Are state bans on hemp THC constitutional?

Thanks to a constitutional challenge, Ohio authorities in one county are temporarily forbidden from enforcing a new state law restricting the sale of hemp THC products to licensed cannabis stores.

The win in Sandusky County Court for Ohio hemp operators fighting Senate Bill 56, which went into effect last month, comes as Texas hemp THC companies bring their own lawsuit alleging a state ban on smokable hemp THC is unconstitutional.

Across the country, operators in the $28 billion U.S. hemp sector are in what many characterize as a fight for survival.

A redefinition of hemp under federal law, scheduled to take effect in November, closes the so-called “loophole” in the 2018 Farm Bill and renders most hemp-derived THC products illegal. And many states are taking separate action to clamp down on what cannabis operators and public safety advocates alike decried as a poorly regulated and unsafe hemp sector.

Ohio hemp THC ban favors cannabis, ‘likely unconstitutional,’ judge rules

Late last year, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed into law Senate Bill 56, which imposes a statewide cap on cannabis retail permits and also bans the sale of hemp THC products at bars and mainstream retailers.

The law, which banned popular hemp THC drinks, was supported by operators in the state’s $1 billion licensed marijuana sector.

But doing so unfairly gave cannabis operators a competitive edge over merchants dealing in hemp, which is still federally legal, Sandusky County Judge Jeremiah Ray ruled on March 24.

And that’s likely unconstitutional, he found.

Hemp THC ban unfairly advantages cannabis operators

Ray’s ruling came in a lawsuit brought by Cycling Frog, a hemp operator with a presence in Sandusky County, who challenged SB56 on constitutional grounds.

“The practical effect is to immunize Ohio’s in-state marijuana industry, which Ohio law requires to have an in-state physical presence, from out-of-state competition with respect to federally legal hemp products otherwise sold in interstate commerce,” he wrote, according to The Toledo Blade.

“This is because the licensed dispensaries and their attendant supply chain benefit from a lack of competition from either inside or outside Ohio. This is, thus, inherently discriminatory on its face.”

Ray imposed a temporary restraining order that applies only in Sandusky County and remains in effect until April 28.

However, according to attorney Andy Male, who filed the lawsuit challenging SB 56 in which Ray ruled, the case could be widened to include all hemp operators.

If that happens, “then basically the bill – with respect to the traditional hemp industry – will not be enforceable in Ohio,” he told the Blade.

Texas hemp THC operators allege THCA flower ban violates Constitution

Separately, thousands of hemp operators in Texas are removing THCA flower from their store shelves following a statewide ban that took effect at the end of March.

The THCA flower ban is among a set of new rules imposed by state agencies.

Texas state regulations have revised the definition of “total THC” to include tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA) in the calculation of total delta-9 THC. THCA, a nonpsychoactive compound, converts to delta-9 when heated.

In response, the Texas Hemp Business Council, Hemp Industry & Farmers of America and Texas-based operators sued the state in Travis County on Tuesday.

In their suit, the hemp companies argue that the Texas Department of State Health Services and the Texas Health and Human Services Commission overstepped their constitutional authority when they changed rules to redefine hemp.

The state agencies did so after an attempt to ban hemp THC was vetoed by Gov. Greg Abbott, who later issued an executive order directing hemp THC to be regulated more like alcohol.

Similar to Ohio, Texas hemp operators are arguing that the ban is unconstitutional.

“Lawmakers carefully debated hemp policy and chose not to change the statutory THC standard during the 89th Legislature in 2025,” Cynthia Cabrera, president of the Texas Hemp Business Council, said in a statement.

“State agencies cannot override the decision by regulation.”