written.
Big canna is fighting it because it shows almost anything to be called hemp and sold without regulation, lot numbers, etc.
deleted by creator