The hemp loophole has become a national intoxicant market
The Hill · C · trust 17/100
Comments: by Paul Chabot, opinion contributor - 08/21/26 9:30 AM ET Comments: Link copied by Paul Chabot, opinion contributor - 08/21/26 9:30 AM ET Comments: Link copied In this photo taken Friday, June 7, 2019, Shane Whitaker checks on hemp seedlings at Whitaker Farms and Garden Center in Climax, N.C.. (AP Photo/Gerry Broome) Congress legalized hemp in 2018 to support American agriculture — not to create a nationwide market for intoxicating gummies, beverages and vaping products. Yet that is precisely what followed.
Businesses exploited the federal definition of hemp to manufacture psychoactive products containing intoxicating cannabinoids. These products quickly migrated from farms and specialized retailers into convenience stores, smoke shops and storefronts across the country.
They are often sold in brightly colored packaging, sometimes resembling ordinary candy or drinks. In many communities, consumers can purchase them without the safeguards traditionally associated with medical or recreational marijuana programs.
The result is a national regulatory failure hiding behind the word “hemp.”
States now face a choice: confront this expanding intoxicant industry or allow it to become economically and politically entrenched. Texas and Arkansas illustrate the consequences of those competing approaches.
In Texas, lawmakers passed Senate Bill 3 to prohibit consumable hemp products containing intoxicating cannabinoids while preserving legitimate non-intoxicating products (such as CBD and CBG). But Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vetoed the legislation . His decision did more than delay a single bill. Texas is the nation’s second-largest state and one of its most valuable consumer markets. By vetoing the prohibition, Abbott gave the intoxicating-hemp industry additional time to open stores, attract customers, hire lobbyists and challenge state regulations in court.
Every year of delay makes reform more difficult. Leases are signed. Trade associations grow. Political contributions increase. Lawyers develop new challenges. What began as the exploitation of a statutory loophole becomes an organized commercial constituency demanding permanent protection.
Arkansas chose a different course. Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) signed legislation restricting intoxicating hemp-derived products. Businesses sued, and a federal district court initially blocked enforcement.
Arkansas kept fighting, and in 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed the injunction in Bio Gen LLC v. Sanders . The appellate court rejected the argument that the 2018 farm bill prevented Arkansas from imposing stronger restrictions. It also rejected the plaintiffs’ vagueness challenge.
The decision does not bind every federal court, including those in Texas. But it demonstrates an important principle with national implications: Congress’s legalization of agricultural hemp did not necessarily strip states of their authority to restrict intoxicating consumer products.
Congress has now acknowledged the underlying problem. Federal legislation enacted in 2025 narrows the definition of lawful hemp by considering total THC content and excluding certain hemp-derived cannabinoid products. Those changes are scheduled to take effect on Nov. 12, 2026 .
That federal correction is welcome, but states should not assume Washington has solved everything.
Questions remain about enforcement, product testing, online sales and the treatment of substances developed to imitate THC’s intoxicating effects. The industry will continue searching for chemical and legal workarounds. Federal agencies will need time to interpret and enforce the new requirements.
Congress should establish a durable national framework that clearly distinguishes agricultural hemp and legitimate non-intoxicating products from recreational intoxicants. States must retain authority to adopt stronger protections suited to their communities.
Lawmakers should also refuse to let veterans become political cover for preserving an inadequately regulated intoxicant market.
I am a disabled veteran who served more than two decades in the Navy, including during the Iraq War. Veterans living with physical injuries and psychological trauma deserve compassionate, evidence-based treatment. If cannabis-derived medicines can help them, those treatments should be evaluated and provided through responsible medical channels.
That is fundamentally different from allowing intoxicating gummies, drinks and vaping products to proliferate in ordinary retail settings.
My years in law enforcement also taught me that preventing substance abuse is far easier than repairing its damage after another intoxicant becomes normalized. Availability matters. Potency matters. Marketing to young consumers matters.
This is no longer a narrow dispute about hemp farming. It is a national debate about whether an unintended loophole should dictate drug policy.
Arkansas demonstrated that a state can defend meaningful restrictions. Texas demonstrated how a governor’s veto can give an expanding industry more time to entrench itself.
Other states — and Congress — should learn from both.
The 2018 farm bill opened a door that lawmakers never intended to open. The country should close it before the intoxicating-hemp market becomes too powerful to control.
Paul Chabot, Ed.D., is president of the Coalition for a Drug Free Texas. He served two U.S. presidents as a White House senior advisor. He is also a retired U.S. Navy intelligence commander, and retired law enforcement officer.
Read the original at The Hill →
Open in TruthVane →