Join us on October 8, 2026, for DEA Enforcement in a Changing Cannabis Landscape: Rescheduling, Hemp, and What Comes Next, a free webinar examining what the evolving federal cannabis landscape could mean for cannabis and hemp businesses. The discussion will feature: Jason Adelstone, Partner at Harris Sliwoski LLP; Matthew John Strait, former Deputy Assistant Administrator
We have been waiting for this. On September 10th, a Michigan man asked the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve a circuit split on whether states can discriminate against non-residents in their cannabis licensing programs. This is a fascinating legal question we’ve been mulling on the blog since at least 2015. It’s pure law, and it
A Michigan cannabis grower proved breach of contract and won a $31.8 million jury verdict—only to lose it on appeal. The Sixth Circuit held that a federal court could not enforce an agreement requiring conduct prohibited by the Controlled Substances Act. The decision offers a stark warning about forum selection, federal illegality, medical-use limitations, and remedies in cannabis contracts.
The federal conversation around hemp and cannabis is entering a pivotal new phase. On September 18 in Denver, Harris Sliwoski partner Jason Adelstone will moderate One Plant, One Policy, a fireside discussion at IgniteIt Denver Spotlight focused on the future of federal hemp regulation. From cannabinoids and product standards to enforcement and consumer safety, policymakers
On September 9th, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied a motion to stay filed by SAM, Inc. and the National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association, Inc. (collectively, “SAM”). The motion sought to stay (pause) the Attorney General’s final order placing state legal medical marijuana into Schedule III of the
Earlier this week, the House passed a short-term funding bill that postpones the federal ban on hemp-derived THC products. President Trump signed the ban into law last year; it was scheduled to take effect November 12th. This Wednesday, however, Trump signed off on the Congressional extension, pushed by his Administration, which means the ban is
Rescheduling has reshaped the legal landscape for California Cannabis businesses, but many existing contracts haven't caught up. This post breaks down where supply, licensing, and investment agreements now fall short—covering gaps in DEA registration language, license conversion triggers, and 280E-related representations—and offers a practical framework for reviewing and updating agreements before those gaps become disputes.
Cannabis law has never been more contradictory. In the U.S., federal and state governments often regulate identical products under completely different legal frameworks. Hemp and marijuana can produce the same intoxicating effects, yet lawmakers treat them as fundamentally different. Medical marijuana now occupies a unique place under federal law while adult use marijuana remains prohibited.
Federal rescheduling has finally arrived, but it didn’t magically solve everything for California cannabis businesses. Instead, it created a new set of decisions: whether to pursue DEA registration as a medical operator, how and when to restructure DCC licenses, and what 280E relief actually looks like for mixed medical/adult use companies. This article walks through the concrete steps California operators should take now — including what to do if you missed the initial DEA registration window.
While most attention has focused on the recently concluded marijuana rescheduling hearing, an equally significant legal battle has unfolded in the D.C. Circuit over the final rescheduling order ("Final Order"). Petitioners, the Department of Justice, newly intervening parties, and amici participants have exchanged a series of briefs over the past month. Those filings may ultimately
