For a state that was the first to adopt medical marijuana and relatively early to adopt recreational marijuana (marijuana is only defined here as marijuana and not marijuana), California is the worst in the league in terms of sensible cannabis-derived CBD policies One of the states. Therefore, in legislation aimed at “legalizing” CBD, absolutely no one would be surprised (AB-45 with SB-235), the state is now about to launch delta-8 THC.

Before explaining what the fate of delta-8 might be, I will provide a short CliffsNotes on how bad California’s handling of CBD is:

• 2018: The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) published a FAQ on its website in July 2018, deeming that the intake of CBD is illegal (check my analysis of these FAQs) Here). In the following years (according to the analysis of the bill attached to AB-45, CDPH issued 13 violation notices, 7 voluntary condemnation and destruction supervision letters, and 9 embargoes-all of which did not enact real regulations! Places! Departmental public health departments are also actively involved in law enforcement.
• 2019: California tried to pass AB-228 but failed, which would legalize CBD.
• 2020: California tried to pass but failed AB-2827 with AB-2028 Both of these goals are to legalize CBD.
• 2021: AB-45 and SB-235 both pass the California State Assembly and Senate, respectively.I have summarized these bills Here with Here.

The second link above describes in detail the provisions of these bills aimed at banning any kind of smokable cannabis products. I think these bills are out of reach. This is partly due to the huge industry backlash facing the marijuana ban and severely shrinking the cannabis market grown in the state, partly due to general political reasons and opposition from the cannabis industry and elsewhere.

However, another feature of these two bills does not seem to have been extensively analyzed before, and it involves delta-8 (and delta-10) THC.If the bill is passed in its current form, it could mean the end of delta-8 Another jurisdiction.

Many people don’t understand the difference between different forms of THC, so I will make a brief summary. Delta-9 THC is the main intoxicating cannabinoid found in marijuana (here again called marijuana in California, although “marijuana” also technically includes marijuana). Delta-8 and delta-10 are also cannabinoids found in hemp and marijuana, but they are usually expressed naturally in very low amounts.

Delta-8 especially recently took off nationwide. Like delta-9, it is intoxicating, but to a lesser degree. Because it is usually not found in large amounts in hemp, it is usually obtained by converting hemp CBD through a chemical process. This means that California has a huge market for hemp biomass that can be used to make delta-8.

The problem is that the proposed bill will define “THC” to include delta-8, -9, and -10. The problem is that hemp product manufacturers need to prove that the THC content of the original extract they use does not exceed 0.3%. Although there are definitely some ambiguities here, they are likely to be resolved in the final draft or regulations.Our prediction result is very likely that hemp products will not contain more than 0.3% any A type of THC, including delta-8. This will make the market for such products very small or non-existent.

The greater challenge based on this new definition is that it modifies the standard Total THC Tests to include all forms of THC. Recall that the state and federal governments require checking THC to determine if cannabis contains 0.3% or more THC plus Converted THC acid (THCA) will be converted when heated. There are different ways to do this, but the end result is that if there is a certain amount of THCA, cannabis containing 0.29% THC may exceed the legal threshold. THC is now defined as including all forms of THC, which may be more difficult to satisfy the test in some cases (even though delta-8 and -10 are usually expressed in very, very small quantities).

Like I said above, I think these bills are out of reach. But it will be interesting to see if they are passed in their current form and state and local regulators decide how to handle this situation. For more updates, please continue to follow the Mina Law Blog.