A few US states may have over-corrected course in their rushing to modify regulations to cover hemp-derived delta-8 THC.
Different states have taken different approaches. In Colorado, for example, they banned THC isomers like delta-8 in products if they had been chemically converted from a naturally occurring cannabinoid, like CBD.
Another approach, like that taken in Oregon, was only to allow delta-8 sales in licensed dispensaries, thus subjecting such products to stricter testing and labelling requirements.
However, states such as Kentucky, South Carolina and Texas have recently interpreted their statutes in a way that creates more questions than answers.
What’s ‘hot’ and what’s not?
Kentucky’s Department of Agriculture has told CBD-Intel that no amount of delta-8 THC is legal in the state. Texas has similarly stated that no amount of THC isomers are legal.
What about trace amounts of THC isomers that could be present in hemp plants? If an otherwise compliant hemp plant (i.e. with less than 0.3% delta-9 THC) contains traces amounts of THC isomers like delta-8 or delta-10, are those plants now considered “hot” and subject to remediation or destruction? Must hemp processors now extract these trace amounts of naturally occurring cannabinoids to make an extract legal?
The recent opinion by South Carolina’s solicitor general oddly states that all THC isomers except for up to 0.3% delta-9 THC in hemp are controlled substances but then states that such a strict interpretation should not apply to naturally occurring THC isomers present in hemp without citing any authority for why those trace amounts would be exempt.
Would “trace amounts” of other controlled substances, such as cocaine, be permitted? Surely not. Ultimately, these recent opinions are illogical and create more confusion than solutions.
– Anthony Traurig CBD-Intel staff