We get a ton of queries about whether or not it is legal to import hemp into the U.S. It is a complex query without having a clear answer. We do know that the Drug Enforcement Administration has confirmed that the importation of cannabis plant material that falls outdoors of the Controlled Substance Act’s definition of “marihuana” (e.g., the mature stalks and seeds incapable of germination) is not in violation of the CSA or associated laws and regulations distinct to importing goods. That restricted exception does not cover other components of the cannabis plant, like hemp flower. The 2014 Farm Bill enables for the restricted cultivation of industrial hemp, but that bill needs that hemp be grown pursuant to an agricultural pilot plan in compliance with state law. Hemp grown in an additional nation cannot meet these inherently domestic needs. The 2014 Farm Bill is nonetheless in impact as the U.S. Division of Agriculture (“USDA”) is preparing to regulate the industrial cultivation below the 2018 Farm Bill. Nonetheless, the 2018 Farm Bill has currently altered the CSA’s definition of marijuana to exclude hemp and that provision is not dependent on USDA regulation.

The complex query was addressed in component in by a federal court in California. In November 2015, Revolutionary Nutraceuticals, LLC placed an order for hemp from Spain to L&M All-natural Hemp. L&M shipped the Spanish-grown hemp along with documentation displaying that the material contained in every single package was cultivated from seeds certified from hemp in Spain and test benefits displaying that the plant material contained .two% THC. On December six, 2015, the Division of Homeland Safety (“DHS”) seized the hemp shipment at the Los Angeles International Airport. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) tested the shipment and located that it contained CBD.

Revolutionary Nutraceuticals filed a petition with CBP, looking for administrative overview of the seizure. CBP denied the petition since CBD is a compound that naturally happens in marijuana and thus the shipment met the definition of marijuana in the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”). CBP also stated that “ hemp flowers” are not excluded from the CSA definition.

In spite of this, Revolutionary Nutraceuticals continued to import hemp from Spain and CBP seized shipments in January and November of 2017. On March 14, 2018, CBP once more seized an Revolutionary Nutraceuticals hemp shipment, this time at the Louisville, Kentucky airport. Nonetheless, CBP informed Revolutionary Nutraceuticals that the shipment could be released if the enterprise executed a “Hold Harmless Agreement” agreeing not to sue CBP for damages associated to the seizure and requiring Revolutionary Nutraceuticals to spend charges for delivery or retrieval.

On July two, 2018, Revolutionary Nutraceuticals filed a complaint against the United States of America in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, looking for the following claims for relief:

(1) an injunction and/or declaratory relief ordering the United States government [(the “Defendant”)] not to detain, seize, summarily forfeit, or destroy any future shipments of hemp plant supplies containing [ CBD] and/or .three% or much less of [THC]

(two) an injunction and/or declaratory relief ordering Defendant to deliver timely notice and a hearing to owners and shippers of detained or seized hemp supplies

(three) declaratory and injunctive relief ordering Defendant not to destroy and to return all seized hemp supplies and

(four) monetary reimbursement for all hemp supplies seized and destroyed by Defendant.

In response, the government filed a motion to dismiss all of Revolutionary Nutraceuticals’ claims.

On March 28, 2019, the Court issued an order (obtainable right here, courtesy of Hemp Market Each day) granting the government’s motion to dismiss Revolutionary Nutraceuticals’ 1st and second claim for mootness and granting dismissal of the fourth claim due to Revolutionary Nutraceuticals failure to determine the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity. Sovereign immunity is a legal doctrine saying you cannot sue the government for damages unless the government says you can.

In denying Revolutionary Nutraceuticals’ 1st and second claims, the Court determined the situation was moot. Below Short article III of the U.S. Constitution, federal courts can only rule on actual, ongoing instances or controversies. The parties have to have some skin in the game in order for a federal court to have jurisdiction. Mootness happens when a single or a lot more situations modify generating the controversy moot. This can take place due to a modify in law, which is precisely why the Court denied Revolutionary Nutraceuticals 1st and second claims:

Section 12619 of the 2018 Farm Bill amended the CSA definition of marijuana so that it now involves an exemption for hemp, defined as “any part” of the Cannabis sativa L. plant “with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not a lot more than .three % on a dry weight basis.” Id. Below this new exemption, any future shipments of industrial hemp item containing much less than .three% THC by dry weight will clearly fall outdoors the CSA definition of marijuana and will not be topic to seizure.

[. . .]

Any uncertainty as to the legal status of Plaintiff’s shipments below the pre-2018 Farm Bill regime has considering the fact that been eliminated by the Bill’s amendment of the CSA’s definition of marijuana.

The Court appears to indicate that future importers of hemp will no longer face the seizures that plagued Revolutionary Nutraceuticals. Whilst tends to make sense offered that hemp is excluded from the CSA’s definition of marijuana, it does not imply that CBP’s days of seizing hemp are more than. The distinction among hemp and marijuana is not clear. It is determined primarily based on the presence of a particular compound, THC. Hemp shipments could include documentation displaying that a item is hemp and not marijuana, but that does not imply that the inquiry stops there. CBP will have to have a way to figure out the distinction among marijuana and hemp. This could be a dilemma in practice since hemp, specially in raw type, has a restricted shelf life.

The takeaway from the Revolutionary Nutraceuticals order appears to be that since hemp is no longer a controlled substance below the CSA, that importing hemp does not violate the CSA. In practice, importing hemp nonetheless presents important danger since CBP could nonetheless seize hemp on suspicion of it getting marijuana. Everyone searching to import hemp into this nation really should program accordingly.