Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hemp Synthetic Ban topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee tables bill to ban synthetic hemp cannabinoids after divided testimony
Summary
Lawmakers tabled HB346, a proposal to ban semi‑synthetic and synthetic hemp‑derived cannabinoids from manufacture and retail in New Mexico, after heavy testimony both for and against and a divided committee vote to table the measure.
House Bill 346 sought to prohibit manufacture, possession and retail sale of semi‑synthetic and synthetic hemp cannabinoids — substances industry and regulators said are often produced through chemical synthesis and lack standardized laboratory methods to identify byproducts. The bill, sponsors said, would give the New Mexico Environment Department authority to regulate hemp finished products sold at retail and allow the department to remove unsafe products from shelves.
John Gerhardt, bureau chief of the hemp and cannabis bureau at the New Mexico Environment Department, told the committee that synthetics can be produced using toxic chemicals and may contain unidentified isomers, impurities and byproducts. He cited national poison control reports showing thousands of exposure cases tied to delta‑8 and related products, and told the committee the department needs statutory authority to regulate retail sales and remove unsafe products.
Supporters included licensed cannabis companies and trade groups that argued the bill would close a public‑health loophole by requiring third‑party testing, labeling and licensing for products imported into New Mexico. “If we don’t do something to address the problem here, we have untested, unsafe products that are available to our children,” a licensing regulator said.
Manufacturers and small business owners, including several in New Mexico’s hemp industry, opposed the bill, warning that an outright ban would drive legitimate businesses out of the market and cut access to products some consumers prefer. “This product has been around since 02/2018, and I don’t understand why it is now an emergency to shut it down,” one manufacturer said. Several witnesses urged regulation rather than prohibition and said responsibly‑operated firms already use third‑party testing and childproof packaging.
Committee members asked technical questions about enforcement, interstate imports and laboratory testing limits. The department said it would inspect retail premises, require registration of retailers and seek injunctions in district court if necessary. The bill proposed a maximum civil penalty of $1,000 per violation.
After extended testimony and questions about online sales and national coordination, Representative Armstrong moved to table the bill. The committee clerk recorded a final tally of 4 votes yes to table and 3 votes no; the bill was tabled.
