Texas had an opportunity to confront the explosive growth of intoxicating THC products. The Legislature acted. Gov. Greg Abbott vetoed the bill.
That veto was a serious mistake, and its consequences are becoming increasingly apparent.
What began with the legalization of hemp has developed into a massive commercial market for intoxicating products sold as gummies, drinks, vapes and other forms of THC. These products are now readily available in communities throughout Texas, often from storefronts that bear little resemblance to anything Texans envisioned when hemp was legalized.
In my own community of McKinney, the proliferation of THC retailers is impossible to ignore. This is no longer simply an agricultural hemp issue. It is a rapidly expanding intoxicant industry establishing a permanent commercial presence in Texas communities.
The Legislature recognized the problem and passed Senate Bill 3, which would have prohibited the retail sale of consumable hemp products containing intoxicating cannabinoids while allowing products containing CBD and CBG.
Abbott vetoed it.
His decision did more than delay one piece of legislation. It sent a powerful signal to the intoxicating-THC industry that Texas — the nation’s second-largest state and one of its most attractive consumer markets — remained open for expansion and political combat.
The industry has every incentive to invest more money, establish more storefronts, hire more lobbyists, and challenge state restrictions in court.
And that is exactly what we are seeing.
As Texas regulators have tightened rules governing hemp-derived products, industry organizations and businesses have responded with coordinated litigation challenging the state’s authority. Earlier this year, the Texas Hemp Business Council and other industry plaintiffs sued state health agencies over new THC testing, licensing, and regulatory requirements.
The governor’s veto opened a Pandora’s box of political, commercial and legal problems that Texas needs to close.
Every additional year allows this industry to become more deeply embedded. Businesses acquire customers and leases. Trade organizations become stronger. Lobbying operations grow. Political influence increases. Lawyers challenge restrictions. Eventually, lawmakers are no longer deciding whether an industry should have been allowed to develop in the first place; they are confronting an entrenched commercial constituency demanding that the status quo remain.
Texas should look at what happened in Arkansas.
After Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed legislation restricting intoxicating hemp-derived THC products, hemp businesses went to federal court and initially persuaded a federal district judge to block enforcement.
Arkansas kept fighting.
In 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed that injunction in Bio Gen LLC v. Sanders. The court rejected the industry’s argument that the 2018 federal Farm Bill broadly prevented Arkansas from restricting these products and also rejected its vagueness challenge.
Texas sits within the Fifth Circuit, so the Arkansas ruling does not control federal courts here. But it provides an important example: federal legalization of hemp did not strip states of their ability to impose tougher restrictions on intoxicating hemp products.
Other courts have reached similar conclusions, strengthening the case that states retain substantial authority in this area.
Congress has now gone even further. Federal lawmakers moved in 2025 to sharply narrow the definition of lawful hemp, with new federal restrictions on intoxicating hemp-derived products scheduled to take effect later this year.
The direction of public policy is becoming clearer. Texas should be leading that movement, not fighting a rear-guard action created by its own governor’s veto.
There is another argument in this debate that I find particularly troubling: the industry’s frequent invocation of veterans.
I am a disabled veteran who served more than two decades in the U.S. Navy, including the Iraq War. I know veterans who live every day with physical and psychological wounds resulting from their service.
Their suffering should never become political cover for preserving a commercial intoxicant industry.
Veterans deserve serious medical care, compassion, and evidence-based treatment. If particular cannabis-derived medicines have legitimate medical applications, Texas can address them through appropriate medical and regulatory channels. That is fundamentally different from allowing an enormous retail market for intoxicating THC products to proliferate throughout our communities.
I also spent years in law enforcement and have seen firsthand what substance abuse can do to individuals, families, and neighborhoods. Prevention is far easier than attempting to repair the damage after another intoxicating industry becomes culturally normalized.
Texas should pay particular attention to its children.
A generation is growing up surrounded by THC gummies, beverages, vapes, and storefronts marketing psychoactive products that would have been virtually unimaginable in ordinary Texas retail commerce a decade ago.
Normalization matters. Availability matters. Potency matters.
Texas continues attracting families from across America. Many came here because they wanted safer communities, stronger schools, and a different approach from states where permissive drug policies became increasingly accepted.
Texas should remain that alternative.
This debate is no longer simply about hemp. It is about what kind of marketplace and culture Texas intends to permit.
The Legislature tried to answer that question. The governor’s veto prevented Texas from taking decisive action, giving an already organized industry additional time to strengthen its position.
That decision can still be corrected.
Texas lawmakers should enact clear and legally durable restrictions on intoxicating THC products while protecting legitimate non-intoxicating hemp commerce. They should study Arkansas’ appellate victory, examine the growing body of decisions supporting state authority, and anticipate the litigation that will inevitably follow.
Gov. Abbott should call a special session rather than wait for the Legislature’s next regular session to rewrite Senate Bill 3 and send it to his desk.
The Pandora’s box opened by the veto only becomes harder to close the longer Texas waits.
Texas should close it now.
