A federal judge last week denied imposing an injunction against the Iowa law regulating consumable hemp products and imposing THC caps on the products, The Gazette reports. Judge Stephanie Rose of the Southern District of Iowa said in her rulings that the companies behind the injunction failed to prove that the law, which took effect July 17, violates the U.S. Constitution.
Rose had previously expressed concerns about the vague definition of “serving” in the law but last week’s decisions indicated that the state had cleared up the vagueness.
“Now that the Final Rules have been promulgated and are in effect, there is no longer a viable argument that ‘serving’ as set forth in the Hemp Amendments is an unconstitutionally vague term.” — Rose, in the ruling, via The Gazette
Rose also ruled against the plaintiffs – a group of hemp companies – on their claim that the state Health and Human Services department can arbitrarily enforce the new standards and reject some products that should be allowed under the law. The judge ruled that even if the law is being improperly applied, the application doesn’t make the law unconstitutionally vague.
“The crux of the issue is not whether the law can be arbitrarily enforced,” Rose wrote, “but whether the language is sufficiently clear so as not to invite arbitrary enforcement.”
Additionally, Rose ruled against the businesses’ arguments that six weeks was not enough time to comply with the law, writing that it was “essentially a claim of what would be better for their businesses.”
Get daily cannabis business news updates. Subscribe
End