{"id":85776,"date":"2026-04-07T08:23:34","date_gmt":"2026-04-07T16:23:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2026\/04\/07\/ohio-judge-pauses-hemp-product-ban-enforcement-saying-it-favors-marijuana-industry\/"},"modified":"2026-04-08T19:46:18","modified_gmt":"2026-04-09T03:46:18","slug":"ohio-judge-pauses-hemp-product-ban-enforcement-saying-it-favors-marijuana-industry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2026\/04\/07\/ohio-judge-pauses-hemp-product-ban-enforcement-saying-it-favors-marijuana-industry\/","title":{"rendered":"Ohio Judge Pauses Hemp Product Ban Enforcement, Saying It Favors Marijuana Industry"},"content":{"rendered":"<\/p>\n

\u201cThe practical effect is to immunize Ohio\u2019s in-state marijuana industry, which Ohio law requires to have an in-state physical presence, from out-of-state competition with respect to federally legal hemp products otherwise sold in interstate commerce.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

By Phillip Smith, The American Hemp Monitor<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

A Sandusky County court of common pleas judge has ruled that Ohio\u2019s new law banning the sale of intoxicating hemp-derived cannabinoids<\/a> except at licensed marijuana retailers is likely unconstitutional and has issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Fremont Police Department from enforcing it.<\/p>\n

The ruling impacts only the Fremont Police Department and \u201call who may act in concert with them\u201d and remains in effect only until April 28. It comes in a case brought by Seattle-based Cycling Frog, a hemp cannabinoid beverage company that sells its products throughout Ohio, including Sandusky County.<\/p>\n

Judge Jeremiah Ray held that the new law created by the passage of Senate Bill 56 appears to violate the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. That law effectively gives the state\u2019s licensed marijuana dispensaries a monopoly over what are federally legal hemp-derived products, Ray held. (Congress voted to radically restrict hemp-derived cannabinoids last November, but that law does not go into effect until this coming November.)<\/p>\n

\u201cThe practical effect is to immunize Ohio\u2019s in-state marijuana industry, which Ohio law requires to have an in-state physical presence, from out-of-state competition with respect to federally legal hemp products otherwise sold in interstate commerce,\u201d Ray said, noting the law also discriminates against in-state businesses.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe parallel intrastate discrimination is no defense to the interstate discrimination. Indeed, the existence of parallel intrastate discrimination makes the protectionist effect of the ordinance more acute,\u201d he wrote. \u201cThis is because the licensed dispensaries and their attendant supply chain benefit from a lack of competition from either inside or outside Ohio. This is, thus, inherently discriminatory on its face.\u201d<\/p>\n

The attorney representing Cycling Frog, Andy Mayle, said he asked Ray to make the temporary restraining order a class action that would block all law enforcement agencies in the state from enforcing the law.<\/p>\n

\u201cThat\u2019s the next step in the case,\u201d Mayle said<\/a>. \u201cIf he does, then basically the bill\u2014with respect to the traditional hemp industry\u2014will not be enforceable in Ohio.\u201d<\/p>\n

The regulation of interstate commerce is the province of Congress, not the state of Ohio, Mayle added.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf Ohio elects to allow these goods in Ohio, which they have\u2014they\u2019re just calling them marijuana now, and they can be bought at dispensaries\u2014they can\u2019t discriminate against the goods on the basis of their origin, which is the practical effect of the redefinition of hemp,\u201d he said. \u201cWhat they\u2019ve done is criminalize interstate commerce. This is just a garden variety Dormant Commerce Clause violation.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

State officials disagree, and Attorney General Dave Yost (R) has filed a motion to intervene in the Sandusky case, arguing that he has the right to defend state laws created by SB 56 and that the law required consistent enforcement statewide.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe attorney general\u2019s participation in this case will ensure statewide consistency between the various actions challenging SB 56,\u201d Yost wrote, pointing to pending action in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas. \u201cRepresented by the same counsel representing the plaintiff here, the Saucy Seltzer plaintiffs\u2019 motion for temporary restraining order was denied on March 19.\u201d<\/p>\n

In that case, however, while the presiding judge denied the hemp company\u2019s request for a temporary restraining order, she also set an April 10 date for a preliminary injunction hearing on the issue.<\/p>\n

A group representing the state\u2019s licensed marijuana industry, the Ohio Cannabis Coalition, criticized the hemp industry for challenging SB 56<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe hemp industry has continuously worked to exploit a loophole in an effort to profit off of consumers. That continues to be true today,\u201d coalition executive director David Bowling said. \u201cSB 56 was meant to protect Ohioans from unsafe, untested products. The Ohio legislature and federal government are in line on this issue.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

This story was first published by The American Hemp Monitor.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

Photo elements courtesy of rawpixel<\/a> and Philip Steffan<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

The post Ohio Judge Pauses Hemp Product Ban Enforcement, Saying It Favors Marijuana Industry<\/a> appeared first on Marijuana Moment<\/a>.<\/p>\n


\n
\nRead More: Ohio Judge Pauses Hemp Product Ban Enforcement, Saying It Favors Marijuana Industry<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cThe practical effect is to immunize Ohio\u2019s in-state marijuana industry, which Ohio law requires to have an in-state physical presence, from out-of-state competition with respect to federally legal hemp products otherwise sold in interstate commerce.\u201d By Phillip Smith, The American Hemp Monitor A Sandusky County court of common pleas judgeContinue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":457,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"false","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[81],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85776"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/457"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=85776"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85776\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":85777,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85776\/revisions\/85777"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=85776"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=85776"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=85776"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}