Cannabis law continues to live in constitutional limbo. States like Washington and California have built robust, tightly regulated cannabis markets, while federal law still treats marijuana as contraband. That tension has now collided head‑on with one of the Constitution’s most powerful doctrines: the Dormant Commerce Clause. Just recently, in January 2026, the Ninth Circuit weighed
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Canna Provisions, Inc. et al. v. Bondi, a high-profile lawsuit that challenged the constitutionality of the federal prohibition of intrastate (and not interstate) cannabis activity. The denial offered no reasoning; nor was it accompanied by dissents or concurrences from any of the justices—all of which is
Yesterday late afternoon, Oregon cannabis wholesaler Jefferson Packing House (JPH) filed another dormant commerce clause (DCC) challenge to protectionist state cannabis laws. You can view the complaint here. I say “another” DCC challenge because JPH prosecuted DCC litigation in late 2022; and also because several DCC cannabis lawsuits have been filed in recent years, with
The creative defense that failed A trademark infringement defendant argued it couldn’t be sued in federal court because its cannabis business was engaged in illegal activity under federal law. This seemingly clever strategy fell flat in Colorado federal court, representing the latest decision in a growing trend of federal judges retaining cannabis-related litigation despite the
A federal appellate court has ruled that a New York cannabis licensing rule favoring in-state residents is unconstitutional, because it discriminates against applicants residing out-of-state. We have been tracking this case for the past couple of years — see our prior posts here and here. This decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals is
As far as I know, the OLCC is a party to two, separate litigations surrounding its administrative rules. The first lawsuit relates to Ballot Measure 119, which is a unionization measure applicable to most classes of Oregon marijuana licensees. The second lawsuit concerns rules that require retail applicants to acquire a certificate of tax compliance
You may have seen this article or some other article yesterday or today, covering the Ontario Supreme Court’s recent certification of a national class action lawsuit against Aurora Cannabis. The defendant entities are all part of the same conglomerate, with Aurora Cannabis Inc. being the parent. You can view their vast array of cannabis products
In fall of 2023 I wrote about the lawsuit to end federal prohibition that wouldn’t really end federal prohibition. Last July, a federal district court ruled against Canna Provisions et al. in that case. On Wednesday, May 27th, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s ruling. The First Circuit decision means the
The Oregon District Court issued a ruling today which “PERMANENTLY ENJOINS AND RESTRAINS” the OLCC and other State actors from enforcing Measure 119 against Bubble’s Hash and Ascend Dispensary, the plaintiffs that sued over BM 119’s constitutionality. You can view Judge Simon’s Opinion and Order here, and the Judgment here. BM 119 required most Oregon
Hardly a week goes by without a client asking us: Can we sue the owners of a cannabis company personally for the company’s failure to pay our invoice / transfer us the license / sell us the land? In other words, they are asking, “Can we pierce the corporate veil and access the owner’s individually
