Judge Orders 'Illicit Cannabis' Signs Removed Amid Controversy Over New York's Cannabis Enforcement
OG Article: here
View our Fair Use Policy: here
A New York State Supreme Court justice has issued a temporary restraining order allowing the removal of "illicit cannabis" signs placed by state regulators on two Manhattan hemp stores following enforcement raids. This ruling is part of a broader legal pushback by hemp store owners against what they describe as heavy-handed and unconstitutional enforcement tactics.
The Background
The signs, posted by the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) after raiding shops accused of selling illicit cannabis, have sparked intense debate. Store owners argue that these signs, often placed without formal hearings or adjudication, unfairly label them as lawbreakers. The fines for removing the signs without authorization further complicate matters.
The legal challenges arise amid a broader effort by Governor Kathy Hochul's administration to regulate the state's cannabis industry and curb unlicensed marijuana sales. However, hemp store owners claim they are being unfairly swept up in a regulatory crackdown that targets marijuana operations.
Legal Challenges and Judicial Rulings
Joshua S. Bauchner, an attorney representing several hemp store owners, welcomed the temporary restraining order, stating it reflects growing judicial concerns over the legality of these enforcement actions.
Unconstitutional Actions Alleged: The petition for the CBD Kratom stores argues that the OCM and law enforcement are imposing penalties and branding stores as criminal without due process.
Broader Concerns: In a separate Queens case, Justice Kevin J. Kerrigan ruled that the New York City Sheriff’s Office overstepped its authority by raiding and shutting down a hemp store without a warrant and ignoring an administrative judge's findings.
Pending Litigation: A larger lawsuit in Albany challenges the OCM and Cannabis Control Board’s enforcement tactics, accusing them of "trampling" hemp retailers’ rights by treating them as unlicensed marijuana sellers.
Hemp Industry Concerns
The enforcement actions have devastated hemp retailers, many of whom claim they were unaware of new rules adopted by the Cannabis Control Board last year. These rules tightened regulations on hemp-derived products, banning synthetic cannabinoids and isomerized compounds that were previously allowed.
Key concerns include:
Loss of Business: Hemp retailers argue that the abrupt regulatory changes and product seizures have crippled their operations.
Regulatory Confusion: Store owners claim they believed their products were compliant with federal law under the 2018 Farm Bill.
Disproportionate Enforcement: Store owners describe raids as aggressive, involving heavily armed law enforcement, turning off security cameras, and sealing entrances.
What’s Next?
The next major ruling in the Albany lawsuit is expected in December. It could determine whether hemp retailers will receive further legal protections from the state’s enforcement measures.
As New York continues to grapple with regulating its cannabis industry, this case underscores the challenges of balancing oversight, fair enforcement, and support for businesses in an evolving legal landscape.
Comments