A coalition of hemp companies filed a federal lawsuit Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri to block a statewide ban on intoxicating hemp products taking effect in November. The suit argues the ban, passed by lawmakers this spring, contains "unconstitutionally vague" definitions of hemp and marijuana.
Craig Katz, government relations and compliance manager for plaintiff MNG 2005, Inc.—a St. Louis-based company operating 55 CBD Kratom stores nationwide—said lawmakers' limited grasp of the cannabis industry is the core problem: "It's very difficult to understand... you come up with something like HB2641, which doesn't make a whole heck of a lot of sense."
The coalition also includes the Missouri Hemp Trade Association and Wisconsin-based Lifted Liquids Inc.
Gov. Mike Kehoe (R) signed HB2641 earlier this year. It takes effect November 12, removing intoxicating hemp products, including THC seltzers sold in bars and grocery stores, mirroring the federal ban Congress approved last year. If Congress reverses the ban, Missouri would permit sales only in licensed dispensaries; if it delays the ban several years, state law would still bar the products except intoxicating beverages. Attorney General Catherine Hanaway (R) is tasked with enforcement.
Named defendants include Kehoe, Hanaway and Sarah Wilson, director of the Department of Health and Senior Services, which runs the state's marijuana program. Hanaway's office said it had not yet been served; Kehoe's office and DHSS declined comment, citing pending litigation.
Earlier versions of the bill failed since 2023. Unregulated products containing up to 1,000 mg of THC are currently sold in smoke shops outside licensed dispensaries.
Sponsor Rep. Dave Hinman (R-O'Fallon) called the suit "the last ditch effort for the hemp industry," saying HB2641 was fully vetted before passing and predicting Missouri would mirror federal policy regardless.
The lawsuit says the bill defines identical products as both "hemp" and "marijuana" in different sections, creating confusion that carries criminal risk since unlicensed marijuana activity is illegal in Missouri. It also argues the law's pledge not to disrupt interstate hemp commerce is undercut by new transport restrictions, and that its effective-date language is too convoluted for businesses to determine coverage. The coalition says the confusing definitions could also strip non-intoxicating CBD products from shelves.
Association president Jay Patel said: "This isn't consumer protection. It's the elimination of an entire legal industry coupled with a government-mandated monopoly."
First published by Missouri Independent.