Texas Bans Delta-8 THC, Which Is Only Popular Because of Prohibition
Six years after legalizing hemp and its by-products, the state is revising its drug policies and criminalizing products sold by thousands of Texas businesses.

This week, the Texas House of Representatives passed a bill outlawing an intoxicating substance derived from hemp, just six years after legalizing it. Ironically, prohibition is what created the problem in the first place.
Senate Bill 3, which passed the Texas Senate in March, would ban all forms of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in the state. "Since 2019, retailers across Texas have exploited a state agriculture law to sell life-threatening, unregulated forms of Tetrahydrocannabinol to Texans, including children," Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (a Republican) said in March, in support of the bill. "These stores which often target children with their marketing have popped up across the state, threatening the safety of our communities."
The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 officially legalized hemp at the federal level, by defining it as any part of the Cannabis sativa plant "with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3 percent." Many states, including Texas, soon followed suit, passing farm bills at the state level using the same percentage.
Hemp and marijuana both come from the Cannabis sativa plant. Delta-9 THC is the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, which causes a "high" when ingested. While THC occurs naturally in marijuana—at a 15 percent concentration, on average—it's only present in trace amounts in hemp.
In 1967, an Israeli chemist synthesized a separate compound, delta-8. On a molecular level, delta-8 is nearly identical to delta-9, and it produces a similar but milder intoxicating response when ingested. Delta-8 also only occurs in small amounts but it can be synthesized using CBD, which comes from hemp.
Once the farm bills became law, hemp production exploded, flooding the market within a growing season. The industry pivoted, using hemp surpluses to manufacture intoxicating delta-8 products.
It worked: A 2022 whitepaper from the Brightfield Group, a market research firm, found the industry grossed nearly $2 billion from delta-8 in two years.
This is why unregulated delta-8 products of dubious quality started popping up in gas stations and convenience stores all across the country. Texas alone now has more than 7,000 registered hemp retailers.
"State regulations governing hemp products vary widely and are unevenly enforced, creating a patchwork of rules that can change dramatically from one state to the next," according to a 2024 report by Michelle Minton and Geoffrey Lawrence of Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes this magazine. "Consumers face an increasingly confusing array of products of uncertain quality while businesses must navigate a shifting and uncertain regulatory environment."
Patrick is right that delta-8 appeals to young people: A 2023 study found more than 11 percent of high schoolers reported having used delta-8 products in the previous year. (In the same period, over 30 percent reported using marijuana.)
But it should come as no surprise that prohibition—specifically, of marijuana—has the most direct impact on delta-8's sudden popularity. As that same 2023 study pointed out, the prevalence of delta-8 use was higher "in the South and Midwest US and in states without legal adult-use marijuana."
"Higher [delta-8] use in states without medical or adult-use cannabis laws suggests that cannabis prohibition may unintentionally promote [delta-8] use," according to another study the following year.
It's not that people are excited to use a substance that is like marijuana, but less potent and potentially more dangerous; rather, consumers are choosing an inferior product because it's easier to get and not illegal.
By passing S.B. 3, Texas is criminalizing a product sold by thousands of stores that only opened because the state government legalized it.
State Rep. James Talarico (D–Austin) called the repeal "the nanny state at its worst" in comments from the chamber floor. "Instead of regulating this booming industry in our state, we are now going backwards to the days of prohibition. This bill is not going to stop Texans from smoking weed or eating edibles, just because a bunch of politicians in Austin tell them not to. Texans will still use THC, but instead of getting it safely from a local small business, they'll now get it from the black market, from the drug cartels. This ban is a gift to the cartels."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I'm sure if you just don't think about it - you can pretend it's safe and effective.
Oh yeah? Well you didn't complain when Democrats mandated covid vaccinations you hypocrite! That means you can't question Texas Republicans!
You realize Covid came out during trumps time... Or, did you forget the sarcastic punctuation? ¡
Poe’s law.
IF you want to blame trump for Fauci's Gain-of-Function funding , sure.But makes you look stupid , er, stupid-er
It's right there in the handle.
Just legalize it already. Canada has proven marijuana and THC products are safe and crime has reduced since legalizing it as well as domestic violence has dropped because people are smoking and relaxed versus drinking alcohol and angry.
But if you legalise weed you have to legalise crack, meth, fentanyl, lsd etc etc!!!
You want school kids smoking acid for breakfast? Well do ya?
Prohibitionist somewhere, probably
Opium was legal for thousands of years…oh nooos, I can’t pooop!
True, and one of the reasons it was so lucrative for the Netherlands in Java and Sumatra, then Japan on Formosa/Taiwan to market non-habit-forming cocaine as a stimulant to restore peristalsis.
Actually if facts matter you have that backwards
Monks brewed beer as a safe alternative to water, a source of sustenance during fasts, and as a way to support their communities.
Beer was so safe and accepted that
beer was often a nutritional necessity, was sometimes used as medicine, could be flavored with everything from the bark of fir trees to thyme and fresh eggs, and was consumed by men, women, and children alike ... a small-scale production that was a basic part of housewifery
Just repeal the laws ordering men with guns to shoot people over plant leaves. Letting politicians add new 500-page laws with modified orders to shoot people has proven itself a bad approach.
This is like the situation with Federal Firearms Licenses. The government wants everybody to have one because a few sales of guns are being made by unlicensed persons, then takes them away because too many are held by people making only a few sales. See Bentsen, Lloyd and Clinton, Bill ca. 1996.
Texas is criminalizing a product sold by thousands of stores that only opened because the state government legalized it.
Where's my tiny violin?
Texans will still use THC, but instead of getting it safely from a local small business, they'll now get it from the black market, from the drug cartels.
Yea, this argument doesn't work on anyone anymore. OMG the woman is going to go do a dangerous back alley and likely harm herself if you don't let her slaughter a baby. OMG the boy pretending to be a girl is going to kill himself if you don't use the wrong pronouns. OMG the child is going to hold his breath until he passes out if you don't give him the candy bar.
Threatening to harm yourself because you don't get your way is a non-starter. Go right the heck ahead. America's calling your bluff.
The lessons of alcohol prohibition only apply to alcohol, right?
Obligatory equation of alcohol to drugs! *drink*
Alcohol kills over 170,000 people a year according to the same people that give us drug statistics. Are we just supposed to ignore that because you don't think it matters? Zero people died from marijuana.
3 serious errors with saying that
1) You lump a long international and ages-old beer-drinking culture in with whiskey abusing losers. Kids drank beer in the Middle Ages. The monks drank it, it was safer than the water !!!
2) Alcohol , if you actually knew alcoholics, is very often a resultant condition, not an occasioning condition.,,[ also from authorities ]
Problem drinking has multiple causes, with genetic, physiological, psychological,and social factors all playing a role. Not every individual is equally affected by each cause. For some alcohol abusers, psychological traits such as impulsiveness, low self-esteem and a need for approval prompt inappropriate drinking. Some individuals drink to cope with or "medicate" emotional problems. Social and environmental factors such as peer pressure and the easy availability of alcohol can play key roles. Poverty and physical or sexual abuse also increase the odds of developing alcohol dependence.
3) This is the childish logic fallacy., Marijuana must be okay because alcohol isn't!!!!! Call a logic ambulance right away
Are we just supposed to ignore that because you don't think it matters?
No, you're supposed to ignore it because it's a false comparison. This is why the comparisons are ALWAYS laughed at by anyone who uses their brain. You don't seem to use yours, and you seem to have an axe to grind - so you're ignoring two very key and important things:
1) Usage. I can't remember where I saw the totals (WHO or CDC probably - likely WHO, since it's a global estimate) had it at roughly 2.5 billion people around the world who imbibe alcohol - from casual drinkers to hardcore drunks. So, figure 25-30% of humans on Earth enjoy alcohol. Marijuana usage, on the other hand, comes in at about 250M. Or, 3%. Let's even give it the benefit of the doubt based on underreporting (since MJ is illegal in most places) and call it 5-6%.
2) Tolerance. Both personal and social. Having a beer or a glass of wine with dinner isn't going to render you the same kind of intoxicated as a bong rip will. We can chicken and egg that discussion if you want, but across the globe people handle alcohol better than they do marijuana. And as a result, society has become much more tolerant to its usage, especially given how prevalent it is (See #1). Now, maybe MJ will get there some day - but it's not now.
At present, you're "comparing" something 1/3rd of the people on Earth do to something 1/20th of them do, and ignoring the fact that the world in general is a whole lot cooler, because the respective users by and large have shown themselves to be more trustworthy (and not just in a "you might harm others" perspective) in its usage, with the former than the latter. And then you take the laughably ludicrious position of calling that "the same."
When you ignore those things, that's when people like me make sarcastic remarks like the one I made above.
Zero people died from marijuana.
Are you insane or retarded?
Y'know, in Mexico alone, there were roughly 150-200K homicides over the last half decade. A minimum - minimum - of 60% were directly tied or reasonably believed to be connected to organized crime. That is, the cartels.
Who traffic in marijuana.
Maybe it's not the dominant product anymore in the drug trade - but it's still part of their operations and still a source of their profits. Those are marijuana-related deaths, period.
And I won't just lay it at the feet of the cartels. Plenty of dealers and addicts in America who have killed over or for it.
The drug trade - from marijuana to fentanyl and everything in between - is a massive killer. You placate yourself by telling yourself that it's ok because it's not physically killing its users via overdose, but ignoring the collateral damage. DUI (both user or 3rd party), laced drugs, and self-inflicted harm (accidental or intentional).
Again, why people laugh right in your face when you pretend alcohol and drugs are the same. You're casually dismissing 99% of the subject to myopically point out 1% of favorable argument.
I think it may be you who is retarded. Did Al Capone or his organization directly give anyone cirrhosis of the liver, or did they shoot people? Do you think those cartel- and drug dealer-related deaths you cite are a result of the affects THC has on one's system, or are they a result of making its production and sale illegal? Clearly it's the latter. And you're in favor of continuing the policy that leads to those deaths? What is gained by doing so, because we already know it's not the end of drug use.
I couldn't care less if someone drinks themself to death in their own home. Likewise, I couldn't care if someone gets stoned out of their head in private. We prosecute actions in public while chemically impaired (like drunk driving) and distribution to minors aggressively, and rightly so, and I would support a similar policy relating to THC.
because we already know it's not the end of drug use.
"They're going to do it anyway" is never a justification for tolerating it.
I notice you dodged the question. Again. Let's try some more:
What, specifically, is gained by continuing the policy that leads to the organized crime related deaths you claim to decry?
How many wrong-door no-knock raids where someone is killed even though they're not involved in drugs at all is acceptable to you?
How much gang related violence is okay when much of it could be prevented by letting people legally buy marijuana in a store?
We know tobacco is addictive and carries significant health risks. Should it be illegal too? If so, why? If not, why not?
Alcohol makes people impaired, is addictive, and has health risks when abused. Should it be illegal (again)? If so, why wouldn't you expect organized crime and associated violence to flourish again?
Don't worry; I expect you lack the courage to actually answer any of the above, and so won't be surprised when you dodge. Again.
Prohibition policies on pretty much anything are futile efforts at best and usually create more problems than they solve. Easily forseeable consequences cannot be later called unintended, so anyone advocating for prohibitionist policies is at the same time advocating for the violence and misery those policies will create.
I notice you dodged the question.
And I notice you dodged the point.
Babble babble babble babble, and you still haven't addressed it.
Prohibition policies on pretty much anything are futile efforts at best and usually create more problems than they solve.
Yea, let's stop prohibiting murder and rape and child molestation and bank robbery and all that other stuff that dirtbags are going to do, regardless of whether it's legal or not, and that normal people - the will of the people - want to see policed and prosecuted. F that and F them, right? It causes more problems than it solves. Anarchy is awesome.
Dork.
Don't worry; I expect you lack the courage to actually answer any of the above, and so won't be surprised when you dodge. Again.
Thanks for being predictable.
Yea, let's stop prohibiting murder and rape and child molestation and bank robbery and all that other stuff that dirtbags are going to do, regardless of whether it's legal or not, and that normal people - the will of the people - want to see policed and prosecuted.
Ooh, followed by a plethora of logical fallacies. A virtual banality buffet. Bravo!
Dork.
Followed by the rhetorical white flag ad-hominem of the defeated. If that's the best you can do to defend your position, you have my pity.
And if I took a drink every time you went full retard I'd be dead in a week, tops. And that's coming from someone with a cast-iron liver.
another --- they are all over the place ---- trans perverts exerting no responsibility in their jobs
Sarah Russell, the Commissioner of the City Emergency Management Agency (CEMA), on leave following a failure of the city’s tornado sirens during last week’s deadly storm.
Yes,Sarah, is a MAN a completely unfit MAN
https://dallasexpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Sarah-Russell-Commissioner-of-the-St.-Louis-City-Emergency-Management-Agency-CEMA-Image-by-Sarah-RussellLinkedIn-1000x563.jpg
Yea, I saw that. But don't worry, he was all over the minute details of the pRiDe PaRaDe lol.
Altruist Totalitarian drags the red herring...
Yep. Same bluff Republican Bert Hoover called reading the felony beer Jones Law of 02MAR1929. That went well, didn't it? And exporting the Harrison Act to Germany in July of 1931 sure made Christian National Socialism the biggest party in Germany in record time. Altruist Totalitarians had a field day, er, decades...
^^ this right here is all the reason you'll ever need not to support recreational drug use. Look at what it does to people.
You are a bootlicking idiot. I think some cop somewhere needs a blowjob, why don't you make yourself useful?
The Gov-Guns isn't their so you F'En moral busybodies can FORCE those others to live the way you want them too. How about taking a little pride in what the USA was built upon. Individual Liberty and Justice for all.
That would require having a tiny shred of actual libertarian principle. Here in the Reason comments we've had a sort of philosophical Gresham's Law, where bad faith argument drives out good. Honestly, if this were my only exposure to libertarianism, I'd fucking hate libertarians too.
Joe, you are arguing against yourself. So the stupid stupid druggies are buying because it's prohibited !!! SO the ban has a basis but keeping it has none. Funny article
Jebus Crow, if you're "normal" then I've never been happier to be a fuckin' weirdo. People are buying the less popular Delta-8 because Delta-9 is illegal. Humans have been getting high since before we were human, and no law has ever made people suddenly not want to get high. Instead of banning the slightly wonky 8, just maybe we should be legalizing the more well-known 9. But then collectivists like you have always know what's best for everyone.
Individual rights violated in Grand Goblin Greg's prohibitionist State Klavern? Gotta be fake news invented by librulz.
Drug warriors should just make it illegal to be under the effects of dopamine.
We should just go full-on Harrison Bergeron already. Shock collars for everyone, with a zap every time they show signs of being too happy, too miserable, or anything other than a perfect failure to give a shit.