A federal judge has upheld Alaska’s right to restrict the sale of intoxicating hemp-derived products, reinforcing state-level efforts to rein in a loosely regulated market that has exploded in recent years due to gaps in federal law.
The May 23 ruling by U.S. Magistrate Judge Kyle Reardon dismissed a challenge from the Alaska Industrial Hemp Association and other plaintiffs, who argued that Alaska’s rules banning products such as delta-8 and delta-10 THC violated the U.S. Constitution and the 2018 Farm Bill. The lawsuit failed to demonstrate any “genuine issue of material fact,” Reardon concluded.
The case arose after Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources enacted new rules in 2023 banning the sale of industrial hemp products containing any detectable amount of delta-9 THC or any synthetic cannabinoids. That move, directed by Gov. Mike Dunleavy following recommendations from an expert panel, effectively banned hemp-derived intoxicants from being sold outside licensed marijuana dispensaries.
Download: Legal and regulatory status of intoxicating hemp, state-by-state
Assistant Attorney General Kevin Higgins, who defended the state in court, said the state acted out of “public safety concerns” to regulate “an emerging industry.”
States fill regulatory gap
The Alaska ruling is the latest example of state governments stepping in to control intoxicating hemp-derived compounds in the absence of federal regulation. These substances—often synthesized from CBD—include delta-8 THC, delta-10 THC, HHC, and others capable of producing marijuana-like effects.
Loopholes in the 2018 Farm Bill allowed such products to be marketed nationwide with minimal oversight, no mandatory age restrictions, and packaging that often targets children. The result has been what many in the industry call a regulatory “free-for-all,” with states responding in vastly different ways.
Some states have banned intoxicating hemp products entirely. Others, like Alaska and California, have restricted access to adult-use channels or imposed strict potency limits and testing requirements. California’s emergency rules implemented in March prohibit the sale of any hemp product with detectable THC, even those containing non-intoxicating CBD, unless they are sold to consumers over 21 and meet defined dosage limits.
Divided hemp economy
These regulatory moves have deepened a divide within the hemp industry itself. On one side are traditional stakeholders focused on hemp’s value in food, fiber, regenerative agriculture, and industrial markets. On the other are cannabinoid market players—some operating responsibly, others not—who pivoted to intoxicating products after the collapse of the CBD market.
Many long-term operators warn that the rise of unregulated intoxicants is blurring the public’s understanding of hemp and marijuana. Researchers and supply chain leaders fear this confusion could harm public trust, investment potential, and access to federal research funding.
Eyes on the Farm Bill
With Congress preparing to consider a long-overdue Farm Bill later this year, many in the hemp sector see a critical opportunity to resolve the issue at the federal level. Proposed reforms include redefining hemp to exclude synthetic intoxicants, introducing national potency standards, mandating age restrictions, and establishing labeling rules.
Industry voices are urging lawmakers to draw a clear legal and regulatory line between legitimate, non-intoxicating hemp-derived compounds like CBD and products designed to mimic marijuana.