Senate extends the federal hemp THC ban to December 11, buying the industry extra weeks to push for a lasting regulatory framework.
Ban details and timeline
The continuing resolution passed by the Senate keeps the hemp‑derived THC prohibition in place until December 11, after it was originally set to expire on November 12.
Under the measure, hemp products may contain no more than 0.4 mg of THC per container, a limit that would bar most THC‑infused drinks that currently range from 2 mg to 5 mg per can.
While synthetic cannabinoids would be banned outright, naturally derived THC would remain legal only if the product stays within the new dosage ceiling.
Industry reaction
The US Hemp Roundtable praised the extension, saying a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers had ensured the sector was not left out of the funding package.
“We are grateful to the bipartisan coalition of lawmakers who worked to ensure the hemp industry was not left behind,” the group stated.
Senator Tina Smith of Minnesota, who advocated for the delay, said the state’s tightly regulated hemp system would be harmed by an abrupt ban, hurting farmers and local breweries.
“The initial ban was ill‑advised and would have hurt both hemp farmers and Minnesota breweries,” she added, urging a long‑term solution.
Blake Patterson, chief revenue officer of Keef, called the extension “an important step,” noting that clear guardrails will help retailers, wholesalers and manufacturers plan sensibly.
Joe Gerrity, CEO and co‑founder of Crescent Canna, described Senate leaders’ move as “the responsible thing,” while warning that a small group of special‑interest lawmakers is already pushing back.
Opposition
Senator Ted Budd of North Carolina condemned the amendment as a “dangerous loophole,” arguing that marketing THC beverages to children poses public‑health risks.
“If a substance causes intoxication like marijuana, it should be regulated as such – not given a free pass as ‘hemp’, he stated.
Gerrity labeled the pushback “par for the course,” saying entrenched interests will always seek to block competition, and urged consumers to pressure their representatives.
“It’s now up to constituents to make clear that the federal government has no business banning products millions of law‑abiding adults enjoy and benefit from, states have shown they can regulate responsibly and bipartisan frameworks are available.”
