Intoxicating Hemp Derivatives: Agricultural Products or Illicit Narcotics?
This article attempts to provide some clarity by explaining what intoxicating hemp products are and the legal framework used to determine whether they are legitimate agricultural products or illicit narcotics.
May 18, 2023 at 05:01 PM
8 minute read
Special Sections![(L-R)Dylan Bishop and Sarah Stoner of Eckert Seamans Cherin & Melott. Courtesy photos](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2023/05/Bishop-Stoner-767x633-2.jpg)
Since passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, the nascent market for hemp-derived products has blossomed into a nationwide, multibillion-dollar enterprise. See H.R.2 – 115th Congress (2017-2018): Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, 115th Cong. (2018) (codified as 7 U.S.C. Section 9001, et seq.). Driven in part by the absence of a federally sanctioned adult-use marijuana industry, hemp-derived products offering consumers a psychotropic "high" (intoxicating hemp products or IHPs) have become increasingly prevalent. However, given the complexity of competing statutes, multiple agencies with overlapping regulatory authority, and a patchwork of federal guidance, most Americans remain uncertain as to the legality of IHPs. This article attempts to provide some clarity by explaining what intoxicating hemp products are and the legal framework used to determine whether they are legitimate agricultural products or illicit narcotics.
What Are Intoxicating Hemp Products?
Intoxicating Hemp Products are inhalable or ingestible consumer goods containing a high-inducing active ingredient derived or processed from hemp. They typically feature one of five cannabinoids or cannabimimetic agents (compounds that mimic the effects of cannabinoids): Delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), Delta-9 THC, Delta-10 THC, hexahydrocannabinol (HHC), or THC acetate ester (THC-O). These substances provide users a high analogous to marijuana but, in some instances, are afforded legal sanction under the 2018 Farm Bill because they are derived from hemp and not marijuana.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![Pa. Supreme Court to Decide Enforceability of 'Browsewrap' Arbitration Agreements Pa. Supreme Court to Decide Enforceability of 'Browsewrap' Arbitration Agreements](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/95/ae/f89a8bc14336b41212b4b02d3326/selmasska-green-767x633.jpg)
Pa. Supreme Court to Decide Enforceability of 'Browsewrap' Arbitration Agreements
8 minute read![From a Mediator’s Perspective: Common Mis-steps That Parties Make at Mediation From a Mediator’s Perspective: Common Mis-steps That Parties Make at Mediation](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/6b/d9/0fdb00614b8b8b2df500dd2d045d/andrew-horowitz-767x633.jpg)
From a Mediator’s Perspective: Common Mis-steps That Parties Make at Mediation
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Parties’ Reservation of Rights Defeats Attempt to Enforce Settlement in Principle
- 2ACC CLO Survey Waves Warning Flags for Boards
- 3States Accuse Trump of Thwarting Court's Funding Restoration Order
- 4Microsoft Becomes Latest Tech Company to Face Claims of Stealing Marketing Commissions From Influencers
- 5Coral Gables Attorney Busted for Stalking Lawyer
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250