Merch
Medical card
A busy week across all three regions, with the U.S. federal rescheduling process drawing fresh criticism for its lack of transparency, several states advancing or debating legalization, and European regulators producing new data from their regulated-market experiments.
United States
DEA Accused of Keeping States in the Dark on Rescheduling
California’s top cannabis regulator said this week that the DEA has shown no interest in helping states prepare for the practical consequences of moving marijuana to Schedule III, even as the agency simultaneously requests information from states about their own programs. A separate op-ed from the Cannabis Regulators Association argued that the DEA must coordinate with state officials to give operators and regulators time to adjust, warning that the current silence is creating dangerous uncertainty. The criticism adds to a pattern of concern about the rescheduling process covered in recent weeks.
The Cannigma’s Take: The bigger issue may be inside state markets. Medical operators can pursue the benefits of Schedule III while adult-use activity remains Schedule I. So states that spent years integrating their medical and recreational systems are now being pushed back towards a federally imposed two-track market.
Federal Watchdog Finds “Gaps” in Drug Scheduling Process
The U.S. Government Accountability Office published a report this week identifying significant gaps in the policies governing how federal agencies evaluate substances and develop scheduling recommendations, with the findings landing squarely in the middle of the ongoing marijuana review. The GAO called on agencies to improve their procedures. The report provides independent validation of concerns that advocates and state officials have raised about the opacity of the current process.
The Cannigma’s Take: The GAO report is awkward for both DEA critics and defenders: it found inadequate written procedures, but also found that DEA agreed with HHS in all 84 final scheduling decisions it reviewed.
Congress: Cannabis Labeled “High-Risk,” Insurance Bill Advances
Two notable bills moved through congressional attention this week. A bipartisan measure aimed at curbing online fraud would designate cannabis a “high-risk” product subject to enhanced advertising verification requirements. Separately, a coalition of insurance industry trade groups formally endorsed legislation that would shield insurers from federal penalties for covering state-legal cannabis businesses, a sign of growing mainstream financial-sector interest in resolving the industry’s coverage gap.
The Cannigma’s Take: Taken together, these two bills capture the peculiar juxtaposition in Washington. Cannabis is normal enough to be regulated alongside alcohol and tobacco for advertising purposes, but still exceptional enough that insurers need an Act of Congress to feel safe serving legal businesses.
Pennsylvania Pushes Legalization; Pennsylvania Democrats Set Hearing
Pennsylvania was one of the week’s most active state-level stories. House Speaker Joanna McClinton said legalization could happen as soon as next year if Democrats flip three seats in November’s legislative elections. Senate Democrats held a formal policy hearing on adult-use legalization, framing it as an economic and criminal justice issue. The back-to-back developments signal that Pennsylvania’s legalization push, which has stalled repeatedly in recent sessions, is being positioned as a central electoral issue for the fall.
The Cannigma’s Take: Flipping three Senate seats would remove one veto point but not settle legalisation. The House’s last plan relied on state-run stores, while a bipartisan Senate bill uses a more conventional regulator and private market. Even with a flip, they might still find themselves inheriting a major fight over what kind of legalisation Pennsylvania wants.
Massachusetts Voters Strongly Oppose Rollback; Governor Files Veterans Bill
A University of New Hampshire poll found 71 percent of Massachusetts voters plan to vote against a November ballot measure that would roll back the state’s marijuana legalization law, suggesting the initiative faces long odds. Separately, Governor Maura Healey filed a supplemental budget bill that includes a provision allowing military veterans to access medical marijuana without a doctor’s recommendation, a move aimed at easing a barrier that advocates have long cited.
The Cannigma’s Take: The rollback initiative is stranger than a straightforward return to prohibition: it would preserve possession and gifting while eliminating licensed adult-use sales. In other words, Massachusetts would keep the demand legal while dismantling much of the legal supply. This would not only potentially be a generous gift to unregulated sellers, but would also mean surrendering a market now generating hundreds of millions in annual state tax revenue.
North Carolina Weighs State-Run Stores; Hemp THC Ban Debated
North Carolina’s governor-appointed cannabis commission is considering a recommendation to legalize marijuana sales through state-operated dispensaries supplied by a centralized warehouse, with cultivation and manufacturing left to private businesses. The state is simultaneously debating a near-total ban on hemp-derived THC beverages, drawing industry opposition from distributors who argue regulation would be more effective than prohibition.
The Cannigma’s Take: Viewed together, the state-store proposal and hemp restrictions suggest a fairly coherent philosophy: intoxicating cannabinoids may be tolerated, but preferably inside a tightly controlled channel the state can police.
Michigan Contract Ruling Opens Industry-Wide Legal Risk
A September 10 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals in a $32 million breach-of-contract case between cultivator Hello Farms and Curaleaf Holdings found that cannabis contracts may be unenforceable under federal law, given marijuana’s continued controlled-substance status. Legal analysts warn the decision opens a “mutually assured destruction” defence that any party to a cannabis contract could invoke, creating significant uncertainty across the industry at a moment when rescheduling has not yet been completed.
The Cannigma’s Take: Rescheduling is not a clean fix for this problem. The Sixth Circuit expressly held that the April 2026 change for medical marijuana did not retroactively validate a contract made in 2020, and that Schedule III status by itself would not make an otherwise federally unlawful transaction legal.
Europe and UK
ACMD Review Gets New Deadline as UK CBD Future Tied to EU
The long-delayed Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs review of the UK’s medical cannabis framework has, for the first time, been given a new target publication date, following an update to Minister of State Sarah Jones. The ACMD report has been awaited by the industry for months. In a separate development, the chair of the Food Standards Agency told its board that the long-term future of Britain’s CBD sector “really will lie with EU authorisations,” a candid acknowledgment that the domestic approval regime the industry has pursued for six years may ultimately be overtaken by Brussels-level decisions.
The Cannigma’s Take: One of the most interesting questions the government explicitly put to the ACMD is whether the growth of private cannabis prescribing has actually weakened incentives to run the clinical trials needed for wider NHS use. Britain’s paradox may be that legal access expanded while the private market simultaneously reduced the pressure to solve the evidence problem blocking public access.
Switzerland and Netherlands Publish Regulated-Market Trial Data
Two significant pieces of evidence from European regulated-market experiments emerged this week. Switzerland’s SCRIPT trial found that regulated cannabis sales changed how participants consumed cannabis but not how much they used overall. The Netherlands published initial findings from its controlled cannabis supply chain experiment, covering the period since the T0 baseline report of March 2024. Both sets of results contribute to a growing European evidence base on the public health effects of regulated access, as reported in earlier coverage of Germany’s Ekocan reports.
The Cannigma’s Take: Europe’s experiments are starting to separate legalisation from commercialisation. Swiss evidence suggests regulated access need not increase consumption and can steer users towards lower-risk products, while earlier pilot analysis found profit-oriented outlets placed less emphasis on prevention. That might be useful evidence for governments that want legal supply without building a North American-style growth industry.
Greece Tightens CBD Rules; Ireland Hemp Case Heads to High Court
Greece moved sharply in the opposite direction from its European neighbours, with a September 15 regulatory circular effectively forcing full-spectrum CBD oils and other natural extracts off shelves by demanding near-zero THC and restricting which cannabinoids may be sold. Industry voices said the rules set the sector back 15 years. In Ireland, a High Court challenge is testing whether the country can continue treating industrial hemp as a controlled drug, a case that could reshape one of the most restrictive hemp regulatory environments in Europe.
The Cannigma’s Take: Ireland’s contradiction is especially stark: farmers can be licensed to grow low-THC industrial hemp, yet domestic drug rules can make much of the harvested plant commercially unusable. The High Court case therefore goes beyond CBD – it asks whether Ireland can recognise hemp as an agricultural crop in the field and effectively turn it back into a narcotic at harvest.
Rest of World
Canada Introduces Mandatory Hemp Industry Levy
Canada brought a new mandatory 0.5 percent levy on hemp into effect last month under a federal order, replacing years of reliance on voluntary industry contributions. The levy is designed to fund research, promotion, and market development for the sector. The move marks a structural shift in how Canada finances hemp industry support and is expected to provide more stable and predictable funding going forward.
The Cannigma’s Take: The product list is revealing: the levy covers not just flower and extraction biomass but seed, stalk, straw and even root. This is better understood as an agricultural check-off system than a cannabis tax, potentially giving non-intoxicating fibre and grain markets an organised research-and-promotion mechanism of their own.
Contradictions and Tensions
Again we turn our attention to the U.S. federal rescheduling process. The DEA is simultaneously conducting a marijuana scheduling review and, according to California’s top regulator, refusing to share information with states about what rescheduling will mean in practice, while also asking those same states to provide data to the federal government. The GAO’s finding of procedural “gaps” in the scheduling process, and the Cannabis Regulators Association’s call for coordinated implementation planning, together suggest that the federal government is advancing a consequential policy change without the infrastructure to execute it coherently. This sits in direct tension with the Trump administration’s stated intention to complete rescheduling.
Sign up for bi-weekly updates, packed full of cannabis education, recipes, and tips. Your inbox will love it.
