Missouri Prosecutors Come Out Against Adult-Use Cannabis Legalization Measure – Cannabis Business Times

Advocates behind Florida’s 2024 adult-use cannabis ballot initiative are hoping to avoid the same fate as a pair of 2022 measures: rejection from the state’s Supreme Court.

In both cases, the state’s justices ruled in 5-2 decisions that the attempts to legalize adult-use cannabis were misleading to voters and were not sufficient to appear on this November’s ballot.

On the heels of those judicial hiccups, Tallahassee-based multistate operator Trulieve and country music duo The Bellamy Brothers have teamed up to back the 2024 “Adult Personal Use of Marijuana” petition via the Smart & Safe Florida political committee. David Bellamy chairs the committee, and Trulieve is driving it financially through $10 million in contributions so far.

RELATED: Trulieve Deposits Another $5 Million Into Florida 2024 Initiative

But what’s stopping the Florida Supreme Court from shutting down the pipeline to the ballot yet again? The secret is in simplicity, Jonathan Robbins, chair of Akerman LLP’s national cannabis practice, told Cannabis Business Times.

“I think they kept it very simple for that reason,” said Robbins, whose Florida-based firm represents Trulieve and many other of the state’s 22 Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers (MMTCs), as well as other companies hoping to gain access to the state’s medical program. MMTC is the overarching term for a vertically integrated business in Florida.

There’s nothing in the 2024 adult-use ballot initiative about undoing the state’s mandate that licensees must be vertically integrated, from seed to sale, Robbins said. There’s nothing about licensing caps or a licensing structure. There’s nothing about wholesaling between MMTCs. And there’s nothing about social equity programs or social justice initiatives, he said.

“I think this thing will probably have a very good shot at making the ballot for 2024 because the language is—and I don’t think it’s a mistake—so simple, so straightforward that I think they want to make sure that they pass muster with the Florida Supreme Court,” Robbins said. “[Language] killed the last two proposals.”

In an effort to abide by the state’s single-subject rule, the 2024 ballot proposal would put the power of creating rules and regulations in the hands of state lawmakers with a mid-2025 effective date for the amendment, if passed by voters.

Here, Robbins dives deeper into the possible impacts the initiative would have on Florida’s state market, and how its passage would affect existing MMTCs as well as those who have been looking for a way into the space since 2016.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for style, length and clarity

Tony Lange: What stands out about the adult-use cannabis petition that Trulieve and The Bellamy Brothers are driving?

Akerman LLP | www.akerman.com/en/

Jonathan Robbins

Jonathan Robbins: In terms of it having legs, what stands out is [its] simplicity. [Trulieve] put a pretty sizeable amount of money toward this initiative because the most expensive thing is getting all the signatures that they have to get on the ballot. In Florida, you need about 900,000 signatures. And that’s a very costly endeavor.

Once they do that, then the question is: Will the language be sufficient with the Florida Supreme Court? And so, yes, I think they kept it very simple for that reason. There’s nothing in there about breaking up vertical integration. There’s nothing in there about social equity programs or social justice initiatives. And, at first, I was like, “Jeez, I wish they put it in there.” And then I was thinking, well, maybe they purposely didn’t because they want to avoid any confusion or anybody arguing that the language is not clear and concise in terms of what exactly the people are voting for.

TL: What you’re saying is that the 2024 proposal’s simplicity is what’s stopping the Supreme Court from intervening, like it did with the 2022 measures?

JR: I think it’d be pretty tough [for the Supreme Court to reject the 2024 measure], because this is a constitutional amendment, much like we had back in 2016. Prior to 2016 in Florida, our medical program really consisted of a high-CBD, low-THC program, and the Legislature, just regardless of the fact that people wanted [a high-THC program], the Legislature just wasn’t going do anything about it. Ultimately, they had to get a well-financed constitutional amendment [on the ballot] for a more robust program down here, which [voters] passed in 2016 and which resulted in the program we have today. Not that it’s perfect, because it’s far from perfect, but at least we do have a real medical cannabis program where patients can actually get what it is their doctor recommends.

I anticipate that will happen again [in 2024]. Obviously it’s not going to be for medical purposes, but I do believe that the voters of this state are going to be behind it. If there’s a challenge from the governor’s office [or] the Department of Health, it’ll be up to the Supreme Court to look at the language and make sure that the language is clear and concise, and the voters understand exactly what they’re voting for and that it covers a single subject, because there’s a single-subject rule. You can’t have constitutional amendments covering multiple issues or subjects. The language is pretty straightforward. So, I have to imagine it’ll withstand a challenge, but I guess that will remain.

TL: Do you think the single-subject rule is a means to allow state lawmakers to maintain broad legislative authority on ballot measures that get passed?

JR: I would tend to agree with you. I certainly think that there’s an incentive for the Legislature to want to maintain the legislative authority over all this stuff and not just have, you know, the voters starting to substitute their judgment in, even though the legislators are supposed to be following the judgment of voters.

[The 2024 ballot language] leaves it up to the Legislature to be able to craft implementing rules and regs. And, hopefully, they’ll address some of the deficiencies that aren’t covered by the amendment.

TL: If the 2024 ballot measure passes, how would that impact the state’s licensing structure and roll-out of new licenses?

JR: The constitutional amendment is silent as to how and how many new licenses will be issued. It’s basically saying, “we’re leaving that to the Legislature.” The last constitutional amendment, the one that passed in 2016, was pretty specific in that there were no caps on the number of licenses. There was no requirement for full vertical integration. In fact, the intent document made it clear that they did not contemplate full vertical integration. And then the Legislature came in and basically said, “Nope,” you know, seed-to-sale, and we’re only going to give out—at that time—it was like 16 licenses. And that’s that. And that’s why that Florigrown case came about because we challenged the constitutionality of the caps and of the requirement for full vertical integration.

Editor’s note: In early 2017, Tampa-based Florigrown applied for a retail license just before lawmakers passed the bill that would implement rules requiring vertical integration in Florida’s medical market. Later that year, Florigrown filed a lawsuit declaring that the Legislature’s vertical integration provision was unconstitutional because it didn’t align with the 2016 voter-approved amendment.

If we still have a conservative Legislature in Florida [in 2024], I have no reason to believe that the floodgates are going to open up in terms of licensing or in terms of allowing, you know, mom and pops to just run dispensaries because they can’t afford to have a cultivation facility and a processing facility. It would be nice. I think that most states that started out as vertically integrated have figured out it doesn’t really work. I think with a recreational program, or adult-use program, it’ll be really difficult for it to work because they won’t even be able to be wholesaling between stores and things like that.

So, I have to imagine that the Legislature will come in and try to help facilitate the program if they understand that that’s what the people want and allow people to run it in a responsible manner, but still in a manner that allows consumers to take advantage of pricing and availability and more options and things like that. But a very long-winded way to say, I guess it remains to be seen.

TL: Florida’s Health Department was supposed to issue 20-some additional MMTC licenses by now based on patient numbers: Do you think the department will issue those additional licenses before the 2024 election?

JR: Before the 2024 election? I sure hope so. I have a lot of clients who are extremely anxious to be able to apply for a license, and they have been promising this since 2017. And even though we have 22 licensees here, we’ve never really had a formal application process. They had an application process back in 2015 for the original five high-CBD, low-THC licenses. They gave out those five. Every other license that has been given out since then, meaning the other 17, have been by way of resolution of litigation.

RELATED: Florida Appeals Court Denies Demand to Open Cannabis License Application Window

In other words, nobody in Florida has yet, despite the rules, despite the money that’s been spent, despite the ungodly amount of money some of my clients have spent putting together these applications, they’ve never been able to apply yet. There’s never been a competitive application process. So, we’ve had a series of lawsuits that ended up in, effectively, default licenses being given out. And then we’ve had a series of secondary market sales of these licenses for big, big, big-time money. And so, what we have ultimately ended up with is a market that’s dominated by multistate operators.

There are entrepreneurs who are not as wealthy, who would like to be able to get into the market—we’re talking about medical now—they would like to be able to serve patients. They’d like to be able to serve underserved communities. And it’s really frustrating that that hasn’t happened. The department of health has told us that we can expect to see the licenses before the end of year, but I’ve heard that again and again and again, and I definitely have heard and have expressed my own concern that this new ballot initiative will be used—it shouldn’t be—but somehow or another as an excuse to delay the process.

TL: With the absence of a social equity provision in the 2024 initiative, do you think certain advocacy groups will push back against the measure?

JR: I would think, if I had to guess, that the people who really want to see a real social equity program in Florida—something that truly makes a difference—I think that the people who want to see that, my guess is that the lobbying will be on the legislative front. In other words, let’s see if we can get this thing passed, and then we can put pressure on the Legislature to make sure it’s rolled out properly and responsibly and in a way that is fair.

TL: Do you foresee other Florida MMTCs joining Trulieve with financial contributions to the initiative?

JR: I would anticipate so, yes, because the way that it’s written, the existing MMTCs, you know, we only have 22 licensees down here right now. We’re supposed to have more. But as of now, we only have 22, and the way that the initiative is written, it doesn’t say, “Oh, we’re going to have the monopoly and can’t let any other licenses in,” but the existing MMTCs will be able to sell cannabis for adult use. They’re going to be on the ground up and running already. So, I would anticipate, yes, there’s every incentive for the other 21 licensees down here to want to join in.

TL: Do you foresee any challenges in meeting the statewide signature threshold for the 2024 initiative?

JR: I think they’re going to make it. They’ve got a lot of money behind it. And I think the support is already there, not even just in the state, but nationally. But even in Florida, which is sort of a unique state, to say the least, all the polling I’ve seen suggest that people want it here. And [Florida] will need 60% [of its voters] for it to pass. It’ll be a supermajority for it to pass. So, the answer is, yeah, I think that they will collect 900,000 signatures—the verifiable signatures—and I’m hopeful that it’ll pass and makes the ballot.

Advisory Committee Reports: Kentuckians want medical cannabis legalized – The Lane Report

FRANKFORT, Ky. — Kentuckians agree that it is past time for the Commonwealth to take action on legalizing medical cannabis, Gov. Andy Beshear said as he released a summary of the feedback obtained by his Medical Cannabis Advisory Committee.

As a supporter of legalizing medical cannabis for those suffering from chronic conditions, like our veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the Governor formed the Team Kentucky Medical Cannabis Advisory Committee to travel the state and listen to Kentuckians’ views on the topic after the state legislature failed to pass legislation earlier this year.

“Polling suggests 90% of Kentucky adults support legalizing medical cannabis. Our team traveled the state to talk directly to Kentuckians, and they found our people do indeed overwhelmingly support it,” Gov. Beshear said. “I appreciate the work of those who participated, and I am taking this information into consideration as I analyze what steps I can take to legalize medical cannabis for those suffering from chronic, debilitating medical conditions.”

The Governor said the summary from the committee included these key findings:

  • Kentuckians of all ages are suffering from chronic conditions. Medical providers are prescribing opioids and painkillers that do not provide relief, and Kentuckians fear their addictive properties. Research indicates individuals cannot overdose on cannabis.
  • Kentuckians are leaving the state to access medical cannabis in states where it is legal. They want to be able to return to the commonwealth without breaking the law.
  • Kentucky military veterans explained that PTSD was significantly eased by the use of cannabis.

Kerry Harvey, the co-chair of the committee and secretary of the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, noted the advisory committee did not hear any opposition at their town hall meetings.

“Everyone who spoke supported legalizing medical cannabis in Kentucky,” Harvey said. “We heard from many Kentuckians that use cannabis for its beneficial medical effects but can only do so by breaking the law as it now exists. Many of these Kentuckians must leave the commonwealth to legally obtain medical cannabis in one of the 38 states where it is legal.”

Attendees of the town hall meetings recounted finding relief from medical cannabis after living with chronic symptoms for many years. These Kentuckians reported an increased ability to engage in the activities of daily living after using cannabis. For them, medical cannabis proved effective, while other treatments, such as opioids, did not.

“Our nation is dealing with a critical crisis from the overuse of addictive opioids. The people we heard from are looking for pain relief that allows them to live useful, productive lives,” said Ray Perry, co-chair of the committee and secretary of the Public Protection Cabinet. “We heard about family trauma stemming from unresolved pain and addictive painkillers. We also heard the frustration that politics deprives them of legal access to an efficacious treatment available to an overwhelming majority of Americans.”

Military veterans attending the town halls emphasized the benefits of cannabis in reducing PTSD symptoms. Some described the inability to sleep because of the disorder, while others reported being prescribed numerous medications to ease pain, treat anxiety, sleep or move their joints fully.

A veteran from Northern Kentucky, who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, described his daily struggle after being prescribed 13 medications that weren’t effective, which left him contemplating suicide. After turning to cannabis, he said, “Within a year, I didn’t drink and was off 12 of the 13 medications. I still have all those injuries and disabilities, but I can function. I can live. I can have friendships and conversations again.”

In addition to the town hall meetings, the state’s medical cannabis website allowed Kentuckians to submit their opinions online. The website received 3,539 comments, 98.64% of which expressed support for legalizing medical cannabis in Kentucky.

Click here for more Kentucky business news.

Auburn to hold public hearing on zoning changes: Cannabis, smoke shops and more – The Citizen

The city of Auburn will hold a public hearing Oct. 4 on proposed changes to its zoning code, several of which concern the possible opening of cannabis businesses in the city.

The hearing will take place at 6:30 p.m. that Tuesday during the Auburn Planning Board meeting in council chambers on the first floor of Memorial City Hall, 24 South St., Auburn.

The cannabis changes would take effect as New York prepares to launch its industry after the substance was legalized by the state last year. They include the addition of retail uses to general commercial-zoned areas, the addition of both retail and consumption sites to highway commercial areas, and preempted uses like cannabis nurseries added to commercial greenhouse or heavy commercial.

Cannabis dispensaries and consumption sites, which the city did not „opt out” of, would be limited to operating from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., per the changes. They will also be prohibited from opening within 1,000 feet of another cannabis retail business; 500 feet of a school, nursery school, day care or playground; 300 feet of a single-family, two-family or townhouse residence; and 200 feet of a church.

People are also reading…

The changes also include several regarding smoke shops. They would be subject to the same time and distance restrictions as cannabis businesses, and required to post signage that minors may not enter.

Additional changes concern prohibited home occupations. Joining the list would be animal hospitals and kennels, motor vehicle-specific uses, restaurants and nightclubs, sales of retail goods and tobacco, vape and adult-use marijuana uses. Other changes concern stormwater management, landscaping and buffers, lighting, off-street parking and loading, and outdoor seating.

For more information, including a full list of the proposed changes, visit auburnny.gov.

As New York gets closer to the day when recreational cannabis can be legally sold in the majority of the state, local municipalities are using…

San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors Approves New Cannabis Tax Compliance Program – Cannabis Business Times

Advocates behind Florida’s 2024 adult-use cannabis ballot initiative are hoping to avoid the same fate as a pair of 2022 measures: rejection from the state’s Supreme Court.

In both cases, the state’s justices ruled in 5-2 decisions that the attempts to legalize adult-use cannabis were misleading to voters and were not sufficient to appear on this November’s ballot.

On the heels of those judicial hiccups, Tallahassee-based multistate operator Trulieve and country music duo The Bellamy Brothers have teamed up to back the 2024 “Adult Personal Use of Marijuana” petition via the Smart & Safe Florida political committee. David Bellamy chairs the committee, and Trulieve is driving it financially through $10 million in contributions so far.

RELATED: Trulieve Deposits Another $5 Million Into Florida 2024 Initiative

But what’s stopping the Florida Supreme Court from shutting down the pipeline to the ballot yet again? The secret is in simplicity, Jonathan Robbins, chair of Akerman LLP’s national cannabis practice, told Cannabis Business Times.

“I think they kept it very simple for that reason,” said Robbins, whose Florida-based firm represents Trulieve and many other of the state’s 22 Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers (MMTCs), as well as other companies hoping to gain access to the state’s medical program. MMTC is the overarching term for a vertically integrated business in Florida.

There’s nothing in the 2024 adult-use ballot initiative about undoing the state’s mandate that licensees must be vertically integrated, from seed to sale, Robbins said. There’s nothing about licensing caps or a licensing structure. There’s nothing about wholesaling between MMTCs. And there’s nothing about social equity programs or social justice initiatives, he said.

“I think this thing will probably have a very good shot at making the ballot for 2024 because the language is—and I don’t think it’s a mistake—so simple, so straightforward that I think they want to make sure that they pass muster with the Florida Supreme Court,” Robbins said. “[Language] killed the last two proposals.”

In an effort to abide by the state’s single-subject rule, the 2024 ballot proposal would put the power of creating rules and regulations in the hands of state lawmakers with a mid-2025 effective date for the amendment, if passed by voters.

Here, Robbins dives deeper into the possible impacts the initiative would have on Florida’s state market, and how its passage would affect existing MMTCs as well as those who have been looking for a way into the space since 2016.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for style, length and clarity

Tony Lange: What stands out about the adult-use cannabis petition that Trulieve and The Bellamy Brothers are driving?

Akerman LLP | www.akerman.com/en/

Jonathan Robbins

Jonathan Robbins: In terms of it having legs, what stands out is [its] simplicity. [Trulieve] put a pretty sizeable amount of money toward this initiative because the most expensive thing is getting all the signatures that they have to get on the ballot. In Florida, you need about 900,000 signatures. And that’s a very costly endeavor.

Once they do that, then the question is: Will the language be sufficient with the Florida Supreme Court? And so, yes, I think they kept it very simple for that reason. There’s nothing in there about breaking up vertical integration. There’s nothing in there about social equity programs or social justice initiatives. And, at first, I was like, “Jeez, I wish they put it in there.” And then I was thinking, well, maybe they purposely didn’t because they want to avoid any confusion or anybody arguing that the language is not clear and concise in terms of what exactly the people are voting for.

TL: What you’re saying is that the 2024 proposal’s simplicity is what’s stopping the Supreme Court from intervening, like it did with the 2022 measures?

JR: I think it’d be pretty tough [for the Supreme Court to reject the 2024 measure], because this is a constitutional amendment, much like we had back in 2016. Prior to 2016 in Florida, our medical program really consisted of a high-CBD, low-THC program, and the Legislature, just regardless of the fact that people wanted [a high-THC program], the Legislature just wasn’t going do anything about it. Ultimately, they had to get a well-financed constitutional amendment [on the ballot] for a more robust program down here, which [voters] passed in 2016 and which resulted in the program we have today. Not that it’s perfect, because it’s far from perfect, but at least we do have a real medical cannabis program where patients can actually get what it is their doctor recommends.

I anticipate that will happen again [in 2024]. Obviously it’s not going to be for medical purposes, but I do believe that the voters of this state are going to be behind it. If there’s a challenge from the governor’s office [or] the Department of Health, it’ll be up to the Supreme Court to look at the language and make sure that the language is clear and concise, and the voters understand exactly what they’re voting for and that it covers a single subject, because there’s a single-subject rule. You can’t have constitutional amendments covering multiple issues or subjects. The language is pretty straightforward. So, I have to imagine it’ll withstand a challenge, but I guess that will remain.

TL: Do you think the single-subject rule is a means to allow state lawmakers to maintain broad legislative authority on ballot measures that get passed?

JR: I would tend to agree with you. I certainly think that there’s an incentive for the Legislature to want to maintain the legislative authority over all this stuff and not just have, you know, the voters starting to substitute their judgment in, even though the legislators are supposed to be following the judgment of voters.

[The 2024 ballot language] leaves it up to the Legislature to be able to craft implementing rules and regs. And, hopefully, they’ll address some of the deficiencies that aren’t covered by the amendment.

TL: If the 2024 ballot measure passes, how would that impact the state’s licensing structure and roll-out of new licenses?

JR: The constitutional amendment is silent as to how and how many new licenses will be issued. It’s basically saying, “we’re leaving that to the Legislature.” The last constitutional amendment, the one that passed in 2016, was pretty specific in that there were no caps on the number of licenses. There was no requirement for full vertical integration. In fact, the intent document made it clear that they did not contemplate full vertical integration. And then the Legislature came in and basically said, “Nope,” you know, seed-to-sale, and we’re only going to give out—at that time—it was like 16 licenses. And that’s that. And that’s why that Florigrown case came about because we challenged the constitutionality of the caps and of the requirement for full vertical integration.

Editor’s note: In early 2017, Tampa-based Florigrown applied for a retail license just before lawmakers passed the bill that would implement rules requiring vertical integration in Florida’s medical market. Later that year, Florigrown filed a lawsuit declaring that the Legislature’s vertical integration provision was unconstitutional because it didn’t align with the 2016 voter-approved amendment.

If we still have a conservative Legislature in Florida [in 2024], I have no reason to believe that the floodgates are going to open up in terms of licensing or in terms of allowing, you know, mom and pops to just run dispensaries because they can’t afford to have a cultivation facility and a processing facility. It would be nice. I think that most states that started out as vertically integrated have figured out it doesn’t really work. I think with a recreational program, or adult-use program, it’ll be really difficult for it to work because they won’t even be able to be wholesaling between stores and things like that.

So, I have to imagine that the Legislature will come in and try to help facilitate the program if they understand that that’s what the people want and allow people to run it in a responsible manner, but still in a manner that allows consumers to take advantage of pricing and availability and more options and things like that. But a very long-winded way to say, I guess it remains to be seen.

TL: Florida’s Health Department was supposed to issue 20-some additional MMTC licenses by now based on patient numbers: Do you think the department will issue those additional licenses before the 2024 election?

JR: Before the 2024 election? I sure hope so. I have a lot of clients who are extremely anxious to be able to apply for a license, and they have been promising this since 2017. And even though we have 22 licensees here, we’ve never really had a formal application process. They had an application process back in 2015 for the original five high-CBD, low-THC licenses. They gave out those five. Every other license that has been given out since then, meaning the other 17, have been by way of resolution of litigation.

RELATED: Florida Appeals Court Denies Demand to Open Cannabis License Application Window

In other words, nobody in Florida has yet, despite the rules, despite the money that’s been spent, despite the ungodly amount of money some of my clients have spent putting together these applications, they’ve never been able to apply yet. There’s never been a competitive application process. So, we’ve had a series of lawsuits that ended up in, effectively, default licenses being given out. And then we’ve had a series of secondary market sales of these licenses for big, big, big-time money. And so, what we have ultimately ended up with is a market that’s dominated by multistate operators.

There are entrepreneurs who are not as wealthy, who would like to be able to get into the market—we’re talking about medical now—they would like to be able to serve patients. They’d like to be able to serve underserved communities. And it’s really frustrating that that hasn’t happened. The department of health has told us that we can expect to see the licenses before the end of year, but I’ve heard that again and again and again, and I definitely have heard and have expressed my own concern that this new ballot initiative will be used—it shouldn’t be—but somehow or another as an excuse to delay the process.

TL: With the absence of a social equity provision in the 2024 initiative, do you think certain advocacy groups will push back against the measure?

JR: I would think, if I had to guess, that the people who really want to see a real social equity program in Florida—something that truly makes a difference—I think that the people who want to see that, my guess is that the lobbying will be on the legislative front. In other words, let’s see if we can get this thing passed, and then we can put pressure on the Legislature to make sure it’s rolled out properly and responsibly and in a way that is fair.

TL: Do you foresee other Florida MMTCs joining Trulieve with financial contributions to the initiative?

JR: I would anticipate so, yes, because the way that it’s written, the existing MMTCs, you know, we only have 22 licensees down here right now. We’re supposed to have more. But as of now, we only have 22, and the way that the initiative is written, it doesn’t say, “Oh, we’re going to have the monopoly and can’t let any other licenses in,” but the existing MMTCs will be able to sell cannabis for adult use. They’re going to be on the ground up and running already. So, I would anticipate, yes, there’s every incentive for the other 21 licensees down here to want to join in.

TL: Do you foresee any challenges in meeting the statewide signature threshold for the 2024 initiative?

JR: I think they’re going to make it. They’ve got a lot of money behind it. And I think the support is already there, not even just in the state, but nationally. But even in Florida, which is sort of a unique state, to say the least, all the polling I’ve seen suggest that people want it here. And [Florida] will need 60% [of its voters] for it to pass. It’ll be a supermajority for it to pass. So, the answer is, yeah, I think that they will collect 900,000 signatures—the verifiable signatures—and I’m hopeful that it’ll pass and makes the ballot.

Cannabis Conspiracy? As Weed Prices Plummet In Michigan, Big Operators Push Legislators To Stymy New Comp – Benzinga

Michigan’s largest marijuana operators are plotting an offensive to keep competitors from getting into the market as weed prices plummet, reported Crain’s Detroit.

At the request of a lobbyist for some of the state’s largest growers, the Legislative Service Bureau has drawn up new legislation to prohibit the Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency from approving any new grower licenses, according to Crain’s.

The draft legislation effectively calls for a moratorium on licenses for an undetermined period of time.

A Crain’s anonymous source said the draft legislation has no legislative sponsors as yet but is expected to be introduced after the November election. It’s also unclear whether the language in the draft legislation will make the final bill.

Over Supply And Falling Prices

The cannabis industry has been struggling with falling prices, oversupply and limited retail outlets. And it seems investors are getting spooked. Hence the pressure on regulators to get rid of the competition.

Prices for wholesale recreational weed in Michigan dropped to as low, or lower than those in states that have been at it for far longer, highlighting how quickly new markets are moving, especially in Michigan where there is no limit on business licenses.

Small Growers Most Affected

Because of the falling prices, small growers complain they’re being consumed by large corporate firms in a „race to the bottom,” reported MLive in late summer. Now it seems everyone is joining the race to the bottom.

Slim margins, too much product and not enough places to sell it combined with the fact that municipalities can opt out of allowing cannabis shops to operate are creating a deadly atmosphere for all involved. Not to mention that Detroit, the state’s largest city, only began taking applications for retail outlets in mid-September.

„Nobody is making a lot of money and many are losing money,” Lance Boldrey, partner at Detroit-based law firm Dykema Gossett PLLC told Crain’s in August. „We are seeing a ton of consolidation out of necessity. We expected that as the industry matured, but now that it’s been here a while it’s just tough. We’re starting to see outright business failures.” 

Painful, no doubt.

Supreme Court trial on homegrow ban reveals a bigger issue in federal cannabis legalization – Leafly

Supreme Court trial on homegrow ban reveals a bigger issue in federal cannabis legalization | Leafly










Loading…

In Canada, legalization grants people the ability to grow up to four cannabis plants per household for personal use—unless, of course, you live in Manitoba or Quebec.

The two provinces have banned adult-use cannabis cultivation at home since the beginning of federal legalization in 2018. A man from Quebec is trying to get the province to reconsider. Janick Murray-Hall is challenging the ban on behalf of himself and any others that may be penalized for growing cannabis at home.

The ongoing legal battle began in 2019 and reached another milestone as the case was heard before the Supreme Court of Canada on the morning of September 15. The hearing took place, as an exception, in Quebec City instead of Ottawa as part of a Supreme Court initiative to make the justice system more accessible to Canadians.

Does a provincial cannabis cultivation ban supersede the rights granted under federal legalization?

Murray-Hall believes that sections 5 and 10 of Quebec’s Cannabis Regulation Act are against Canadian’s charter rights and freedom on the grounds that they directly contravene the federal Cannabis Act. Under the Act, Canadians are permitted to grow and possess up to four cannabis plants per household for personal consumption. 

He says that federal law should take precedence over provincial legislation.

In court on Thursday, Murray-Hall’s lawyer, Maxime Guérin, accused the province of creating legislation to “stigmatize the possession and growing and consumption of cannabis,” saying that it undermined the values of the federal act.

“The Quebec government was really looking to offset or counteract the federal legislation,” Guérin told the court as he answered questions from the nine Supreme Court justices seated in the Quebec City courtroom.

Guérin also told the court that the federal regulations “seem to grant positive rights” to Canadians with regard to growing and possessing cannabis plants. 

But Patricia Blair, legal representation for the Attorney General of Quebec, told the court that while the federal Cannabis Act may render it not federally illegal to grow cannabis, it doesn’t give Canadians the right or entitlement to do so.

Blair noted that the Criminal Code is not intended to bestow “positive rights,” but to prohibit specific activities.

Blair also stressed that the provincial legislation, including the ban on home cultivation, is intended to ensure the respective safety of Quebec’s youth and its cannabis consumers.

This means that ultimately, according to Blair, the provincial legislation does in fact have “the same objective” as the federal Cannabis Act, despite Murray-Hill’s claims of a disparity.

The court also heard from a long line of interveners, whose role is to advance their own view of a legal matter before the court and to aid in providing a broader perspective on a particular issue than those of the respondents and appellants. 

Parties with intervener status included representatives from advocacy groups such as the Canadian Cancer Society, Canadian Association for Progres in Justice, and Cannabis Amnesty; from industry groups such as the Cannabis Council of Canada and Quebec Cannabis Industry Association; and the Attorneys General of Saskatchewan, Alberta, Ontario, British Columbia, and Manitoba, the latter being the only other province in Canada where home cultivation is banned. 

Canadians can grow four plants at home—except in Manitoba and Quebec

The legal challenge dates back to 2019 when applicant Murray-Hall, best known for being the creator of the parody website “Le Journal de Mourréal,” challenged two sections of the provincial cannabis legislation that prohibit Quebecers from growing cannabis at home and/or possessing cannabis plants for personal use. 

The Superior Court sided with Murray-Hall and found both sections 5 and 10 of the provincial Act to be constitutionally invalid.

In her ruling, Justice Manon Lavoie wrote that the sections infringed upon the jurisdiction of the federal government, which permitted the home cultivation of up to four plants per household and is solely responsible for the legislation of criminal affairs. 

Justice Lavoie noted that while the province could potentially place further limits on home cultivation, it could not ban the practice outright. But the decision was overturned in September 2021 by the Quebec Court of Appeal, which unanimously ruled the provisions in question to be constitutionally valid.

Murray-Hall then escalated the battle to the country’s highest court.

Despite overwhelming public support for home cultivation in surveys pre-legalization, growing cannabis at home will cost you. Persons caught possessing or growing cannabis for personal use in Quebec face a fine of $250 to $750 for a first offence, with the amount doubled for a second offence, under the current legislation. 

Related

One store’s legal battle to free the pot leaf and save Quebecois cannabis culture

La belle province has long had some of the strictest cannabis laws in the country, including the highest legal minimum age to consume (21 and over), limits on how much cannabis residents can possess in private, and additional restrictions on products like edibles, shirts, bongs, and books.

Manitoba is the only other province in Canada that has banned adult-use home cultivation. 

This trial could set the stage for challenging provincial bans in other provinces too

Outside of Quebec, Manitoba residents will be the most directly affected by the upcoming ruling.

A decision that upholds the provincial ban in Quebec would essentially set Manitoba’s own cultivation ban in stone. If the ban is struck down as unconstitutional then many homes in Manitoba may get a little bit greener in the near future, to the likely chagrin of the Attorney General’s office. 

For the rest of Canada, the consequences may be less immediately evident in day-to-day life, but Toronto-based lawyer and former NORML Canada director Caryma Sa’d told Leafly that the decision rendered in this case could set a precedent that has legal consequences that extend beyond home cannabis cultivation in Quebec. 

A good example of this might be Alberta (Attorney General) vs. Moloney, a 2015 case involving car insurance and a conflict between provincial and federal legislation that has been repeatedly cited by attorneys and in intervener factums as this case winds its way through the court system.

Sa’d says that Murray-Hill’s argument that federal law trumps provincial legislation has some validity and cites the doctrine of paramountcy, which stipulates that in cases where federal and provincial laws are in conflict, federal laws will prevail. 

The Societé Québecoise du Cannabis (SQDC) has earned an estimated $168.5 million in net income since legalization and recently announced a net income of $20.5 million for its first quarter ending in June 2022.

The conflict can consist of a direct operational conflict, where it is impossible to comply with both federal and provincial laws, or an indirect operational conflict, wherein the operation of provincial legislation “frustrates” the purpose of federal laws. 

But that doesn’t mean that the case is open-and-shut.

“In the name of co-operative federalism, [the doctrine of paramountcy] has to be applied with restraint,” Sa’d explains. The crux of the legal argument comes down to this—does the Cannabis Act actually grant Canadians the positive right to grow and possess cannabis plants?

“Yes, I do think that it grants people the positive right,” she says, but cautions that the Justices may not see it that way. “Ultimately, the outcome is impossible to predict.”

Is Quebec protecting citizens or profit margin?

While attorneys for the province and some interveners stressed that the cultivation ban was about protecting consumers and the safety of young people, others have wondered if the province might also be protecting its own financial interest as Quebecers’ only source of legal weed.

In a recent investigation by MJBiz Daily, reporter Matt Lamers revealed that the most profitable cannabis businesses in Canada were, in fact, owned by the government. Number two on the list? Quebec’s own Societé Québecoise du Cannabis (SQDC)—the province’s sole legal cannabis retailer.

The SQDC has earned an estimated $168.5 million in net income since legalization and recently announced a net income of $20.5 million for its first quarter ending in June 2022. With an additional $33.5 million in the form of consumer and excise taxes, the SQDC generated a total of $54 million for the Quebec government that quarter.

“The purpose of the SQDC is not to make profits, but rather a to be a non-profit corporate Corporation,” Guérin said at the end of the hearing, noting that the cash went into “government coffers,” albeit with the stipulation that it be re-invested.

Won’t somebody please think of the children?

The protection of youth was repeatedly cited throughout the hearing, with provincial Attorneys General stressing the ban as a means of keeping kids and young people safe. 

But Montreal researcher Kira London-Nadeau, chair of Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy, founder of VoxCann, and a strategic advisor for the national Cannabis & Psychosis project of the Schizophrenia Society of Canada, is skeptical of the province’s argument that the ban on home cultivation protects young people. 

“Since the plant needs to be properly prepared in order to deliver any psychoactive effects, growing cannabis at home does not mean youth will have unbridled access,” London-Nadeau told Leafly.

“But perhaps even more importantly, growing cannabis at home opens the door for families to have open, honest and de-stigmatizing conversations about cannabis use.”

London-Nadeau believes that an age-appropriate but straightforward approach is integral when it comes to the safety and well-being of kids and teens.

“We need to do away with the idea that protecting youth means hiding things away from them and take actual responsibility for ensuring that young people have the tools and knowledge to make their own informed decisions,” she says. “This is the best way to support youth.”

Don’t expect to learn the trial verdict anytime soon

When the Supreme Court will rule is anyone’s guess, but Sa’d estimated that it could be months—or longer—before Canadians hear a decision. Until then, home horticulturalists in Quebec will have to fly under the radar to avoid hefty fines.

Alternatively, Quebecers have the option of (illegally) purchasing cannabis products from the illicit market that provincial legislation sought to eradicate, or (legally) purchasing cannabis products from a provincial retailer and handing their money over to the government that enacted the ban.

Regardless of how the Justices rule, it’s somewhat ironic that the province that values its autonomy above all else has lost all decision-making power in its long-game attempt to defend it. With the case now in federal hands, all Quebecers can do is wait.

How To Market Your Cannabis Brand On Instagram – Herb.co

Cannabis brands have experienced the wrath of Instagram’s community guidelines first-hand. These community guidelines state the following:

“Offering sexual services, buying or selling firearms, alcohol, and tobacco products between private individuals, and buying or selling non-medical or pharmaceutical drugs are also not allowed. We also remove content that attempts to trade, co-ordinate the trade of, donate, gift, or ask for non-medical drugs, as well as content that either admits to personal use (unless in the recovery context) or coordinates or promotes the use of non-medical drugs.”

The key takeaway here is “non-medical drugs,” aka recreational cannabis. Basically, the only way you can talk about the personal use of cannabis is if you’re sharing a story about recovering from it.

This is because cannabis is still illegal at a federal level in the United States. It’s still on the list of controlled substances, so promoting it takes some serious planning if you want to shimmy through these complicated guidelines.

Finally, Instagram’s choice of which accounts to flag and deactivate is very inconsistent. It’s not uncommon to see brands marketing their products like no tomorrow, and then your account ends up getting deactivated for something you thought was okay.

Michigan Regulators Warn Cannabis Licensees of Increased Fraudulent Activity – Cannabis Business Times

Advocates behind Florida’s 2024 adult-use cannabis ballot initiative are hoping to avoid the same fate as a pair of 2022 measures: rejection from the state’s Supreme Court.

In both cases, the state’s justices ruled in 5-2 decisions that the attempts to legalize adult-use cannabis were misleading to voters and were not sufficient to appear on this November’s ballot.

On the heels of those judicial hiccups, Tallahassee-based multistate operator Trulieve and country music duo The Bellamy Brothers have teamed up to back the 2024 “Adult Personal Use of Marijuana” petition via the Smart & Safe Florida political committee. David Bellamy chairs the committee, and Trulieve is driving it financially through $10 million in contributions so far.

RELATED: Trulieve Deposits Another $5 Million Into Florida 2024 Initiative

But what’s stopping the Florida Supreme Court from shutting down the pipeline to the ballot yet again? The secret is in simplicity, Jonathan Robbins, chair of Akerman LLP’s national cannabis practice, told Cannabis Business Times.

“I think they kept it very simple for that reason,” said Robbins, whose Florida-based firm represents Trulieve and many other of the state’s 22 Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers (MMTCs), as well as other companies hoping to gain access to the state’s medical program. MMTC is the overarching term for a vertically integrated business in Florida.

There’s nothing in the 2024 adult-use ballot initiative about undoing the state’s mandate that licensees must be vertically integrated, from seed to sale, Robbins said. There’s nothing about licensing caps or a licensing structure. There’s nothing about wholesaling between MMTCs. And there’s nothing about social equity programs or social justice initiatives, he said.

“I think this thing will probably have a very good shot at making the ballot for 2024 because the language is—and I don’t think it’s a mistake—so simple, so straightforward that I think they want to make sure that they pass muster with the Florida Supreme Court,” Robbins said. “[Language] killed the last two proposals.”

In an effort to abide by the state’s single-subject rule, the 2024 ballot proposal would put the power of creating rules and regulations in the hands of state lawmakers with a mid-2025 effective date for the amendment, if passed by voters.

Here, Robbins dives deeper into the possible impacts the initiative would have on Florida’s state market, and how its passage would affect existing MMTCs as well as those who have been looking for a way into the space since 2016.

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for style, length and clarity

Tony Lange: What stands out about the adult-use cannabis petition that Trulieve and The Bellamy Brothers are driving?

Akerman LLP | www.akerman.com/en/

Jonathan Robbins

Jonathan Robbins: In terms of it having legs, what stands out is [its] simplicity. [Trulieve] put a pretty sizeable amount of money toward this initiative because the most expensive thing is getting all the signatures that they have to get on the ballot. In Florida, you need about 900,000 signatures. And that’s a very costly endeavor.

Once they do that, then the question is: Will the language be sufficient with the Florida Supreme Court? And so, yes, I think they kept it very simple for that reason. There’s nothing in there about breaking up vertical integration. There’s nothing in there about social equity programs or social justice initiatives. And, at first, I was like, “Jeez, I wish they put it in there.” And then I was thinking, well, maybe they purposely didn’t because they want to avoid any confusion or anybody arguing that the language is not clear and concise in terms of what exactly the people are voting for.

TL: What you’re saying is that the 2024 proposal’s simplicity is what’s stopping the Supreme Court from intervening, like it did with the 2022 measures?

JR: I think it’d be pretty tough [for the Supreme Court to reject the 2024 measure], because this is a constitutional amendment, much like we had back in 2016. Prior to 2016 in Florida, our medical program really consisted of a high-CBD, low-THC program, and the Legislature, just regardless of the fact that people wanted [a high-THC program], the Legislature just wasn’t going do anything about it. Ultimately, they had to get a well-financed constitutional amendment [on the ballot] for a more robust program down here, which [voters] passed in 2016 and which resulted in the program we have today. Not that it’s perfect, because it’s far from perfect, but at least we do have a real medical cannabis program where patients can actually get what it is their doctor recommends.

I anticipate that will happen again [in 2024]. Obviously it’s not going to be for medical purposes, but I do believe that the voters of this state are going to be behind it. If there’s a challenge from the governor’s office [or] the Department of Health, it’ll be up to the Supreme Court to look at the language and make sure that the language is clear and concise, and the voters understand exactly what they’re voting for and that it covers a single subject, because there’s a single-subject rule. You can’t have constitutional amendments covering multiple issues or subjects. The language is pretty straightforward. So, I have to imagine it’ll withstand a challenge, but I guess that will remain.

TL: Do you think the single-subject rule is a means to allow state lawmakers to maintain broad legislative authority on ballot measures that get passed?

JR: I would tend to agree with you. I certainly think that there’s an incentive for the Legislature to want to maintain the legislative authority over all this stuff and not just have, you know, the voters starting to substitute their judgment in, even though the legislators are supposed to be following the judgment of voters.

[The 2024 ballot language] leaves it up to the Legislature to be able to craft implementing rules and regs. And, hopefully, they’ll address some of the deficiencies that aren’t covered by the amendment.

TL: If the 2024 ballot measure passes, how would that impact the state’s licensing structure and roll-out of new licenses?

JR: The constitutional amendment is silent as to how and how many new licenses will be issued. It’s basically saying, “we’re leaving that to the Legislature.” The last constitutional amendment, the one that passed in 2016, was pretty specific in that there were no caps on the number of licenses. There was no requirement for full vertical integration. In fact, the intent document made it clear that they did not contemplate full vertical integration. And then the Legislature came in and basically said, “Nope,” you know, seed-to-sale, and we’re only going to give out—at that time—it was like 16 licenses. And that’s that. And that’s why that Florigrown case came about because we challenged the constitutionality of the caps and of the requirement for full vertical integration.

Editor’s note: In early 2017, Tampa-based Florigrown applied for a retail license just before lawmakers passed the bill that would implement rules requiring vertical integration in Florida’s medical market. Later that year, Florigrown filed a lawsuit declaring that the Legislature’s vertical integration provision was unconstitutional because it didn’t align with the 2016 voter-approved amendment.

If we still have a conservative Legislature in Florida [in 2024], I have no reason to believe that the floodgates are going to open up in terms of licensing or in terms of allowing, you know, mom and pops to just run dispensaries because they can’t afford to have a cultivation facility and a processing facility. It would be nice. I think that most states that started out as vertically integrated have figured out it doesn’t really work. I think with a recreational program, or adult-use program, it’ll be really difficult for it to work because they won’t even be able to be wholesaling between stores and things like that.

So, I have to imagine that the Legislature will come in and try to help facilitate the program if they understand that that’s what the people want and allow people to run it in a responsible manner, but still in a manner that allows consumers to take advantage of pricing and availability and more options and things like that. But a very long-winded way to say, I guess it remains to be seen.

TL: Florida’s Health Department was supposed to issue 20-some additional MMTC licenses by now based on patient numbers: Do you think the department will issue those additional licenses before the 2024 election?

JR: Before the 2024 election? I sure hope so. I have a lot of clients who are extremely anxious to be able to apply for a license, and they have been promising this since 2017. And even though we have 22 licensees here, we’ve never really had a formal application process. They had an application process back in 2015 for the original five high-CBD, low-THC licenses. They gave out those five. Every other license that has been given out since then, meaning the other 17, have been by way of resolution of litigation.

RELATED: Florida Appeals Court Denies Demand to Open Cannabis License Application Window

In other words, nobody in Florida has yet, despite the rules, despite the money that’s been spent, despite the ungodly amount of money some of my clients have spent putting together these applications, they’ve never been able to apply yet. There’s never been a competitive application process. So, we’ve had a series of lawsuits that ended up in, effectively, default licenses being given out. And then we’ve had a series of secondary market sales of these licenses for big, big, big-time money. And so, what we have ultimately ended up with is a market that’s dominated by multistate operators.

There are entrepreneurs who are not as wealthy, who would like to be able to get into the market—we’re talking about medical now—they would like to be able to serve patients. They’d like to be able to serve underserved communities. And it’s really frustrating that that hasn’t happened. The department of health has told us that we can expect to see the licenses before the end of year, but I’ve heard that again and again and again, and I definitely have heard and have expressed my own concern that this new ballot initiative will be used—it shouldn’t be—but somehow or another as an excuse to delay the process.

TL: With the absence of a social equity provision in the 2024 initiative, do you think certain advocacy groups will push back against the measure?

JR: I would think, if I had to guess, that the people who really want to see a real social equity program in Florida—something that truly makes a difference—I think that the people who want to see that, my guess is that the lobbying will be on the legislative front. In other words, let’s see if we can get this thing passed, and then we can put pressure on the Legislature to make sure it’s rolled out properly and responsibly and in a way that is fair.

TL: Do you foresee other Florida MMTCs joining Trulieve with financial contributions to the initiative?

JR: I would anticipate so, yes, because the way that it’s written, the existing MMTCs, you know, we only have 22 licensees down here right now. We’re supposed to have more. But as of now, we only have 22, and the way that the initiative is written, it doesn’t say, “Oh, we’re going to have the monopoly and can’t let any other licenses in,” but the existing MMTCs will be able to sell cannabis for adult use. They’re going to be on the ground up and running already. So, I would anticipate, yes, there’s every incentive for the other 21 licensees down here to want to join in.

TL: Do you foresee any challenges in meeting the statewide signature threshold for the 2024 initiative?

JR: I think they’re going to make it. They’ve got a lot of money behind it. And I think the support is already there, not even just in the state, but nationally. But even in Florida, which is sort of a unique state, to say the least, all the polling I’ve seen suggest that people want it here. And [Florida] will need 60% [of its voters] for it to pass. It’ll be a supermajority for it to pass. So, the answer is, yeah, I think that they will collect 900,000 signatures—the verifiable signatures—and I’m hopeful that it’ll pass and makes the ballot.

utan: A 'miracle’ CBD tan that gives you a glow AND reduces redness – Daily Mail

As we head into autumn, our bronzed summer skin can feel like a distant memory.

So much so, many of us will start to look as if we haven’t seen the sun for months!

But what can you do to keep your tan topped up without any of the usual faff of prepping and faking it? The smell, the streaks, the time (not to mention the the break-outs that can occur from fragranced fake tans) can be seriously off-putting, especially if you suffer with sensitive skin.

Here, MailOnline’s Hannah Homer tries out a product that’s been doing the rounds on beauty lovers’ socials – utan’s CBD tanning mist (£18). The formula promises to give you a healthy glow in four hours and applies in seconds – and ease problem skin rather than irritating it. But does it work? 

Hannah before using utan

Hannah after two applications of utan

MailOnline’s Hannah Homer has tried out the must-have fake tan spray – utan CBD Tanning Water – to give her summer tan a boost as we head into Autumn

’I have booked a last minute holiday for the end of September to Ibiza now the prices have dropped after summer.

’I got a good tan this summer as it’s been boiling and I mainly cycle to and from work, but it’s quickly fading as the weather gets cooler.

’I wanted to get sun-kissed look before I brave a bikini, but have always hated the fuss that comes with fake tan.

’I also have very sensitive skin, which can get very dry. I don’t really get oily or spotty skin, but I do get blocked pores and some patches of dryness – another reason why I haven’t tried fake tan for a while as it can be heavily fragranced and you need to exfoliate your whole body!

Hannah loves rocking a tan in summer but hates the fuss of usual fake tans - pictured above before she used utan's easy to spray tanning water

Hannah loves rocking a tan in summer but hates the fuss of usual fake tans – pictured above before she used utan’s easy to spray tanning water 

The utan x Jamie CBD Tanning Water is a gradual facial tanning mist that comes in two shades. For a light to medium glow or ‘50% darker shade’ suitable for deeper skin tones or fairer skin tones to match body self tan

The utan x Jamie CBD Tanning Water is a gradual facial tanning mist that comes in two shades. For a light to medium glow or '50% darker shade’ suitable for deeper skin tones or fairer skin tones to match body self tan 

Hannah after first application

Hannah after her second application

Over a week, Hannah used the utan Tanning Water twice; above left after one application & above left after the second

’But I have to admit, I feel more confident when I’m tanned but never tan my face when I’m in the sun – mainly because of wrinkles and sun damage.

’That’s when I scouted the aisles in my local Superdrug for something that’s less of a faff and easy to do after a shower. 

I’ve had so many compliments telling me I look well or glowing – this is a must-have product for me now 

’I spotted utan. They have all different products but the one that caught my eye was their utan x Jamie Tanning Water. 

’I asked my friend, who is the queen of fake tanning, and she said she loved it so bought a few bottles. 

’I have to say, I was an instant fan. It spritzes on easily and smells lovely.

Hannah loved the results – and the gentle ingredients of Scottish lavender and CBD in the Tanning Water which ensured her sensitive skin wasn’t irritated

’Overnight I saw a difference, and other people did too. When I went to the office the day after I first used it, I had a lot of people asking if I had been away… I also had a lot of 'you look glowing’ and 'you look really well’ compliments. 

’It was super easy to apply and I didn’t have any of that horrible orange staining on my hands like I would normally get with a fake tan.

’It is sold as a facial & decolletage tanner – but I also spritzed my arms, stomach and legs to give them a bit of a sun-kissed look. It slowly build up over a few days and now I’m hooked! I just need to try their cute freckle pen next summer.

’Despite the fact it gives you a glow and is clinically proven safe for for sensitive skin, I just like using it! I would use it after putting on make-up or for just some hydration during a flight. 

’For £18, I thought it was good value as you don’t need to use much of it to get good coverage. My mum always takes my beauty product recommendations and loves that you can spray it over your SPF and make-up, too.’

utan broke the mold once again this year by releasing a world first freckle & lip-overline fake tan pen. The utan pen results pictured above (before and after on Nicquita after using it to create longlasting tan faux freckles & lip definition)

utan broke the mold once again this year by releasing a world first freckle & lip-overline fake tan pen. The utan pen results pictured above (before and after on Nicquita after using it to create longlasting tan faux freckles & lip definition)

Now you can create the closest thing to a sunkissed tan. The mist will tan your face in four hours while the utan Pen can create water-resistant freckles & lip overline (no sun exposure needed!)

Now you can create the closest thing to a sunkissed tan. The mist will tan your face in four hours while the utan Pen can create water-resistant freckles & lip overline (no sun exposure needed!)

Do you need a facial tan for sunless summer skin? Critics have been raving about this cult product combats redness & breakouts. Here’s how it works… 

Critics have been raving that this patented mist combats redness and tackles breakouts.

We spoke to utan customers who discuss their skincare journey since using the Tanning Water…

Customer Kerrie Dodd has seen a great improvement in her skin since using utan's CBD Tanning Water as part of her daily routine

Customer Kerrie Dodd has seen a great improvement in her skin since using utan’s CBD Tanning Water as part of her daily routine

First of all, what is CBD? 

CBD, short for cannabidiol, is a compound from the cannabis plant and it’s added to beauty products as it’s believed to have anti-inflammatory properties to maintain skin health. Organically grown is thought to be best.

How does utan’s tanning water work? 

The product has a patented formula with antibacterial properties and no perfume fragrance to cover up the usual strong fake-tan scent. 

Instead it’s infused with Scottish harvested lavender oil, which smells like a sleep pillow mist.

Caitlin before utan

Caitlin after utan

Customer Caitlin has dealt with problem skin and painful breakouts for years – and felt like she’d tried every product on the market before trying utan’s CBD tanning water

utan has become a cult beauty brand – from its revolutionary glow mist with organically grown CBD to it’s new summer must-have freckle & lip utan Pen 

So will it help my skin? 

Emma suffered regular breakouts

Emma suffered regular breakouts

Painful: Nurse Emma, 22, suffered regular breakouts around her chin and couldn’t find a solution, until she found utan’s Tanning Water 

Emma's complexion after using utan

Emma's complexion after using utan

Tan fan! Emma now boasts clearer skin and says she couldn’t live without it: 'I spray some after my moisturiser … unlike other tans there’s no fuss…’

MailOnline have independently spoken to dozens of women who were thrilled with the difference this 'miracle mist’ has made to their skin…

Makeup artist Amy revealed not only did it leave her with a natural looking tan, but it helped clear up her problem skin.

After years of struggling with blemishes, Amy had ben booked in with a hospital appointment to deal with her acne.

Love Island's Olivia Bowen is also a fan of the tanning mist after struggling to find a fake tan that didn't irritate her psoriasis

Love Island’s Olivia Bowen is also a fan of the tanning mist after struggling to find a fake tan that didn’t irritate her psoriasis 

Yet using the utan x Jamie Tanning Water helped clear up her skin so well she doesn’t need to go down that route anymore…

Amy said: 'My skin is now glowing thanks to this product, the improvement in my acne has been unbelievable.

’I totally wasn’t expecting it to clear up persistent breakouts that I’ve been suffering for years with.

’I only wanted a tanning water and had no idea about the claims it was good for clearing skin, so it was a big surprise when my face kept getting clearer! 

’It was only after I googled it and saw the reviews that I realised, 'wow its not just me then’.

Wow! Makeup artist Amy was left delighted with the results from the CBD tanning water after it cleared up her breakouts (pictured before using the product)

Wow! Amy is pictured after using utan x Jamie Tanning Water

Wow! Makeup artist Amy was left delighted with the results from the CBD tanning water after it cleared up her adult acne (pictured left, before using the product, right, after) 

How do I use it? 

You can apply the utan x Jamie CBD Tanning Water over your moisturiser as the last step in your skincare routine, or mist over your make-up for a buildable glow just 4 hours later.

With your hairline covered (if you have light or bleached hair), spray the clear mist holding at an arm’s length away. Application can be done over make-up as a setting spray in under 5 seconds or buffed on with a dense brush.

Will not affect lash extensions due to the oil emulsified in a water formula.

Your tan will develop in 4-6 hours.

Mail online readers get an exclusive 20% discount with code MAILCBD. Click here to shop the Tanning Water, now back in stock, in glow or 50% Darker shades and save across the full range*

What Superdrug customers are saying…

*Limited time, offer cannot be guaranteed if item is out of stock and the code is expired. Cannot be used in conjunction with any other offer or on sale items.