Wisconsin Democrats Renew Push for Cannabis Legalization with SB 1045
On February 24, 2026, a coalition of Wisconsin Democrats introduced Senate Bill 1045 (SB 1045), a measure that seeks to legalize and regulate adult‑use and medical cannabis while tightening oversight of intoxicating hemp products. The bill marks the latest in a series of attempts by Democratic lawmakers to end cannabis prohibition in the Badger State, a goal that has repeatedly stalled amid Republican control of both legislative chambers.
Political Context and Growing Support
Although Republicans still hold majorities in the Wisconsin Senate and Assembly, several factors have shifted the landscape this session. The Biden administration has signaled a softer stance on cannabis, and federal efforts to reschedule marijuana to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act are underway. At the state level, a Marquette Law School poll conducted in 2022—reported by the ACLU of Wisconsin in 2023—found that a slight majority of Wisconsin Republicans now support adult‑use legalization.
These developments have created renewed optimism among cannabis reform advocates, who argue that SB 1045 could gain traction where previous bills failed.
Key Provisions of SB 1045
The bill is organized around three core areas: adult‑use cannabis, medical cannabis, and intoxicating hemp products.
Adult‑Use Cannabis
- Establishes a Division of Cannabis Regulation within the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to oversee production, processing, transportation, and testing.
- Permits individuals aged 21 and older to possess up to 2.5 ounces of cannabis flower in public spaces and up to 5 pounds in a private residence.
- Allows licensed entities to cultivate, process, and sell adult‑use cannabis, with production/processing licenses generally separate from retail licenses.
- Gives municipalities the authority to enact local ordinances that prohibit cannabis sales within their borders.
- Mandates laboratory testing of all cannabis products sold in the state.
- Imposes specific packaging and labeling requirements to promote consumer safety and prevent youth access.
Medical Cannabis
- Directs the Department of Health Services to create a Medical Cannabis Registry Program.
- Allows qualifying patients aged 18 or older (with certain exemptions) to possess cannabis for medical use.
- Lists qualifying conditions, including cancer, glaucoma, AIDS/HIV, Crohn’s disease, hepatitis C, Alzheimer’s disease, ALS, nail‑patella syndrome, Ehlers‑Danlos syndrome, PTSD, opioid‑related disorders, and any chronic or debilitating condition that causes cachexia, severe pain, severe nausea, seizures, or persistent muscle spasms. The DHS may add further conditions by rule.
- Requires the DHS to issue registry identification cards to approved patients.
Intoxicating Hemp Products
- Defines intoxicating hemp products as edible items or beverages containing 1–10 milligrams of intoxicating cannabinoids per serving (or per 12 fluid ounces) and restricts their sale to consumers 21 and older.
- Increases penalties for violations of existing hemp producer regulations.
- Includes a “trigger” repeal clause that would automatically nullify these hemp provisions when a federal intoxicating hemp ban takes effect on November 12, 2026. At that point, the bill would transition to regulating low‑dose cannabis‑infused products under the adult‑use framework.
Alignment with State Leadership
The hemp‑focused sections of SB 1045 echo recent comments from Governor Tony Evers. On February 27, 2026, the governor sent a letter to Wisconsin’s congressional delegation urging a reconsideration of the impending federal intoxicating hemp ban, warning that the prohibition could jeopardize the livelihoods of state hemp farmers, processors, and retailers.
SB 1045 currently resides in the Senate Committee on Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs. Observers will be watching the committee’s markup and any subsequent floor action to gauge whether the bill can overcome the longstanding partisan divide.
For a detailed analysis of the bill’s language and potential impact, see the Foley Hoag blog post: Here
