The State of Tennessee and the City of Spring Hill will reportedly compensate two hemp businesses for their losses after a seizure of products in May this year.
Spring Hill Police Department reportedly seized 231 pounds of products from the two businesses in Columbia. After the event, a lawsuit was filed claiming warrants didn’t allow for seizure of the hemp products. The lawsuit sought damages of $1,350,607 plus attorney fees.
The lawsuit was partly based on District Attorney Brent Cooper’s alleged claim that hemp and marijuana were “the same damn thing.”
“Today, that statement has proven both legally and financially costly,” says a press release attributed to law firm Litson PLLC. “While the authorities have not admitted wrongdoing, the substantial settlement speaks volumes about the merits of the businesses’ claims.”
The settlement was for USD $735,000.
Tennessee has legalized the cultivation of hemp and according to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation defines it as Cannabis sativa containing less than 0.3% THC. Over this level and it is considered marijuana, which is still illegal in Tennessee and at a federal level.
In other hemp related news out of the state, new rules are scheduled to go into effect on December 26, 2024 stipulating the combined amount of delta-9 and THCa must be under 0.3% in order to be recognised as hemp. THCa undergoes a chemical change when heated and and turns into THC. This rule change will mean THCa flower will no longer be able to be sold and would ban a large majority of the hemp flower products sold in in the state’s stores.
The Tennessee Growers Coalition is one of the parties suing the Tennessee Department of Agriculture (TDA) over the rule. It claims the industry has been self regulated since 2018 without any major issues.
“The TDA’s decision to ignore the majority of the 19,000 comments made in opposition of the rules is just one of the many reasons why we are suing them,” says the group.
It says the TDA pushed ahead with the new rules despite TGC’s efforts to warn the Department they were not going to be taken well by the industry.
“We met with the TDA prior to the filling of the proposed rules, on the TDA’s request. Unfortunately, our warning was not taken seriously.”
