Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
CommunitySub-MenuPublishersChannelsProductsSub-MenuBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAboutContactResourcesSubscribeSupport
Join
Search
Close

Cannabis Legal Report—Week of March 1, 2023

By Elizabeth Gustafson, Tommy Tobin, Andrew Kline & Hanna Barker Mullin on March 2, 2023
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Cannabis: In Focus

  • DEA Classifies Two Lab-Derived Cannabinoids as Schedule I
  • Washington Federal Judge Dismisses Suit Challenging Residency Requirements

DEA Classifies Two Lab-Derived Cannabinoids as Schedule I

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) determined that two lab-derived cannabinoids— delta-8 THC acetate ester (delta-8 THCO) and delta-9 acetate ester (delta-9 THCO)—do not meet the federal definition of “hemp” and are therefore considered controlled substances.

Delta-8 THCO and delta-9 THCO do not naturally occur in the cannabis plant. The DEA issued its letter in response to an inquiry received from a North Carolina law firm.

Because the DEA considers delta-8 THCO and delta-9 THCO controlled substances, these substances are subject to the same federal controls applicable to marijuana, which is classified as a Schedule I substance.

The cannabis industry took note because there has been significant debate about the legality of delta-8 THC. This response solidifies that the DEA does not consider hemp-derived delta-8 THC to be a controlled substance. Of course, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken a different view when the popular, yet unregulated, cannabinoid has been added to a food or beverage.

Washington Federal Judge Dismisses Suit Challenging Residency Requirement

In an order dated February 7, 2023, a Seattle federal court dismissed a suit brought by an investor attempting to enter Washington state’s cannabis market. At issue was whether the state’s residency requirements for commercial cannabis licenses violated the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, the Dormant Commerce Clause (DCC) would ordinarily prohibit a state from placing undue burdens on out-of-state residents to favor in-state residents.

Judge Benjamin Settle ordered that the Washington residency requirements did not violate the DCC because the DCC protects a national market for goods, and there was no interstate commerce of cannabis, given its federal illegality. According to the court, even though a state may have legalized cannabis, it remains a Schedule I controlled substance at the federal level.

Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit came to the opposite conclusion. The appellate panel struck down residency requirements applicable in Maine that were similar to those applicable in Washington. The panel reasoned that Maine’s residency requirements violated the DCC and were therefore unconstitutional. Perkins Coie lawyers have written about this issue here and here. Watch this space for further developments.

Photo of Tommy Tobin Tommy Tobin

Thomas Tobin’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation and class action matters involving statutory, constitutional, and regulatory issues in a range of industries, including food and beverage, consumer packaged goods, and cannabis. In the food and beverage sector, Tommy has experience defending false…

Thomas Tobin’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation and class action matters involving statutory, constitutional, and regulatory issues in a range of industries, including food and beverage, consumer packaged goods, and cannabis. In the food and beverage sector, Tommy has experience defending false advertising claims and consumer protection claims for well-known international corporations.

Read more about Tommy TobinEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Andrew Kline Andrew Kline
Read more about Andrew KlineEmail
  • Posted in:
    Cannabis
  • Blog:
    Cannabis Legal Highlights
  • Organization:
    Perkins Coie LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center

New to the Network

  • Employment Class Actions: A General Counsel Briefing
  • U.S. Legal Insights for Korean Businesses
  • Latin American Blog
  • Intellectual Property Law Blog
  • Insurance Law Blog
Copyright © 2023, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo