Skip to main content

Tag: Texas Hemp Reporter

The TCUP Math Problem: How a Busted Spreadsheet Rewrote the Medical Cannabis Map

Written by Jay Maguire on . Posted in Legislative.

There is a particular kind of regulatory failure that does not arrive with subpoenas or headlines. It slips in quietly, dressed up in spreadsheets and procedural language, hiding in a denominator that nobody bothers to question. It looks clean, professional, even defensible—right up until someone actually runs the numbers.

 

That is precisely what has happened in the Texas Compassionate Use Program expansion under House Bill 46. The Department of Public Safety published a scoring rubric that promised a simple, balanced framework: four categories, each carrying equal weight. What the State implemented was not that framework. It was something materially different, and the difference is not philosophical or interpretive. It is mathematical, and it changed who won.

 

The Rule the State Published

DPS told applicants, in plain English, that four categories would each account for 25 percent of the final score. Those categories—Security and Infrastructure, Accountability, Financial Responsibility, and Technical and Technological Ability—were presented as equal partners in the evaluation process.

There was nothing subtle about that promise. It was repeated in the rubric, relied upon in applicant preparation, and understood as the governing structure of the competition. Four equal slices of the pie, adding cleanly to one hundred percent. That is the rule applicants were told they were competing under.

 

The Structure Beneath the Rule

Beneath that clean promise, however, sat a more complicated reality. Each category contained a different number of scoring items. Security and Infrastructure included fourteen separate elements. Accountability included twelve. Financial Responsibility included eight. Technical and Technological Ability, the category that speaks most directly to whether an operator can actually run a compliant medical cannabis program, included just four.

Each of those items was scored by three evaluators on a scale of zero to five hundred. That structure produces dramatically different raw scoring ceilings. A perfect score in Security and Infrastructure reaches twenty-one thousand points, while a perfect score in Technical and Technological Ability tops out at six thousand.

There is nothing inherently improper about uneven category sizes. Any seasoned regulator or procurement officer has seen rubrics where some sections are more granular than others. The critical requirement, and the one that determines whether the system is fair, is normalization. If the State promises equal weighting, then each category must be scaled to ensure it actually contributes equally, regardless of how many individual items it contains.

What Equal Weighting Actually Requires

If you want four categories to count equally, the math is straightforward. You do not sum raw totals. You convert each category into a percentage of its own maximum possible score. Once each category is expressed as a percentage, you then apply equal weighting across those percentages.

In practical terms, that means taking an applicant’s score in each exhibit, dividing it by that exhibit’s maximum possible score, and then weighting each result at twenty-five percent. When you add those four weighted values together, you get a final score that reflects the rule the State said it would follow.

This is not exotic mathematics. It is standard practice across regulated industries, procurement systems, and competitive licensing frameworks. It is how you translate unequal components into equal influence.

 

 

What the State Actually Did

Instead of normalizing each category to its own maximum, DPS applied a single divisor across all four exhibits. Every raw score, regardless of whether it came from a category with fourteen items or one with four, was divided by twelve.

At first glance, that may look like a harmless simplification. It is not. When you divide unequal totals by the same number, you do not equalize them. You preserve their imbalance and carry it forward into the final score.

The result is a set of “Applicant Scores” that look standardized but are anything but. Security and Infrastructure retains a ceiling of 1,750 points, while Technical and Technological Ability is capped at just 500. When those numbers are combined, the weighting shifts dramatically. Security and Infrastructure ends up driving roughly thirty-seven percent of the final score. Accountability contributes about thirty-two percent. Financial Responsibility falls to roughly twenty-one percent. Technical and Technological Ability, the category that should stand shoulder to shoulder with the others, is reduced to just over ten percent.

That is not a rounding discrepancy or a clerical oversight. That is a complete reweighting of the system the State said it was using.

Why This Is Not a Close Call

There is no gray area here. Dividing unequal numbers by the same constant does not normalize them. It preserves their proportional differences. A category with a maximum score of twenty-one thousand will remain three and a half times more influential than a category capped at six thousand if both are subjected to the same divisor.

This is arithmetic, not interpretation. Once the method is set, the outcome follows automatically. The State did not accidentally drift away from equal weighting. It implemented a formula that could never produce equal weighting.

The result is that the rule applicants relied upon and the method used to evaluate them are not the same.

This Was Not an Isolated Mistake

If this were a one-off inconsistency buried in a single application, it might be dismissed as a transcription error. It is not. A review of virtually every scoring entry across both phases of the licensing process shows the same method applied without exception. Raw totals were divided by twelve, and those results were summed to produce final rankings.

This was the system. It was applied consistently. It was just not the system the State said it would use.

 

What Happens When You Fix the Math

When the applications are recalculated using the correct method—normalizing each category to its own maximum and then weighting them equally—the rankings change in ways that matter.

The very top of the list remains relatively stable. Companies that performed well across the board continue to perform well. The disruption occurs in the middle tier, where licenses are actually awarded.

Under the corrected calculation, three companies that received conditional licenses fall out of the top twelve. In their place, three different applicants move into winning position. Those new entrants are Texas-based operators who performed exceptionally well in Technical and Technological Ability, the very category that was most heavily discounted under the State’s method.

What emerges is not randomness or noise. It is a clear pattern. The flawed formula elevated categories with more scoring items—primarily infrastructure—and suppressed the influence of technical competence. When you restore the intended weighting, applicants who excelled in technical execution rise accordingly.

Why This Matters Beyond the Applicants

It is tempting to treat this as a dispute between competing companies, but that framing misses the point. Every license issued under this system determines where dispensaries are built, which companies invest capital in Texas, and how patients access medical cannabis.

For nearly a decade, Texas operated with just three dispensing organizations serving a vast and geographically dispersed patient population. House Bill 46 was supposed to correct that imbalance and bring the program into alignment with the needs of the state.

If the licensing process that governs that expansion is built on a misapplied formula, the consequences are not abstract. They are felt in the placement of facilities, the availability of products, and the ability of patients to obtain treatment without driving across half the state.

This is not a paperwork problem. It is a capacity allocation problem with real-world effects.

The State’s Position and Its Exposure

The State represented to applicants that each category would carry equal weight. Applicants relied on that representation in structuring their submissions. That reliance is not incidental; it is the foundation of the competitive process.

When the implemented methodology diverges from the published rule, the issue moves beyond process into legitimacy. The State is no longer simply defending a policy choice. It is defending a result that does not align with the rule it set.

That is a difficult position to maintain, particularly in a regulated industry where credibility is currency. Every future licensing decision, every enforcement action, and every legislative hearing will be measured against whether the State followed its own rules here.

Author’s Note:

This article has been revised to more clearly present the scoring calculations underlying the Texas Compassionate Use Program licensing process. The updates expand the mathematical explanation and align the analysis with the methodology described in the State’s published rubric.

CROSSHAIRS OF HEMP MEDIA

Written by getblazed on . Posted in Cannabis News.

A Strange Connection: Judge Maya Guerra Gamble, Alex Jones, and the Texas Hemp Industry

By Russell Dowden

Publisher, Blazed Magazine / Texas Hemp Reporter

There are moments where media, law, and industry collide in ways that feel almost pre-written. For me—and for Judge Maya Guerra Gamble—those intersections have happened more than once, each time with real consequences.

From Infowars to HBO: A Shared Timeline

In HBO’s “The Truth vs. Alex Jones,” I appear in the opening minutes, providing context on Alex Jones’ early days in Austin media. In 2012, I served as General Manager of Infowars Magazine, working inside the ecosystem that would later become the center of a landmark defamation case.

That case ultimately landed in Judge Gamble’s courtroom.

The $49 Million Judgment

In November 2022, Judge Gamble upheld a Texas jury’s award of roughly $49 million in damages against Alex Jones in the Sandy Hook case. It was a defining moment for media accountability—and a surreal one for those of us who had once worked in that orbit.

The Sweet Sensi Case: Where It Got Personal

The next intersection wasn’t just professional—it became personal.

During the Sweet Sensi litigation, my publications—Texas Hemp Reporter and related titles—were entered into evidence by both legal teams during discovery. That’s rare air for a publisher: not just covering a case, but becoming part of the record.

Both the plaintiff and defendant were active advertisers, and coverage of the dispute became a focal point in how the case was perceived publicly.

Tensions escalated beyond the courtroom.

On October 25, 2024, Greg Autry of Sweet Sensi ran a paid advertisement in The Austin Chronicle that directly attacked Wyatt Larew of Wyatt Purp and the Texas Hemp Reporter. It was a public shot—aimed not just at a competitor, but at our coverage.

The verdict changed that narrative.

A Texas jury ultimately found constructive fraud and other violations against Sweet Sensi—effectively vindicating Wyatt Larew and the Texas Hemp Reporter’s initial reporting on the case.

For us, it wasn’t just a legal outcome—it was validation.

Back in Court: The Fight for THCA Flower

Now, in 2026, Judge Gamble is again presiding over a case with major implications for Texas hemp.

With THCA flower representing roughly 50% of hemp product sales, the current litigation could determine the industry’s future.

So far, Judge Gamble has:

Granted a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO)

Allowed continued sales of THCA flower—for now

Set a Temporary Injunction Hearing for Friday, April 23 at 9 AM

That hearing is expected to be pivotal.

It could decide:

Whether THCA flower remains legal in Texas

How aggressively the state can regulate hemp moving forward

Whether small operators survive the next phase of enforcement

A Pattern of Consequence

Across three very different cases, a pattern emerges:

Alex Jones → financial accountability at scale

Sweet Sensi → industry-level precedent and media scrutiny

THCA litigation → the future of hemp commerce in Texas

And in each instance, Judge Maya Guerra Gamble has been at the center.

A Publisher in the Crosscurrents

From appearing in an HBO documentary about Alex Jones…

To having my magazines entered into court as evidence…

To now covering—and being part of—the ongoing fight over hemp…

This isn’t just reporting from the sidelines.

It’s being in the middle of it.

What Happens Next

All eyes are now on the April 23rd injunction hearing.

What’s decided in that courtroom could:

Reshape the Texas hemp market

Determine the fate of THCA flower

And once again place Judge Gamble at the center of a high-impact ruling

Final Word

Some stories you cover.

Others, you live through.

This one has been both.

 

Texas Is Quietly Building the Case for Another THC Crackdown

Written by Jay Maguire on . Posted in Legislative.

Senate Health and Human Services Committee given interim charge

The next major fight over hemp-derived THC in Texas is already taking shape, and it is not beginning with a neutral policy review. It is unfolding just as the industry’s legal team prepares to challenge the Department of State Health Services’ permanent hemp rule in court, with lawyers arguing that the agency repeated the same kind of administrative overreach at issue in the Sky Marketing litigation and again tried to do by rule what Texas law did not authorize it to do by statute. In that telling, the state did not simply adopt an aggressive interpretation of its power. It used bureaucratic means to pursue a prohibitionist outcome that critics say could not be cleanly achieved through the ordinary constitutional process. Against that backdrop, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick’s new interim charge to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee looks less like an open inquiry than the next move in a coordinated campaign.

 

The charge directs lawmakers to study the “societal impacts” of THC product consumption, with particular emphasis on increased health care costs, mental health emergency detentions, THC-induced psychotic disorder, and criminal justice burdens. What it does not ask is just as revealing. It does not ask whether Texas has created a workable regulatory framework for lawful hemp products. It does not ask whether patients and consumers retain meaningful access. It does not ask whether DSHS exceeded its statutory authority. And it does not ask whether prohibition would impose costs of its own. The structure of the assignment points in one direction: build a record of harm, quantify the burden, and prepare the argument for a more aggressive legislative response in 2027.

 

That is why this development should be understood as more than another committee study. In Texas politics, the decisive work often begins long before a bill is filed. Interim charges shape hearings, hearings shape reports, and reports become the respectable-looking foundation for policies whose conclusion was plain from the start. Here, the real question does not appear to be what kind of hemp policy Texas needs. It appears to be how much damage THC can be made to represent on paper.

The Committee Leadership Tellst The Story

Lois Kolkhorst is central to this process not because she is the Senate’s most theatrical prohibitionist, but because she is something more consequential: a disciplined institutional loyalist with a long record of aligning herself with leadership when it matters. Her history on cannabis policy shows occasional room for tightly cabined compassionate-access arguments, but little evidence of any appetite to break with the Senate’s power structure.

 

As a House committee chair, she allowed a harsher marijuana-related measure to die without advancing it, then later voted for the Compassionate Use Act. That record did not make her a reformer. It made her a politician willing to permit narrow exceptions without becoming the architect of broader change. When the decisive test arrived in the 89th Legislature, she voted for SB 3, the Patrick-backed total THC ban later vetoed by Governor Abbott. There is no indication she tried to soften its essential purpose or publicly distance herself from its prohibitionist thrust.

 

Just as important, Senator Charles Perry serves as vice chair of the committee. The Texas Senate’s official materials identify Perry as vice chair of Health and Human Services, alongside Kolkhorst as chair. That is not a minor organizational detail. Perry has spent years positioning himself as one of the hemp industry’s most consistent antagonists, and his presence in the committee’s second-ranking role signals that this will not be a neutral venue. If Kolkhorst embodies the institutional discipline of Senate leadership, Perry brings the ideological zeal. Together they form a leadership structure far more likely to treat hemp-derived THC as a target to be suppressed than a market to be sensibly regulated.

 

That matters because hearings are not passive events. Chairs and vice chairs shape tone, sequence witnesses, frame questions, and decide what kinds of testimony are treated as serious. On an issue as contested as hemp-derived THC, that kind of procedural control can matter as much as any floor vote.

Dan Patrick’s Method Is Becoming Plain

 

Seen in sequence, the pattern is getting harder to ignore. Since 2025, the anti-THC campaign in Texas has moved on several fronts at once. The Legislature established the rhetoric. The executive and administrative apparatus imposed immediate burdens. Now the interim study process is being positioned to generate the official record that can be cited when lawmakers return in 2027.

 

This is how a durable prohibition agenda is assembled. First comes the moral panic. Then come the regulatory burdens. Then comes the official study that translates political claims into findings, recommendations, and citations suitable for legislation. By the time the next bill is filed, its supporters can present the outcome not as ideology, but as the sober conclusion of a state-sanctioned review. That is the political value of a charge like this one. It allows a predetermined conclusion to wear the costume of public-health diligence.

Why the Timing Matters

The timing is especially revealing. Texas has just finalized DSHS permanent rules that took effect at the end of March 2026, and those rules are already facing legal challenge over whether the agency exceeded its authority, particularly in its treatment of total THC and THCA. The dispute is not merely technical. It goes to whether an agency can effectively redraw the legal boundaries of the hemp market through rulemaking when the Legislature itself did not clearly do so.

 

From that perspective, Patrick’s interim charge looks like a hedge as much as a study. If the courts conclude that DSHS overreached, the Legislature will want a ready-made predicate for direct statutory action in 2027. A committee record saturated with testimony about psychosis, emergency detentions, and public cost would serve that purpose well. It prepares the ground for the next prohibition push in case the current regulatory approach proves legally unstable.

Kolkhorst’s Expanded Influence Raises the Stakes

 

The memo’s most significant observation may be that Kolkhorst’s power now extends beyond this single interim charge. She was also appointed to chair the Sunset Advisory Commission at a moment when agencies including the Health and Human Services Commission and DSHS will be under review. That creates a notable concentration of authority in one senator already closely aligned with Senate leadership and now positioned at the center of both the THC study and the broader institutional review of the agencies shaping hemp regulation.

 

That dual role matters because it links narrative power with procedural power. The same political ecosystem that will study THC’s alleged harms will also be positioned to evaluate the agencies enforcing the state’s hemp rules. For the hemp industry and for the broader public, the question is whether that concentration of influence will produce meaningful scrutiny of agency overreach or simply a more coordinated effort to ratify it.

Federal Pressure May Tighten the Squeeze

 

The state fight is also unfolding against a shifting federal backdrop. The memo notes that a federal continuing resolution provision set to take effect in November 2026 could move federal policy toward a total-THC standard and push many intoxicating hemp products back toward Schedule I treatment under federal law. If that happens, the Texas Senate will enter the 2027 session armed with both a state-level prohibition narrative and a harder federal environment to cite in support of further restrictions.

 

For prohibition advocates, that is politically useful terrain. It allows them to argue that Texas is not overreacting, but merely aligning itself with an emerging trend. Whether that trend is analytically sound or opportunistically invoked is another question. In legislative combat, the appearance of alignment is often nearly as useful as the substance.

The Remaining Openings

 

None of this means the outcome is fixed in every respect. It means the structure of the fight is becoming clearer. Even in a hostile process, there are still places where the record can be contested and overreach can be exposed.

 

Kolkhorst’s history suggests some responsiveness to arguments grounded in genuine medical need, especially when voiced by patients, families, and veterans rather than by industry alone. That does not make her a reform ally. It does suggest that a purely commercial defense of the hemp market is less likely to break through than an argument grounded in access, inadequate alternatives, and the real-world consequences of prohibition.

 

The Sunset process may ultimately matter more than the interim hearings themselves. Sunset review is supposed to examine whether agencies are operating within legislative intent, using public resources rationally, and staying within the limits of their authority. That is a more fact-intensive forum than a THC hearing built around alarming testimony and politically convenient anecdotes. If opponents of overreach can show that DSHS exceeded its mandate, imposed irrational burdens, or failed to justify its regulatory choices, that case may carry more institutional force there than in a hearing designed from the outset to validate alarm.

 

The interim hearings will still matter, even if no one should mistake them for neutral proceedings. Their importance lies not in the prospect of immediate persuasion, but in the creation of a counter-record. Physicians, economists, public-health researchers, veterans, consumers, and lawful retailers can still inject complexity into a process designed to simplify. In Texas politics, that can make the difference between a one-sided morality play and a record robust enough to support litigation, legislative alternatives, and public skepticism.

What This Moment Really Means

The deeper significance of this moment is not simply that another committee has been assigned another study. It is that Texas leadership appears to be constructing, piece by piece, the procedural and rhetorical architecture for renewed action against THC products. The Legislature supplied the rhetoric. Agencies supplied the immediate pressure. Now the committee process is being positioned to supply the official justification.

 

For the broader public, that should raise a straightforward question. When lawmakers announce a “study,” are they seeking answers, or are they assembling evidentiary packaging for conclusions already chosen? On hemp-derived THC, the answer increasingly appears to be the latter. And with Lois Kolkhorst in the chair and Charles Perry at her side as vice chair, there is little reason to pretend this committee has been arranged for balance.

 

The next chapter of Texas hemp policy will not be decided in a single hearing room. It will be shaped in court, in agency review, in committee testimony, and in the wider political fight over whether regulation is still allowed to mean regulation, or whether every controversy must end the same way: with a ban dressed up as public health.

 

 

 

 

Champs Trade Show Las Vegas Winter

Written by Clay Moore on . Posted in Events.

The CHAMPS Trade Show, a cornerstone event in the counterculture industry since
1999, is set to return to the Las Vegas Convention Center from February 12th to 15th,
2025.

This premier business-to-business expo brings together a diverse array of exhibitors,
including manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, glass artists, and suppliers, all
showcasing a vast selection of smoking accessories, counterculture products, clothing,
hand-blown glass, and other specialty gifts.

Attendees can look forward to the renowned CHAMPS Glass Games, a live
glassblowing competition featuring elite artists vying for cash prizes and industry
recognition.

Additionally, the event offers numerous networking opportunities, informative keynote
sessions, and panels led by industry leaders, providing valuable insights into the latest
trends and innovations.

For those planning to attend, CHAMPS has secured special hotel deals. Rooms at
Tuscany Suites0 & Casino start at $89 per night, available from February 10th to 17th,
2025, with no resort fee and complimentary shuttle service to the convention center.
This deal ends on January 10th. Additionally, Resorts World offers rooms ranging from
$95 to $275 per night between February 9th and 15th, 2025.

As the premier counterculture B2B expo, CHAMPS Trade Shows provide an
unparalleled platform for businesses to connect, discover new products, and stay ahead
in a thriving marketplace. Whether you’re a retailer, wholesaler, or industry enthusiast,
this event is a must-attend to experience the forefront of counterculture trends and
innovations.

For Buyers:
CHAMPS offers retailers access to exclusive deals, cutting-edge products, and
connections with top brands and industry leaders. Attendees can discover the latest
trends, witness live glass art competitions through the CHAMPS Glass Games, and
benefit from a dynamic atmosphere conducive to business growth. The event is free to
attend but is strictly business-to-business and not open to the public. All attendees must
be at least 18 years old and provide two forms of business identification, such as a
reseller’s license, seller’s permit, business license, or tax ID.

For Exhibitors:

Exhibiting at CHAMPS provides a unique platform to showcase products to a diverse
and influential audience, facilitating market expansion and the formation of international

partnerships. The event is renowned for innovation and trendsetting within the
counterculture industry, offering exhibitors invaluable insights, exposure, and networking
opportunities that can drive business growth and success.
Each 10×10 booth includes an 8-foot table, a chair, a wastebasket, pipe and drape, and
up to four vendor badges. Larger booths receive proportional amenities. Additional
furnishings, carpet, and electricity can be ordered through the Exhibitor Kit. A 50%
deposit is due at the time of booking, with full payment required 45 days before the
show. Badge registration instructions are provided approximately one month before the
event, contingent upon a signed contract and full payment.
For more information and to register as a buyer or exhibitor, visit
https://champstradeshows.com/

Cultivating Wellness: The Journey of Endozondo Farm

Written by Grace Gonzales on . Posted in Cultivation.

Endozondo Farm, a Texas-based hemp operation, was born from a passion for natural wellness and a desire to offer affordable alternatives to traditional medicine. Founded by Arturo Elizondo and his family, the farm’s mission goes beyond cultivation—they are committed to sustainable farming, community education, and elevating Texas as a leader in the hemp industry. In this interview, Elizondo shares the inspiration behind Endozondo Farm, the sustainable practices that drive their work, and his vision for a future where Texas-grown hemp is recognized and celebrated nationwide.

What inspired the founding of Endozondo Farm, and how did it evolve into a hemp-focused operation?

  • We were inspired by seeing friends and family face legal consequences for using a natural plant to find relief from various ailments. This fueled our passion to offer people an affordable, natural alternative to pharmaceuticals.

Can you describe the specific types of hemp you cultivate and the primary products you produce?

  • We focus on cultivating unique hemp genetics tailored to our customers’ needs. Potency and purity are our top priorities, which drive our selection and pheno-hunting processes.

What sustainable farming practices does Endozondo Farm implement to ensure environmental responsibility?

  • We use coco coir as a growing medium, which we recycle multiple times for both veg and flower stages. Our targeted watering cycles allow us to conserve water throughout the day.

How does Endozondo Farm contribute to the local community and the hemp industry in Texas?

  • We actively participate in local farmers’ markets and sponsor community events. Education on health and wellness is a big part of our mission, as well as supporting The Elizondo Foundation, our family’s nonprofit organization.

What challenges have you faced in the hemp farming industry, and how have you overcome them?

  • Texas lawmakers often seem more supportive of out-of-state interests, allowing them to sell products statewide while Texas farmers face restrictive regulations. We hope to see lawmakers prioritize Texas-grown products, giving local farmers a fair chance to thrive.

Can you share the story behind the name “Endozondo” and its significance to your mission?

  • The name combines “Endo,” for the endocannabinoid system, and “Zondo” from our family name, Elizondo. It reflects our commitment to harnessing natural plant properties

What role does innovation play in your farming techniques and product development?

  • We keep our processes straightforward, using automated watering systems and climate control to monitor grow conditions. For the most part, we let the plants thrive naturally, intervening only to optimize their health.

How do you ensure the quality and safety of your hemp products from cultivation to market?

  • Quality starts with maintaining controlled environments and a strict integrated pest management (IPM) protocol. We prioritize cleanliness, advance planning, and state-approved testing to ensure our products are safe and reliable.

What advice would you give to new farmers interested in starting their own hemp operations in Texas?

  • Educate yourself thoroughly and be prepared for long hours. Stay committed, and just go for it.

What are your future goals for Endozondo Farm, and how do you envision the growth of the hemp industry in Texas?

  • Our goal is to keep producing high-quality hemp with our customers’ wellness in mind, while continuing to educate the community on health. We see Texas becoming a hemp powerhouse, with a thriving local industry that supports our state’s farmers.

For more information, please go to: www.EndoZondo.com.

 

 

Lt. Governor’s Prohibition Push: History Repeats in Texas Hemp Debate

Written by Jay Maguire on . Posted in Legislative.

 

When Lt. Governor Dan Patrick announced Senate Bill 3 to ban all forms of THC in Texas, he drew from a familiar political playbook. His declaration that “thousands of stores have opened to sell all types of dangerous products with unlimited THC” echoes rhetoric used to justify cannabis prohibition in the 1930s, when claims about “reefer madness” helped drive federal policy.

 

The Texas Hemp Federation, through Executive Director Jay Maguire, responded: “The Lt. Governor’s characterization ignores basic facts about our industry. Legal hemp businesses employing thousands of Texans are providing safe, tested products while generating over a billion dollars in tax revenue. This isn’t about public safety – it’s about politics.”

Patrick’s announcement comes as multiple studies show regulated hemp markets reduce illegal sales and provide safer alternatives for consumers. States with strict regulation rather than prohibition consistently report better outcomes for both public health and law enforcement resources.

 

The timing is particularly notable given recent challenges to the “tough on drugs” political narrative. As more states move toward regulated markets, evidence continues to mount that prohibition creates more problems than it solves. Even traditionally conservative states have begun embracing hemp’s economic benefits while implementing sensible regulations.

 

Law enforcement perspectives have also evolved. Many departments now prefer focusing resources on actually dangerous substances rather than hemp products. Some Texas police chiefs have publicly stated that regulated hemp markets make their jobs easier by clearly distinguishing legal from illegal products.

 

The economic stakes are substantial. Beyond direct revenue and employment, Texas’ hemp industry supports numerous ancillary businesses from agriculture to retail. Local communities across the state have come to depend on hemp-related commerce and tax revenue for essential services.

 

“History teaches us that prohibition doesn’t eliminate demand – it just drives markets underground,” notes the Federation’s statement. “We’ve built a transparent, regulated industry that protects consumers and supports communities. Dismantling it would only benefit illegal operators.”

The proposed ban faces several hurdles, including potential federal preemption under the Farm Bill and likely legal challenges from affected businesses. Previous attempts at administrative prohibition have already been blocked by Texas courts.

 

For now, the industry continues operating under existing regulations while preparing for what promises to be a defining legislative battle. The outcome may well determine whether Texas embraces evidence-based policy or returns to failed strategies of the past.

 

[Note: This article represents ongoing coverage. The Texas Hemp Reporter will continue following developments as this story unfolds.]

 

AI generated courtroom illustration

Jury Finds LoneStar Farms, LLC, “d/b/a” Sweet Sensi Committed Constructive Fraud Against CenTex CBD

Written by T3mPl@teAdm1n on . Posted in Business. 4 Comments on Jury Finds LoneStar Farms, LLC, “d/b/a” Sweet Sensi Committed Constructive Fraud Against CenTex CBD

LoneStar Does Not Own Trade Secrets Listed in Court Filings

CenTex CBD beat back a claim by LoneStar Farms LLC, better known as Sweet Sensi, and their lawyer, Lisa Pittman, of misappropriation of trade secrets and intellectual property and allegations of unethical conduct. This ruling of Constructive Fraud and other charges against Sweet Sensi will have significant implications for the rapidly growing and changing hemp industry in Texas.

During the case, Greg Autry of Sweet Sensi attacked Wyatt Larew of Wyatt Purp and the Texas Hemp Reporter in an advertisement published in The Austin Chronicle on October 25, 2024. The jury verdict completely vindicated Larew and the Texas Hemp Reporter for its initial coverage of the case.

“Sweet Sensi tried to cover up its bad behavior and questionable business practices by attacking me. I am grateful that the jury ruled in CenTex’s favor and vindicated me. I am disappointed in my former attorney, Lisa Pittman, who took a contradictory position after providing a legal opinion for me. Justice is the winner this week. Also, Hemp businesses in Texas won because bad actors need to be exposed, and ethical standards must be respected,” said Larew.

The conduct of Sweet Sensi’s lawyer, Pittman, has come into question. During the legal process, Pitman moved the case to District court from small claims court, which allowed Sweet Sensi to counter-sue for $250k-1 million in damages. While the trial was progressing, CenTex asked the judge to sanction Pittman. The judge agreed and sanctioned her. Additionally, the judge found it necessary to remind Pittman of her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, raising the concern that her actions could be viewed as criminal, not just unethical.

“The Texas Hemp Reporter bases our reporting on court filings and public documents. Factual court reporting does not require commentary for the parties involved to “spin” us with their interpretation of court proceedings,” said Russell Dowden, Publisher of the Texas Hemp Reporter.

In this case, the jury ruled that Sweet Sensi did not own certain trade secrets, which contradicts what Autry of Sweet Sensi said in his paid advertisement.

“In my opinion, the jury did a good job seeing through the thinly veiled arguments presented by Sweet Sensi attempting to misuse trade secrets and the patent process. Hemp businesses must maintain their integrity so we can continue to supply products for the people who need them the most,” said David Sergi, Attorney for Wyatt Purp and other hemp-related businesses.

{What Does the Future of Hemp hold for the Lone Star State? Operators will be more accountable to retailers moving forward.}

In addition to finding Sweet Sensi committed constructive fraud, the jury returned unanimous verdicts, finding that Sweet Sensi engaged in false, misleading, deceptive, and unconscionable actions when the jury answered the following questions.

  • Did LoneStar engage in any false, misleading, or deceptive act or practice that CenTex relied on to its detriment and that was a producing cause of damages to CenTex? Jury said Yes.
  • Did LoneStar engage in any unconscionable action or course of action that was a producing cause of damages to CenTex? Jury said Yes.
  • Did CenTex and LoneStar agree that CenTex’s cherry limeade gumdrops ordered from LoneStar would come with red sugar and contain approximately 15 mg of Delta 8 per gumdrop? Jury said Yes.
  • Did CenTex and LoneStar agree that LoneStar would provide shelf-ready/consumer-ready gumdrops to CenTex? Jury said Yes.
  • Did LoneStar fail to comply with its agreement with CenTex, if any? Jury says Yes.
  • Did CenTex substantially rely to its detriment on LoneStar’s promises), if any, and, if so, was CenTex’s reliance foreseeable by LoneStar? Jury said Yes.
  • Did LoneStar obtain a benefit from CenTex by fraud or the taking of an undue advantage? Jury said Yes.
  • Did LoneStar fail to comply with the Manufacturing Service Agreement? Jury said Yes.
  • Did LoneStar own a trade secret in the formula, pattern, compilation, program, method, technique, process, or list of actual or potential customers listed below?
    • 1. The rosin-based process used to design and manufacture LoneStar’s rosin-based products. Jury said No.
    • 2. The process for designing and manufacturing LoneStar’s rosin base. Jury said No.
    • 3. The process for designing and manufacturing LoneStar’s rosin-based products. Jury said No.
    • 4. The process for designing and manufacturing LoneStar’s vape cartridges and gummy products. Jury said No.

In addition to these findings, LoneStar Farms LLC dba Sweet Sensi must pay monetary damages to CenTex CDB.

Additional steps related to the people and businesses involved in this case will be taken in the coming weeks. We will continue to inform the public about any developments.

For media interviews. Please contact Kevin Lampe at (312) 617-7280 or kevin@kurthlampe.com.

-30-

Upcoming Events

Written by Grace Gonzales on . Posted in News.

With the rapid growth of the hemp industry in Texas, upcoming events and workshops offer invaluable opportunities to connect with industry leaders, acquire practical insights, and engage in meaningful advocacy. These events highlight sustainable practices, provide updates on regulatory developments, and showcase innovative applications of hemp.

Upcoming Hemp Events in Texas

3rd Annual Texas Hemp Summit – Nov 1-2, 2024, Texas A&M AgriLife Center, College Station

Organized by the Texas Hemp Coalition, this two-day summit will explore hemp market trends, sustainable farming, and regulatory developments. Attendees can participate in networking sessions, workshops, and policy discussions, focusing on hemp’s environmental and economic impact.

Hemp-Ology – November 30, 1-2pm, Online

Discover the World of Hemp with Expert Dora Wilson-Jefferson. Join renowned hemp grower and author Dora Wilson-Jefferson for an engaging two-hour training session to empower beginners and experienced enthusiasts. Whether you’re just starting your journey or looking to expand your expertise, this event offers a unique opportunity to dive deeper into the hemp industry and its many applications. This session covers topics such as: exploring hemp’s versatility and discovering the wide range of uses and benefits of hemp, from wellness products to sustainable materials. Learning to stay ahead of trends: Gain insights into the latest industry trends and uncover emerging business opportunities to master best practices including understanding proven strategies and techniques for cultivating hemp successfully and maximizing your yields

Texas Hemp Building Summit – Dec 5, 2024, Austin

This summit brings together builders, architects, and environmental advocates to explore innovative uses of hemp in construction. Sessions will cover topics such as hempcrete applications, sustainable design, and eco-friendly building materials. Attendees will also take a guided tour of local projects using hemp-based materials, offering real-world insights into sustainable architecture.

National CBD Month – January

National CBD Month is celebrated every January, raising awareness about CBD’s potential wellness effects. CbdMD was officially founded to combat health challenges associated with the misperceptions of CBD. Throughout January, we aim to shine a spotlight on the hemp-derived substance, clear up misunderstandings, change perceptions, and set standards for superior CBD products.

Advocacy Training by the Texas Hemp Federation – Ongoing

These advocacy sessions empower participants to engage with lawmakers at the state and federal levels. Attendees will learn how to advocate effectively, understand current hemp regulations, and develop strategies to communicate the benefits of hemp to policymakers, contributing to legislative changes that support the industry.

Stay Engaged with Hemp Events

AllEvents: Search for “hemp” to discover additional workshops, summits, and networking opportunities across Texas and beyond.

Texas Hemp Coalition: Stay updated on events and advocacy efforts by visiting their website and following their social media channels.

Education and advocacy remain key drivers of the hemp industry’s growth in Texas. Participating in events like the Texas Hemp Summit, Hemp Building Summit, and Hemp for Health Workshop helps Texans stay informed and shape the future of this growing sector. Engaging in these initiatives ensures hemp becomes a vital part of the state’s agricultural, health, and economic development landscape, paving the way for sustainable and innovative solutions.

 

Tejas Tonic: 3 Flavors of Unlimited Enjoyment

Written by Rachel Nelson on . Posted in News.

After receiving a positive response from customers on its inaugural lime-flavored beverage, Tejas Tonic released two more varieties: Agarita Berry and Frio Mango.

The agarita berry grows on a shrub commonly found in the Texas Hill Country. Fragrant, yellow blooms appear on the plant during spring, followed by a bright red berry often used for making jelly and wine.

The agarita berry offers a mostly tart flavor, and according to the blog Foraging Texas, it offers medicinal applications. Agaritas are said to relieve nausea, aid with digestion and help boost immunity.

Frio mango is the latest refreshing flavor offered by Tejas Tonic and is a homage to South Texas — the only part of the state with a climate suitable for growing mangos.

Emerging as Tejas Tonic’s entry into the “exotic” flavor category, Frio Mango is also a tip of the hat to Texas’ own Frio River. There’s nothing more exotic in Texas than the Frio River, right?

While many options are popping up in the hemp beverage space, here are four reasons to enjoy Tejas Tonic.

4 Reasons to Enjoy Tejas Tonic

1. It’s all-natural.

Aaron Owens, founder of Tejas Hemp and Tejas Tonic, believes in keeping his products natural and never uses synthetic methods. In its marketing for Tejas Tonic, the company emphasizes, “It hasn’t left our sight since the plants came out of the ground.”

Tejas does, in fact, grow its hemp for Tejas Tonic locally in Dripping Springs and Luchenbach, remaining one of (if not the only) Texas beverage to grow their own — and here in Texas at that.

2. It’s terp-boosted.

Terpenes, known as terps, are compounds in certain plants that give them distinct aromas and flavors. In cannabis plants, each strain has a unique terpene profile, and each terpene is said to offer certain benefits (such as reducing anxiety or improving focus).

3. It won’t give you a hangover.

One of the biggest benefits of hemp beverages is that partakers won’t suffer undesirable after-effects. As hemp-infused drinks become more widely available, many people are opting for them over a night of boozing.

4. It’s convenient to get.

Tejas Tonic is available in over 700 locations in Texas alone. Visit tejastonic.com/finder to find a location near you.

Texas Hemp Show #186: THC Beverages

Written by T3mPl@teAdm1n on . Posted in Podcast.

Hemp beverages are seltzers, sodas, mocktails, coffees, teas, and other drinks that contain an infusion of hemp-derived cannabinoids, terpenes, or fibers. Common cannabinoids include CBD and THC, but other “minor cannabinoids” can also be incorporated.

Hear Our Interview with Christopher Lackner of US Hemp Bevg. Alliance

The Results Are In

Learn more about the Lone Star State’s best beverage brands in our THC-infused Beverage Challenge.

80stixx – Premium Alternative Cannabinoid Products

Written by Clay Moore on . Posted in Hemp.

Since its inception in 2022, 80stixx has rapidly established itself as a leader in the alternative cannabinoid market. Inspired by the Amarillo area code “806,” the brand has expanded its reach across the country, securing placement in over 1,000 stores and establishing more than 10 distribution accounts. With a focus on quality, transparency, and innovation, 80stixx is reshaping the cannabinoid landscape with its wide array of products and commitment to excellence.

 

The Journey

80stixx’s quick rise in the industry reflects its dedication to providing high-quality cannabinoid products that meet consumer demands. Drawing inspiration from its Texas roots, the brand has become a household name in alternative cannabinoids, offering everything from Delta-8 (D8) and Delta-9 (D9) products to THCA. Each product is carefully crafted to deliver purity, potency, and consistency—qualities that set 80stixx apart in a crowded marketplace.

What truly distinguishes 80stixx from other brands in the cannabinoid industry is its focus on the finer details—taste, aesthetics, and innovative packaging. The brand is known for pioneering die-cut packaging for their D8 and D9 gummies, incorporating creative designs that enhance the consumer experience. This attention to packaging not only adds a visual appeal but also signals the brand’s commitment to quality and innovation.

On the taste front, 80stixx gummies are infused with authentic flavors and precision D9 dosing, ensuring a superior experience for consumers. Unlike many other brands that spray cannabinoids onto gummies, 80stixx opts for infusion, delivering a more consistent and enjoyable product without an overpowering cannabis taste.

 

Adapting to the Shifting Legal Landscape of Hemp-Derived Cannabinoids

Operating in the alternative cannabinoid space means keeping up with the ever-evolving legal landscape. States across the U.S. have varied regulations regarding cannabinoids like THCA and Delta-8, making compliance a top priority for brands like 80stixx. The 2018 Farm Bill paved the way for the hemp industry, but ongoing legislative changes require companies to stay vigilant.

Recently, 80stixx faced challenges in Florida when packaging regulations forced the temporary removal of their products from the market. However, thanks to a reversal of those laws, the company was able to quickly resume operations. This agility in navigating legal challenges demonstrates 80stixx’s resilience and commitment to maintaining a strong presence in the market.

Commitment to Transparency and Lab Testing

Quality and transparency are at the heart of 80stixx’s operations. The company emphasizes the importance of third-party lab testing for all its products to ensure purity, potency, and safety. Every product sold by 80stixx includes a scannable QR code, allowing customers to easily access the Certificate of Analysis (COA) for that batch. This level of transparency not only builds trust with consumers but also ensures that 80stixx continues to deliver the highest standards of cannabinoid products.

 

Emerging Trends and Innovations Shaping the Future of 80stixx

As the cannabinoid industry grows, consumer preferences are shifting, and 80stixx is keeping pace with the latest trends. One emerging trend is the popularity of diamond prerolls, a product that has been gaining traction among retail outlets. 80stixx plans to expand its product line to include more offerings in this category, capitalizing on the growing demand for premium prerolls.

Another notable trend is the increasing interest in edibles and beverages, particularly among an older demographic. While younger consumers tend to favor flower products from smoke shops, edibles are becoming more popular as a discreet and convenient way to consume cannabinoids. 80stixx is well-positioned to cater to both segments, offering a diverse range of products to meet varying consumer needs.

 

Sustainability: A Key Priority

Sustainability is a growing concern in the hemp and cannabinoid industries, and 80stixx is committed to doing its part. The company works closely with growers and manufacturers to ensure that all operations are environmentally responsible. Regular visits to production facilities and optimized shipping processes help 80stixx minimize its environmental impact, even in challenging conditions such as extreme heat.

This focus on sustainability not only benefits the environment but also aligns with the values of many of 80stixx’s customers, who are increasingly seeking eco-friendly products.

 

Shaping the Future of the Hemp Industry

As a rising force in Texas’ hemp and cannabinoid industry, 80stixx is committed to playing a leading role in shaping the future of this rapidly growing sector. The company aims to be a major producer and influencer, crafting innovative solutions and advocating for favorable legislation that supports the growth of the hemp industry.

Looking ahead, 80stixx has its sights set on offering legal cannabinoid products in dispensaries nationwide. With its strong focus on quality, transparency, and sustainability, the brand is poised to continue leading the way in the cannabinoid market for years to come.

For more information about 80stixx and its range of cannabinoid products, visit 80stixx.com or contact them at:

Address: 300 W 6th Street Suite #127, Borger, Texas 79007

Phone: +1 (806) 553-7875

Email: info@80stixx.com

80stixx remains dedicated to offering high-quality, lab-tested cannabinoid products, bringing transparency and innovation to an evolving industry.

Skip to content