Texas Begins Enforcing New Total THC Rule: What the DSHS Crackdown Means for Hemp Retailers
The Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) has begun actively enforcing new Consumable Hemp Program rules that dramatically change how THC is measured in hemp products, creating significant consequences for retailers, manufacturers, distributors, and consumers across Texas.
The agency’s enforcement centers on a Total THC calculation performed on a dry-weight basis. Unlike previous interpretations that focused primarily on Delta-9 THC, the new methodology includes THCA after it is converted into Delta-9 THC through decarboxylation—the process that occurs when cannabis flower is heated or smoked.
For much of the Texas hemp industry, this is more than a testing change. It effectively places most THCA flower products outside the state’s legal hemp definition.
The curious timing in this reversal in their approach happened shortly after The Texas Hemp Business Council or (THBC) filed a motion for rehearing. Allegedly, they were not properly enforcing the new rules and that DSHS therefore had waived it. This move was extremely controversial in the Texas Hemp Industry, particularly for those who sell flower. The advocacy lobby team at (THBC) is largely funded by Hometown Hero of which flower is not a product the company sells or offers.
Why It Matters?
Because most hemp flower naturally contains THCA that converts into Delta-9 THC when heated, many products that previously passed compliance testing may now exceed Texas’ legal THC limit.
Retailers carrying smokable hemp products, pre-rolls, and certain concentrates could face increased regulatory scrutiny as DSHS expands enforcement efforts.
The industry argues that these rules fundamentally reshape the marketplace through administrative rulemaking rather than legislative action, and multiple legal challenges continue to move through Texas courts.
What Retailers Should Expect?
As if the water faucet being turned on again and off again multiple times since March 31st… what should Texas retailers expect next?
Businesses should review inventory, certificates of analysis, supplier testing protocols, and compliance documentation while monitoring ongoing litigation that could affect enforcement. Or reach out to their office for further clarification that information is at the end of this article.
The new rules impact:
– THCA flower
– Pre-rolls
– Smokable hemp products
– Testing standards
– Retail compliance requirements
– Product sourcing and inventory decisions
Industry Response
Texas hemp advocates maintain that DSHS has exceeded its statutory authority by adopting a Total THC standard that was not explicitly enacted by the Texas Legislature.
State regulators, meanwhile, maintain that the updated enforcement is intended to ensure products sold as hemp remain within legal THC limits established under Texas law.
The legal battle over these rules is expected to continue throughout 2026 and may ultimately determine the future of the Texas hemp flower market.
Some feel that the flower market in Texas has somehow been hijacked from the TCUP program with the Delta-9 status. But Texas lawmakers are still at least a session or two away from yet offering a smokable flower option.
Blazed Magazine will continue monitoring enforcement activity, court proceedings, and industry response as the regulatory landscape evolves. Businesses with questions regarding compliance should consult qualified legal counsel and stay informed through official DSHS guidance.
For regulatory clarification regarding the Consumable Hemp Program, DSHS identifies:
Jessica Fierros, RS
Manager, Consumable Hemp Branch
Texas Department of State Health Services
Office: 512-231-5656
Cell: 512-217-1319
Email: Jessica.fierros@dshs.texas.gov
This contact information is provided as a public regulatory resource for businesses seeking clarification regarding Texas Consumable Hemp Program enforcement.
For generations, cannabis opponents leaned heavily on one of prohibition’s most familiar
warnings: smoke enough marijuana, and your lungs would inevitably pay the price much like
cigarettes.
But one of the most significant long-term pulmonary studies ever conducted tells a far more
nuanced story.
Published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the federally funded CARDIA
study followed more than 5,000 young adults over a 20-year period, examining how both
tobacco and cannabis impacted respiratory health over time. Researchers entered the study
expecting cannabis smokers to show a similar pattern of declining lung function seen in tobacco
users.
The data surprised them.
While cigarette smokers experienced the expected progressive reduction in pulmonary
performance, moderate cannabis users largely did not. In fact, many cannabis consumers
maintained normal lung function, and some even demonstrated slightly increased forced vital
capacity, a key measurement of how much air the lungs can hold, compared to both non-smokers
and tobacco smokers.
This finding became one of the more controversial outcomes in cannabis respiratory research,
largely because it challenged decades of public assumptions.
Dr. Donald Tashkin, a UCLA pulmonologist and one of the most respected researchers in
cannabis lung studies, spent years investigating whether marijuana smoke carried the same long-
term dangers as tobacco. His work consistently found that while heavy cannabis smoking could
contribute to airway irritation and bronchitis-like symptoms, it did not produce the same strong
link to emphysema, severe lung damage, or lung cancer that tobacco smoking clearly
demonstrated.
That distinction is critical.
For decades, anti-cannabis messaging often blurred the line between tobacco and marijuana
smoke, implying similar health outcomes despite mounting evidence that their long-term
physiological effects may differ substantially.
Researchers have proposed multiple reasons for the disparity. Cannabis users generally smoke
less frequently than tobacco users, often consume fewer total inhalations per day, and
cannabinoids themselves may interact differently with inflammation and respiratory pathways.
Some experts have even suggested that the deep inhalation techniques common among cannabis
consumers could contribute to stronger respiratory muscle conditioning, though this remains an
area requiring further study.
image of lungs undamaged by cannabis smoke, symbolizing health benefits- image adobe
To be clear, none of this means smoking cannabis is harmless.
Combusting plant material of any kind introduces irritants and toxins into the lungs. Heavy
cannabis use can still trigger chronic cough, increased phlegm production, and airway
inflammation. Alternative consumption methods such as vaporization, edibles, tinctures, or
beverages may ultimately offer safer long-term respiratory options.
But the larger takeaway remains important: cannabis does not appear to fit neatly into the same
respiratory risk profile as tobacco, despite years of political rhetoric suggesting otherwise.
For the modern cannabis movement, these findings reinforce an increasingly familiar theme:
much of what society was taught about cannabis during the height of prohibition was often
exaggerated, incomplete, or filtered through ideological agendas rather than objective science.
As legalization expands and research barriers continue to fall, studies like CARDIA help reshape
the conversation from fear-based assumptions to evidence-based understanding.
Cannabis is not a miracle substance, nor is it entirely without risk.
But when one of America’s largest long-term respiratory studies found that moderate cannabis
users often maintained healthier lung function than expected, it became clear that the plant’s
health profile is far more complex than decades of propaganda ever allowed.
In the end, perhaps the most dangerous thing about cannabis was never the smoke itself.
It may have been the misinformation surrounding it.
Well, Texas did it again. A federal judge just told a couple of hemp shop owners in Abilene,
“sorry folks, you’re on your own.”
Here’s what happened. Brennon and Brittany Manske run CBD House of Healing. Like a lot of
Texas hemp businesses, they’ve been trying to carve out a place in this messy, confusing market
since the 2018 Farm Bill supposedly made hemp products legal. They built their shop around
CBD and other hemp-derived products, kept their shelves stocked, and had customers who relied
on them.
Then, in August, Abilene police showed up with a search warrant. Officers raided the place and
walked out with roughly $400,000 worth of products. The Manskes say the raid was based on
misinformation, bad testing, and outright lies. They argue every single item taken was federally
legal hemp.
So they sued. They asked a federal judge to step in and order the city to give their inventory back
and stop any more raids. Because let’s be honest, when you lose nearly half a million dollars in
merchandise, it’s not just a setback. It is a death sentence for a small business.
But Judge James Wesley Hendrix said no. He ruled that it is not the federal court’s job to
interfere with ongoing state criminal proceedings. He called the request for a temporary
restraining order “an extraordinary remedy” and basically said, “come back when the state case
is over.” And in his view, financial loss does not count as irreparable harm. As for reputational
damage, the judge said that is speculative at best.
That is a tough pill to swallow. Imagine having your entire store cleaned out, customers left
wondering if you are even legitimate, and being told, “Don’t worry, you can fight it later.” By
then, later might be too late.
Now let’s talk about the so-called evidence. The raid relied on field kits from Safariland and lab
results from National Medical Services. Both have a reputation for overestimating THC levels.
These tests have been criticized for years. They are unreliable, inconsistent, and often flat-out
wrong. According to the lawsuit, one of the very officers involved in the raid even admitted the
tests were not solid while the raid was happening. Yet somehow, those results were enough to
justify wiping out a local business.
(Store Raids and Check ups by Law Enforcement have Increased in Recent Years as Lt. Gov Dan Patrick'sCrusade against Federally Legal Hemp Products were stepped up after the 89th Legislative Session began.)
And the Manskes are not alone. Another shop owner, Nate Shahbain, joined the lawsuit. He has
not been raided yet, but he is looking over his shoulder every day, wondering when it is his turn.
That is what this kind of enforcement does. It spreads fear through an entire industry.
This is the bigger problem: the disconnect between federal and state enforcement. The 2018
Farm Bill said hemp was legal if it contains less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC. That should have
been clear. But in Texas, local police departments have taken it upon themselves to interpret and
enforce the rules however they see fit. We have seen it with smokable hemp bans. We have seen
it with THCA crackdowns. And now we are seeing it with raids based on junk science.
It creates a patchwork where your business can be perfectly legal on paper and still be treated
like a drug den if the wrong cop decides to test your products with the wrong kit. And let’s be
honest, if those kits were accurate, we would not have half the wrongful arrests and lawsuits we
have seen across the country.
So where does this leave the hemp industry in Texas? On shaky ground, as always. The judge
made it clear the Manskes will have to keep fighting in state court first. Their products stay
locked up in an evidence room, their shop struggles to stay open, and their customers are left
without access.
For the rest of the hemp retailers out there, the message is pretty clear: you are on your own.
Federal law will not save you. Local politics will steamroll you. And even if you can prove you
were right all along, by the time the courts sort it out, your business might not survive.
That is the reality of doing business in Texas right now. Hemp is legal, but only until someone
with a badge decides it is not.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott has taken matters into his own hands. On September 10, Abbott
signed an executive order directing the Department of State Health Services (DSHS), the Texas
Alcoholic Beverage Commission (TABC), and the Department of Public Safety (DPS) to
immediately regulate intoxicating hemp products.
The move comes after Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick repeatedly ignored Abbott’s calls for regulation
during two special sessions, insisting instead on an outright ban. By sidestepping the Legislature,
Abbott has effectively reshaped the future of Texas hemp with the stroke of a pen.
What the Order Does
The order bans sales to anyone under 21, requiring strict ID verification at the point of purchase.
Retailers who fail to comply risk losing their licenses. Testing and labeling standards are being
revised to ensure products list cannabinoid content, serving sizes, and health warnings. License
fees will increase to fund enforcement, and agencies are tasked with conducting compliance
checks and seizing non-compliant products.
Perhaps most significantly, the executive order directs agencies to review how THC is measured.
Instead of testing only for delta-9 THC, labs may be required to calculate total THC, which
includes THCa, the non-psychoactive compound that converts into delta-9 when heated.
Why THCa Flower Could Be Affected
If Texas does adopt total THC testing, much of the THCa flower currently sold could suddenly
fall outside the legal definition of hemp. For consumers, that would mean empty shelves, higher
prices, or a pivot to less potent products. For farmers, it might remove the incentive to grow
high-THCa strains, cutting deep into a market that has sustained them for years.
But here is the key: none of this is final yet.
EO: Makes THC 21+ But also calls for tougher THC testing?
Industry Response: “Don’t Panic”
Lukas Gilkey, CEO of Hometown Hero and a founding member of the Texas Hemp Business
Council, has been fielding nonstop questions since the order dropped. In a video posted to social
media, he urged the industry and consumers to stay calm:
“We are getting nonstop questions about THCa in regards to the executive order that was put out
this morning by the Texas state governor. This is simply guidance. Nothing is set in stone on this.
This isn’t even going to start for 10 days where they actually begin reviewing it. The keyword
here is possible. It says DSHS shall within 10 business days begin reviewing existing agency
rules for possible revision. This is a process that can be influenced.”
Gilkey added that the industry now has a chance to work with the governor’s office to help shape
the rules. “The keynote here is don’t panic. We as an industry have the ability to band together
and influence this policy. It’s not set in stone.”
What Comes Next
Abbott has also tasked agencies with studying a comprehensive regulatory model similar to
House Bill 309, introduced earlier this year. That proposal would have created potency caps,
prohibited sales near schools and churches, restricted advertising to children, and established a
THC-based tax structure. The study will set the stage for possible phased implementation of
those measures.
For now, the message from industry leaders is clear: prepare, but do not panic. Retailers and
farmers should expect change, but there is still room to influence how those changes take shape.
Abbott insists the order protects children while preserving adult access. Whether it stabilizes the
market or threatens one of its most vital sectors will depend on how the hemp industry and state
regulators work together over the coming weeks.
Sidebar: What is THCa Flower and Why Does It Matter?
THCa, or tetrahydrocannabinolic acid, is the raw, non-psychoactive form of THC found in
cannabis and hemp plants. By itself, THCa does not get you high. But when exposed to heat
through smoking, vaping, or baking it “decarboxylates,” turning into the familiar delta-9 THC
that does have intoxicating effects.
Here is why that matters in Texas: under federal law, hemp is only legal if it contains less than
0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight. Because THCa is not counted in that calculation, hemp flower
with high THCa levels but low delta-9 has been legally sold in the state. For consumers, it looks,
smells, and feels like cannabis flower once heated.
Abbott’s executive order suggests reviewing the rules to include total THC. If that happens, the
vast majority of flower products could test “over the limit” and become illegal overnight. For
now, though, the change is only being considered.
You’d think legalizing a plant would mean the fight is over. But for hemp, the real battle is just
beginning. You’ve probably heard the buzz about cannabis legalization. The headlines paint a rosy picture:
billion-dollar markets, job creation, legal status spreading state by state. On the surface, things
look promising. But behind the headlines, another story is unfolding. If you work in or rely on the hemp industry,
you know exactly what I’m talking about.
Right now, the federally legal hemp market is under systematic attack. This isn’t random or
coincidental. It’s strategic. State by state, bill by bill, hemp products are being regulated out of
existence, even though the federal government explicitly allowed their growth under the 2018
Farm Bill. Texas, predictably, is once again at the epicenter of this battle.
A Legal Industry, Slowly Bled Out
The 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp federally, provided it contained less than 0.3% Delta-9 THC.
Anything above that threshold remains federally illegal cannabis.
Here’s the kicker: hemp and cannabis are scientifically the same plant, Cannabis sativa L.,
separated only by that thin chemical distinction. This seemingly minor difference set two
industries on a collision course. It opened doors for hemp-derived cannabinoids like CBD,
Delta-9, Delta-8, Delta-10, and HHC. These products, extracted legally from hemp, bypassed the
restrictive regulations surrounding cannabis, spawning a booming alternative market.
Suddenly, consumers across non-legalized states had access to THC products without
dispensaries, inflated costs, or burdensome registrations. Wellness stores across Texas flourished,
offering Delta-8 gummies and other cannabinoid products. Farmers swapped cotton fields for
hemp, small businesses thrived, and consumers enjoyed unprecedented accessibility.
Unsurprisingly, this rapid growth did not sit well with everyone, especially the large multi-state
cannabis operators, alcohol distributors, and special interest groups accustomed to dominating
the market.
When the Lobbyists Show Up
Quickly recognizing hemp’s competitive threat, established cannabis interests mobilized
lobbyists to protect their market share. Their message was simple yet misleading: hemp is
unregulated, unsafe, and poses a public health threat.
In reality, this was never about public health. It was purely about profit margins. New bills
emerged, targeting Delta-8, Delta-10, and other cannabinoids. Suddenly, testing standards
skyrocketed, permits became costly, and regulations grew more restrictive. Step by step, states
dismantled the hemp market they once proudly supported.
Texas: The Tip of the Spear
Nowhere is this shift clearer than Texas, where SB 3 was passed by both chambers in late May
2025 and sent to Governor Greg Abbott’s desk. The bill would have banned virtually every
hemp-derived cannabinoid currently on the market.
But in a surprising move, Abbott vetoed SB 3.
His decision followed massive public pressure: over 100,000 petition signatures, 5,000 letters,
and impassioned testimonies from veterans, farmers, and medical users. Advocates, like crash
survivor Elizabeth Meigs, emphasized how hemp-derived products changed their lives for the
better, underscoring the potential job losses and access issues a ban would cause.
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick had aggressively pushed for Abbott to sign the bill, framing hemp-derived
THC as a dire public health threat. He continues to ignore data and the experiences of countless
Texans who rely on these products. Abbott, for his part, cited the bill’s overreach and impact on
legal businesses as part of his reasoning.
What’s truly driving this urgency? Powerful lobbyists and industry groups want to shoehorn
hemp products into the outdated alcohol distribution model. That means higher costs, reduced
availability, and a system favoring only the largest operators. One such group, the Coalition for
Adult Beverage Alternatives (C.A.B.A.), which includes beverage giants like Tilray, Keef
Brands, and Wynk, isn’t pushing for an outright hemp ban. Instead, they want regulations that
eliminate small, local competitors.
Beyond Texas: Nationwide Restrictions
Texas isn’t alone. Nationwide, states are rapidly targeting hemp-derived cannabinoids:
• Utah, Nevada, and New Hampshire have enacted strict 0.3% total THC limits, applying
this restriction to all cannabinoids, not just Delta-9 THC.
• Colorado, Iowa, and Minnesota have imposed per-serving THC potency limits,
effectively neutering hemp products’ appeal.
• South Dakota, North Dakota, and Wyoming have banned all isomerized cannabinoids,
allowing only naturally derived Delta-9 THC under the 0.3% threshold.
• Tennessee has introduced costly permits and excessive testing fees that favor large
corporate interests.
• Kentucky finds Delta-8 wrapped up in lawsuits and political gridlock, while Alabama and
Mississippi have banned hemp-derived THC entirely.
Overall, 32 states now impose some form of restrictive regulation on intoxicating hemp products.
This wave of legislative actions isn’t accidental. It’s coordinated, systematically dismantling
small businesses and the innovative markets they created.
The federal government’s failure to anticipate the explosive growth of novel cannabinoids
created this vacuum. It’s now being filled by lobbyists and influential interest groups.
Meanwhile, In Washington
As states act decisively, federal cannabis policy stagnates. Cannabis remains a Schedule I
substance federally, blocking banking access, sensible taxation, and standard regulations.
Agencies capable of intervention remain silent, leaving the industry vulnerable to lobbyists and
political influence.
Worse yet, the latest House Appropriations Committee draft proposes extending the 0.3% THC
cap to all cannabinoids. This would effectively seal the legal loophole that allowed hemp
products to flourish. It would devastate the federally legal hemp businesses that trusted and
operated within existing frameworks, essentially punishing compliance with shifting rules mid-
game.
What’s Really at Stake
Allowing these bans to continue will inevitably consolidate power in the hands of those who
historically fought against cannabis legalization. The hemp market, once vibrant with innovation,
local economic growth, and accessible wellness products, risks being wiped out entirely.
Every new state-level restriction represents a victory, not for safety or regulation, but for
entrenched corporate interests. And if these interests succeed, the core foundation of the modern
cannabis movement, innovation, accessibility and local economies will all vanish.
This isn’t merely about hemp products. It’s about who controls the cannabis industry. It’s about
ensuring adult consumers can make informed choices without interference from powerful
lobbyists or artificially restrictive regulations.
If Americans can responsibly handle opioids, alcohol, and firearms, surely they can manage a
plant.
What’s Next?
The immediate fire may be out in Texas for now, but the threat remains.
Governor Abbott’s veto of SB 3 was a critical win, but it’s not the end. Lawmakers are already
gearing up for a special session to try and work out a new version of the bill. You can bet the
same lobbyists and interest groups will be back at the table, pushing to reintroduce restrictions
under the guise of compromise. If anything, the battle is about to shift into overtime.
Going forward, advocacy must emphasize sensible regulation. Age verification, clear labeling,
potency standards, not outright bans. A unified voice must demand federal clarity through the
next Farm Bill, protecting the hemp industry and its consumers from future legislative overreach.
It’s time to defend the promise of the Farm Bill, support local economies, protect consumer
choice, and recognize that cannabis, whether hemp-derived or otherwise, remains fundamentally
a personal choice. If we fail to act now, we risk losing the cannabis revolution not to regulation, but to a handful of
powerful interests intent on monopolizing this growing market.
