Utah and Alabama Pass CBD Extract Measures
Some pretty cool news out of the traditionally conservative states of Utah and Alabama: last month both states passed laws allowing limited medical use of CBD cannabis extracts, however neither state made any sort of provision for making or obtaining the medicinal extracts. John Bentley of Alabama (above) signed a limited-access measure into law last Tuesday, while in Utah, a ceremonial signing took place on March 25, of a peice of legislation which opens the door to seizure-stopping cannabis oil access for exceptional cases of epilepsy.
Utah Gov. Gary Herbert signed HB105 on March 25; known as “Charlee’s Law” in memory of Charlee Nelson, a 6-year-old girl who died of a seizure disorder while waiting for the measure to pass, the Utah resolution provides for oils of 0.3% THC or less and at least 15% CBD. At the ceremonial signing at the Capitol, Herbert applauded families for being the driving force behind a bill that many surmised had no chance of passage and that underwent nine revisions. This is the only kind of cannabis preparation the Utah legislation permits.
Now this is an interesting conundrum: Utah has no provisions for growing or extracting CBDs, whereas the neighboring state of Colorado does provide extraction and tincture preparation services, something that could seriously benefit medical patients like Charlee Nelson. However Colorado state law explicitly prohibits taking these materials out of state.
In Alabama, SB 174 is a similar law known as “Carly’s Law” named after Carly Chandler, a 3-year-old from Birmingham who suffers from a rare form of epilepsy called CDKL-5; Carly’s Law was signed by Governor John Bentley on Tuesday, and will take effect on June 1, 2014. The law extends access for CBD and other cannabis extracts to only those patients that are diagnosed with seizure disorders by the University of Alabama-Birmingham’s Department of Neurology. The reasoning is that since these are Schedule 1 substances, medical professionals are not legally allowed to write a prescription. This feels like a short-sighted way to handle such extracts especially considering that several states have legalized cannabinoids for commerce in the face of federal drug legislation — California, Colorado, and Washington all allow medical professionals to write prescriptions for patients in need.
Why should Utah and Alabama be any different? Well, for starters these are traditionally conservative states in terms of voter tendencies; they skew Republican who is traditionally anti-marijuana. However in recent years the influx of libertarian-inspired philosophy has proliferated a craving for free access in terms of medically viable treatments for debilitating illnesses. It’s pretty inspiring to see resolutions like Carly’s Law and Charlee’s Law make it all the way to the desk of the Governors in these states. Though Utah lawmakers have been open to the idea of importing CBD extracts to help patients like Charlee and other qualifying recipients, it’s actually Colorado that is holding things back, though we anticipate a sea change in thought from Colorado, one of the most progressive states in terms of marijuana access reform.
It seems like the next natural step to increasing full access and federal decriminalization. If Colorado permits the sale and cross-border transportation of cannabis extracts to Utah, this will be a bellwether move that sets a precedent for intrastate cannabis commerce. The most recent directives from the US DOJ state that any movement of cannabis products across state lines remains a federal enforcement priority. Compliance with state medical cannabis laws provides no immunity from federal prosecution, and all uses and distribution of cannabis are still federally illegal.
In our view, having a structure for these types of transactions when earmarked for medical purposes is a sensible compromise for both Utah and Colorado alike. Alabama faces a similar conundrum as it is nearly a thousand miles from any state where medical cannabis is currently distributed legally.
We’re going to monitor these developments closely, with a particular interest in the wording of SB 174 which restricts the access of cannabis extracts to a single disorder — seizures, as diagnosed by a single institution, the UAB Department of Neurology.
About the Author
- Related:
- cannabis oil
- medical cannabis
Loading ...