Congress banned most hemp-derived products, but a new Senate bill offers a national regulatory framework with real testing, age limits and THC caps. The fight now comes down to whether lawmakers choose prohibition or standards that match how the country already consumes cannabis.
For weeks, we’ve been tracking the slow-moving car crash that began when former President Donald Trump signed a spending bill that quietly folded a national hemp ban into the fine print. It was the kind of move that hits you twice: first when you realize it actually passed, then again when you see what it could do to one of the fastest-growing sectors of the cannabis economy.
Now there’s a counterproposal. Oregon senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley introduced the Cannabinoid Safety and Regulation Act, a bill that tries to pull the country back from the edge by swapping prohibition for a structured national rulebook. The idea is simple: replace a ban with standards that actually work.
“We learned from the failed war on drugs that a one-size-fits-all approach that bans hemp products from the market outright does nothing to protect kids and consumers,” Wyden told Marijuana Moment. Merkley added that blanket prohibition “harms research and the entire industry.”
If you’ve been following High Times over the past month, this tracks. We reported how the shutdown deal created the ban. We explained how the 0.4 milligram total THC cap would erase entire categories of products, including nonintoxicating ones. We documented how states are already signaling they won’t follow the federal script. We showed how Project 2025 thinking is shaping the conversation and how alcohol and traditional cannabis interests have joined the political tug of war. This new bill sits inside that same storm.
Under Wyden and Merkley’s plan, hemp beverages wouldn’t disappear. Instead, they’d get clear limits and a national structure. Drinks could contain up to 5 milligrams of THC per serving and 10 milligrams per container. Edibles, topicals and inhalable products would have their own caps. Products would be tested by accredited labs. Labels would show cannabinoid content, testing confirmation, warnings, allergens and a universal cannabis symbol. Sales to anyone under 21 would be banned. Fully synthetic cannabinoids would be prohibited. Semi-synthetic conversions would be allowed only if safe and created through a single chemical step.
This is exactly the kind of clarity the beverage sector has been begging for. The Hemp Beverage Alliance, representing more than 375 members, said the bill “provides a pathway for the hemp beverage industry to continue to thrive.” The group noted it has been advocating for age limits, testing and sensible THC levels since 2023. In its words, this proposal creates the environment the category needs to survive.
The bill would also force the FDA to finally step into the role it has avoided for years. It would be required to create rules for online sales, good manufacturing practices, child-resistant packaging and testing standards. It would need to verify facilities, enforce lab accreditation and establish a “nutrition facts” style panel for cannabinoid products. This could change everything from how labels look to how products move across state lines.
At the same time, states would still have the right to go further. They could ban intoxicating hemp outright or impose stricter rules. But they couldn’t block interstate transport and would have to follow consistent packaging and labeling standards. That matters, because as we wrote earlier this month, several states had already begun carving their own regulatory lanes long before this bill showed up.
The proposal also includes more than regulation. It sets aside $200 million a year for CDC research into cannabis use. It allocates millions more for impaired driving studies and youth prevention programs. It pushes agencies to collaborate on THC beverage rules, something that became necessary the moment these drinks moved from novelty to national shelf space.
What makes this moment interesting is not just the policy but the timing. Congressional Research Service analysts warned there’s no clear roadmap for enforcing the ban. Industry groups are pleading for an extension, so lawmakers have time to build an actual framework. Senator Rand Paul is preparing his own bill to protect hemp markets. And despite widespread public pushback, Trump publicly supported the ban language.
So now the country sits between two possible futures. One is the ban we’ve already dissected: a measure that would collapse an entire supply chain with almost no guidance on how to do it. The other is a regulatory model that treats intoxicating hemp as a category that already exists, already has millions of consumers and already operates with or without Washington’s approval.
This new bill doesn’t settle the fight, but it gives Congress something real to work with. It gives states something predictable. It gives producers a path that doesn’t depend on loopholes. It gives consumers a category with clear rules instead of panic and improvisation.
The clock is still ticking. But for the first time since Trump signed the shutdown bill, there’s a version of the future that doesn’t end with empty shelves.
Photo: Shutterstock
