Texas Hemp-Derived THC Debate: Prohibition or Freedom?

Originally posted on Substack. 

In 2025, Texas lawmakers have been debating whether to ban hemp-derived THC. The evidence is clear: prohibition fails every time. It fails economically, socially, and politically. Yet instead of trusting Texans to make responsible choices, some leaders continue pushing bans that would destroy jobs, enrich cartels, and grow government power. That’s not the Texas way. Check out my latest research here.

​Hemp-derived products have been federally legal since the 2018 Farm Bill set a 0.3% delta-9 THC limit by dry weight. Texas followed with its own legal hemp program in 2019, and since then, the industry has flourished. According to a recent study, hemp-derived cannabinoids generate $5.5 billion in annual sales, $10.2 billion in statewide economic activity, $268 million in sales tax revenue, and 53,000 jobs. These aren’t speculative numbers—they’re real livelihoods for farmers, small retailers, veterans, and entrepreneurs across the state.

But in 2025, prohibitionists tried three times to ban hemp in Texas. Senate Bill 3 passed in the regular session but was vetoed by Governor Greg Abbott. Senate Bill 5 failed in the first special session. Senate Bill 6 collapsed in the second after lawmakers couldn’t agree on its extreme provisions: banning any detectable cannabinoids beyond CBD or CBG, slapping $10,000–$20,000 fees on businesses, and creating new felony penalties. Texans should be grateful those bills didn’t become law.

Instead, on September 10, Governor Abbott issued Executive Order GA-56. The order sets a minimum age of 21, restricts sales near schools and churches, and requires clearer labeling and product testing. While this is a more balanced approach than prohibition, it still leaves open the risk of future restrictions because it is an EO and not legislation. Businesses and consumers may remain uncertain about the future.

The key question is whether Texas will build on this regulatory step in a free-market direction based on people’s behavior—or slide back toward prohibition.

Economics Don’t Lie

Prohibition would destroy $10.2 billion in legal economic activity. It would kill 53,000 jobs and erase hundreds of millions in tax revenue. Worse, it would hand billions of dollars straight to cartels, drug dealers, and out-of-state sellers, who already profit from illicit drug markets. Enforcement costs would pile up—just as they did during alcohol prohibition in the 1920s, when organized crime flourished and government budgets ballooned. Estimates suggest federal marijuana prohibition costs taxpayers $3.6 billion annually with no measurable impact on demand. Texas would be foolish to replicate this failed model at the state level.

Public Health Excuses Don’t Hold

Prohibitionists argue they’re protecting Texans, especially young people. But the facts tell a different story. The FDA warns about mislabeled hemp products—but that’s a call for testing and labeling, not bans. The CDC traced the 2019–2020 vape injury outbreak to illicit products cut with vitamin E acetate, not legal ones. A Journal of Medical Toxicology study found fewer adverse exposures in states with regulated markets than in those with bans.

Meanwhile, tobacco kills 28,000 Texans a year and alcohol another 10,600—including nearly 1,000 from drunk driving. Hemp-derived THC? Zero confirmed deaths. If safety is the standard, then banning hemp while leaving alcohol and tobacco legal is hypocrisy.

Texans Know Better

Voters see through the politics. A recent poll found 79% of Texans want hemp to be legal with safeguards, while only 13% support prohibition. Support cuts across party lines: Republicans (75%), Democrats (81%), and independents (82%) all back legal hemp. Another poll found similar majorities for medical marijuana, decriminalization, and even recreational legalization. Lawmakers who ignore this bipartisan consensus do so at their political peril.

The Bigger Picture

Prohibition isn’t just bad policy; it’s rent-seeking. Beer distributors lobby against hemp beverages to protect their market share. Participants in the Texas Compassionate Use Program benefit financially from limiting competition. This is classic “Bootleggers and Baptists” politics: moral arguments used to mask protectionism. True free-market capitalism rejects this cronyism.

Other states show what works. Colorado and California made mistakes with high taxes and heavy regulation, which kept black markets alive. Oklahoma and Florida demonstrate that light-touch rules—such as age limits, labeling, and safety testing—are sufficient to protect consumers while shrinking illicit markets.

Texas should learn from experience. Overregulation is just prohibition by another name.

Closing

The hemp debate isn’t easy, but it is simple. History, economics, public health, and voter opinion all point in the same direction: prohibition fails, light-touch regulation works. Governor Abbott’s executive order was a step away from outright bans, but Texas lawmakers must resist efforts to go further down the road of prohibition.

Texans don’t need another nanny state experiment. They need freedom, accountability, and trust in markets. The evidence is overwhelming: banning hemp would hurt families, grow cartels, and weaken our economy. Regulation—if any is needed—should remain modest and risk-based.

👉 Read the full policy report for the facts lawmakers can’t afford to ignore. And share it with friends, neighbors, and your representatives—because Texas deserves better than prohibition!