Federal lawmakers, as part of the spending agreement that ended the recent government shutdown, approved a new restriction that effectively bars most consumable hemp-derived tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) products nationwide. The funding package was passed by the U.S. House and signed into law by President Donald Trump on Wednesday; it limits hemp products to no more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per item. Backers say the measure closes a perceived post-2018 farm bill loophole; opponents warn it will shutter large swaths of Texas’ $8 billion hemp market and cost thousands of jobs. The provision is scheduled to take effect one year after the legislation becomes law unless Congress acts to change it.
Key takeaways
- The spending bill, approved by the House and signed by President Donald Trump, includes a hemp provision capping THC at 0.4 mg per product and criminalizing most consumable hemp items nationwide.
- Supporters framed the change as closing a loophole left by the 2018 farm bill; the new language was attached to Agriculture Department funding passed under the shutdown-end deal.
- Opponents say the ban threatens Texas’ $8 billion hemp industry and thousands of jobs tied to more than 8,000 retailers selling edibles, vapes, drinks and flower buds.
- Texas’ congressional delegation split: Sen. John Cornyn opposed removing the hemp language; Sen. Ted Cruz voted to strip it, arguing states should decide regulation.
- State-level tensions between Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Gov. Greg Abbott resurfaced: Abbott vetoed a statewide ban earlier this year and instead used an executive order to tighten rules for minors.
- Industry groups and policy advocates pledge legal and legislative fights, calling for science-based regulation rather than an outright nationwide prohibition.
Background
The 2018 federal farm bill legalized hemp containing no more than 0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight, unleashing rapid growth in hemp-derived products that often rely on other THC isomers or concentrates. Many manufacturers and retailers built businesses on that federal threshold, while state rules varied on how to treat non-delta-9 derivatives. In Texas, lawmakers passed a 2019 law aligning with the farm bill’s delta-9 limit but left other hemp derivatives less clearly regulated, a gap critics say the industry exploited to sell intoxicating products.
Earlier in 2025 this schism produced a political fight in Austin: Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick pushed for a full ban on consumable THC products, while Gov. Greg Abbott vetoed that measure and urged stricter regulation instead. Abbott later issued an executive order tightening controls, including prohibitions targeting minors, but that stopgap did not settle the broader debate about commerce and public-health risk. The federal action now moves the dispute from state capitols to Congress and the courts, with national implications for products ranging from gummies to vapes.
Main event
Negotiators added the hemp restriction late in the package that funds the Department of Agriculture for a year; it was not the subject of a standalone vote in the House. The language sets a per-product THC ceiling of 0.4 milligrams, a limit supporters say prevents high-potency items from reaching consumers. Opponents counter that the measure’s numeric cap, combined with criminal penalties, will eliminate most consumable hemp goods offered legally since 2019.
Texas Republicans were split as the deal moved to the president’s desk. Sen. John Cornyn voted against an amendment that would have removed the hemp language, while Sen. Ted Cruz voted to strip it, arguing states should set their own rules. In the House, several Texas Republicans said they opposed including the hemp ban in the package but voted for the overall bill to restore federal funding and reopen the government.
Representative Dan Crenshaw, R-Houston, said he believes regulation should be handled by states and that the hemp provision would not change his vote to end the shutdown. Representative Troy Nehls, R-Richmond, likewise expressed preference for a separate debate but prioritized reopening federal operations. Other members, like Reps. Keith Self and Pete Sessions, praised the amendment as necessary to stop intoxicating hemp derivatives from proliferating.
The practical effect, if fully enforced, would be to criminalize many edible, beverage, vape and flower products currently sold in Texas and nationwide. Industry participants and some lawmakers argue that tighter licensing and lab-testing rules could address safety concerns without reviving prohibition; supporters of the ban say a clear federal limit will better protect youth and public health.
Analysis & implications
Economically, the federal ban threatens a supply chain that, by some estimates, supports an $8 billion Texas industry and thousands of small businesses and retailers. If manufacturers cannot reformulate products to meet a 0.4 mg-per-item standard while retaining profitability, markets could contract sharply and many retailers could exit the category. That would ripple through distributors, testing labs and agricultural suppliers tied to hemp farming and processing.
Legally, the provision may prompt rapid litigation. Businesses and trade groups are likely to challenge the ban on statutory and constitutional grounds, arguing either that the language exceeds Congress’ authority or that it improperly criminalizes products previously treated as lawful under the 2018 farm bill. Courts will have to interpret the measure’s numeric threshold against existing federal and state hemp frameworks, which could produce stays or narrowing opinions that affect enforcement timing.
Politically, the move reshapes intra-party dynamics in Texas and nationally. Conservative supporters of the ban, including Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, will claim victory for public-health and anti-intoxication arguments; rural and business constituencies harmed by the ban will push back. The controversy could drive state legislatures to either tighten protections for local hemp economies or to pursue preemption challenges aiming to preserve state regulatory flexibility.
Comparison & data
| Rule | Metric | Limit |
|---|---|---|
| 2018 Farm Bill (federal) | Delta-9 THC concentration | ≤ 0.3% by dry weight |
| New funding-law provision | Per-product THC amount (all isomers) | ≤ 0.4 mg per item |
| Texas 2019 law | Delta-9 THC concentration | Trace amounts only; follows federal delta-9 standard |
The new 0.4 mg-per-item standard differs in kind from the 2018 farm bill’s percentage-based delta-9 limit: percentage thresholds scale with product weight, while an absolute milligram cap sets a firm maximum regardless of form or size. That means small-dose items or concentrated extracts can be treated differently than bulk plant material, complicating compliance and enforcement across product types and state rules.
Reactions & quotes
Supporters framed the measure as a necessary fix to curb intoxicating hemp derivatives that they say circumvent prior rules.
“This closes a loophole that allowed intoxicating and dangerous high-potency THC products like Delta-8 to flood our communities,”
Rep. Pete Sessions
Opponents and industry groups warned of economic harm and urged regulation over prohibition.
“Banning it and sending us back into an era of prohibition is going to cause far more harm than good,”
Heather Fazio, Texas Cannabis Policy Center
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick celebrated the outcome as aligned with his long-term push for a national restriction.
“Consumable, highly intoxicating hemp-derived THC is essentially banned in America,”
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (social post)
Unconfirmed
- Whether federal enforcement will prioritize prosecutions against small retailers or focus on manufacturers remains unclear; enforcement policy details have not yet been published.
- Estimates of total job losses in Texas are projections by industry groups and have not been independently verified by state labor data.
- The timeline for expected legal challenges and their likely outcomes is uncertain; litigation could delay or limit enforcement.
Bottom line
The inclusion of a 0.4 mg THC-per-item limit in a must-pass spending bill shifts the hemp debate from state legislatures to a national statute with immediate economic and regulatory consequences. For Texas, where the hemp sector was valued at roughly $8 billion and supported thousands of retailers, the provision threatens rapid market contraction unless businesses adapt or courts intervene. Policymakers and stakeholders should expect swift litigation and a scramble to reconcile federal rules with existing state frameworks and industry practices.
Key next steps for interested parties include monitoring regulatory guidance about enforcement, evaluating product reformulation strategies to meet the milligram cap, and pursuing legislative or judicial avenues to seek clarifications or repeal. The dispute highlights the broader tension between public-health concerns and the economic interests built around hemp since federal legalization in 2018.
Sources
- Texas Tribune (news media)
- 2018 Farm Bill (H.R.2) (official congressional record)