Courtesy of Harris Bricken

#hempproducts – “The Kushly case is actually the seventh such case brought by the FTC against a CBD company in the U.S. based on false and/or unsupported health claims, related to the bodily or curative effects of CBD. It’s no secret that the FDA routinely tries to shutter these kinds of CBD companies, but now the FTC is using its teeth to sue and fine these companies and their individual owners. This case marks the first time, though, that consumers are also getting refunds for products purchased, the cost of which of course must be borne by Kushly.

The two main takeaways from the Kushly case are: 1) if you’re a CBD business, do not make either untrue or unsubstantiated health claims about your CBD products; and 2) if you’re a consumer of such products, in the future you may be entitled to a refund if the FTC continues to crack down on CBD companies in this manner. We expect that will happen given that these lawsuits are another enforcement “stick” to curb deceitful practices in the wild west industry that is CBD.”

#cannabisindustry – “”They aren’t saying it’s legal,” said Shane Pennington, a New York-based attorney at Vicente Sederberg LLP, one of the nation’s foremost cannabis-focused law firms. “They’re just saying it exists.”

Congress still classifies cannabis as illegal, and anyone trafficking in an illegal substance across state lines still commits a federal crime.

Several states, including Oregon in 2019 and California this year, have passed laws in anticipation of federal legalization that would allow permit holders to ship cannabis across state lines, provided they hold permits in both states and federal law changes. But those provisions also require major, as-yet unseen changes in federal policy to take effect.

Some legal experts did suggest that someone could try to send a few packs across state lines and then use the First Circuit decision in a defense; other experts said that anyone trying this particular gambit ought to have a very good defense team ready.”

#californiacannabis – “The presence of a CDFW agent in full gear also concerned the resident, a legacy farmer who has lived in the Emerald Triangle throughout the War on Drugs era that pitted law enforcement against cannabis cultivators. The cultivator, although a legal cannabis cultivation license holder, chose to remain anonymous for fear that speaking with the media may result in harassment from state officials.

The cultivator said that although they could show that they had no violations on their site and were not engaged in any water theft or diversion, it felt to them that the officials “were trying to catch us doing something wrong.”

Notably, the cultivator said that three weeks ago during a routine visit, the inspectors had marked water levels on the site’s water storage tanks. During yesterday’s visit, officials compared those marks against the current water levels, presumably to make sure the water levels had not risen as cultivators are not allowed to divert water this time of year. Additional water levels marks were made to the storage tanks with an ominous, “expect a call,” from the DCC official.”

#psychedelic – “The notice, which is set to be formally published in the Federal Register on Monday, doesn’t give a specific reason for rescinding the ban of the two phenethylamine hallucinogens. But this marks another win for scientific community, coming just one month after DEA abandoned separate plans to place five tryptamine psychedelics in Schedule I.

“DEA is withdrawing the proposed rule, terminating all proceedings related thereto, and will be publishing a new proposed rule using an amended procedure,” the new notice on 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine (DOI) and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-chloroamphetamine (DOC) says.”

#californiacannabis – “The OCal Program, as it is called, allows cannabis products that have met certain rigorous standards — similar to the criteria used by the USDA when certifying organic products — to be marketed with the OCal label.[2]

Authority over the OCal Program is shared by the California Department of Food and Agriculture, or CFDA, which enforces comparable-to-organic standards for cannabis cultivators, and the California Department of Public Health, or CDPH, which enforces comparable-to-organic standards for cannabis manufacturers.

Actual approvals to use OCal labels will come from third-party accredited certifying agents. The OCal Program is currently accepting applications for registration and accreditation of certifying agents.[3]

So far, very few cultivators and manufacturers have become OCal-certified, but widespread adoption seems likely.”