Brittney Griner, the American basketball star who has been held in a Russian prison since her February arrest over drug smuggling charges, appeared in a Moscow court for the start of her trial on Friday.

Griner was arrested at a Moscow airport on February 17 after being accused of carrying cannabis oil in her luggage.

“Being sufficiently aware that the movement of narcotic drugs is not allowed… no later than February 17, 2022 at an unspecified location under unspecified circumstances from an unidentified person [Griner] bought two cartridges for personal use, which contained 0.252 grams and 0.45 grams of hash oil, totaling 0.702 grams,” a prosecutor said in court on Friday, according to CNN.

CNN reported that the “prosecution argues that Griner intended to import the drugs into Russia’s territory and put the prohibited substances into a backpack and a suitcase,” and that cannabis oil “is subject to control in Russia and is classified as a narcotic drug.”

The trial is scheduled to resume next Friday. Griner faces up to 10 years in prison.

Griner, one of the most decorated women’s basketball players in history who stars for the Phoenix Mercury of the WNBA, has become a symbol in the deteriorating relationship between the United States and Russia. Her detention, coinciding with Russia’s internationally-condemned invasion of Ukraine, is widely seen as being politically motivated.

In May, the United States reclassified Griner as “wrongfully detained.”

There is growing speculation that Russia could be angling for a prisoner swap with the U.S., with The New York Times reporting that the Kremlin appears to be linking Griner’s fate with that of Viktor Bout, a Russian arms dealer currently serving a 25-year federal prison sentence in the United States.

That could put President Joe Biden in a diplomatic quandary, according to the Times.

“The vast disparity between the cases of Brittney Griner and Viktor Bout highlights the extreme difficulty President Biden would face if he sought a prisoner exchange to free Ms. Griner, the detained W.N.B.A. player, from detention in Moscow. The Biden administration, reluctant to create an incentive for the arrest or abduction of Americans abroad, would be hard-pressed to justify the release of a villainous figure like Mr. Bout,” the Times reported.

But the Biden administration is facing mounting pressure to secure Griner’s freedom. Her peers in the sporting community have expressed support for her, while urging the U.S. to do something to end her detention.

LeBron James’s brand, Uninterrupted, issued a message last month calling on Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris to continue to work for her release.

“For over 100 days, BG has faced inhumane conditions in a Russian prison and has been denied communications with her family and loved ones,” the message read. “As a decorated Olympian and member of an elite global sport community, BG’s detention must be resolved out of respect for the sanctity of all sport and for all Americans traveling internationally. It is imperative that the U.S. Government immediately address this human rights issue and do whatever is necessary to return Brittney home.”

Griner was arrested as she was returning to Russia to complete her season with UMMC Ekaterinburg. Like many American women’s basketball players, Griner has long competed in Russia during the WNBA’s offseasons.

Although she was arrested in February, her detention was not made public until several weeks later.

“We are aware of the situation with Brittney Griner in Russia and are in close contact with her, her legal representation in Russia, her family, her teams and the WNBA and NBA,” Griner’s agent, Lindsay Kagawa Colas, said after Russian authorities announced her arrest in March. “As this is an ongoing legal matter, we are not able to comment further on the specifics of her case but can confirm that as we work to get her home, her mental and physical health remain our primary concern.”

Hemp is now permanently legal in North Carolina thanks to a bill signed into law by the state’s governor.

The legislation was one of three measures signed on Thursday by Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat. As written, the bill will permanently remove hemp from the state’s list of controlled substances, which brings North Carolina in line with federal law.

Cooper hailed the bill as a win for Tar Heel State farmers.

“Agriculture is North Carolina’s largest industry and giving North Carolina farmers certainty that they can continue to participate in this growing market is the right thing to do for rural communities and our economy,” Cooper said in a statement following the bill’s signing.

Changes to federal law over the last eight years have made it possible for states to cultivate hemp, a policy that has been a boon to the agriculture community.

In 2014, Congress passed a Farm Bill that enabled state governments and research institutions to cultivate and produce hemp under so-called “pilot programs.”

The 2018 Farm Bill changed national policy over hemp entirely by removing it from the federal Controlled Substances Act.

As the National Conference of State Legislatures explained: “The 2018 Farm Bill allows states and tribes to submit a plan and apply for primary regulatory authority over the production of hemp in their state or in their tribal territory. As described in the USDA interim final rule, a state plan must include certain requirements, such as keeping track of land, testing methods, and disposal of plants or products that exceed the allowed THC concentration. The USDA will review and issue a decision within 60 days on plans submitted by a state to the agency with the goal of providing states enough time to implement their plan before the 2020 hemp season.”

North Carolina had treated its hemp cultivation as a pilot program, which was scheduled to lapse at the end of June. The bill signed into law on Thursday by Cooper extends the program beyond that month, and into the future.

The measure had overwhelming support in North Carolina’s Republican-controlled general assembly, with members of the state Senate passing the bill unanimously in May.

The hemp bill fared better than a proposal to legalize medical cannabis in North Carolina. Members of the state Senate approved that legislation last month by a vote of 35-10, but has stalled in the state House of Representatives.

The bill would permit patients with the following qualifying conditions to receive medical cannabis as a treatment: Cancer; Epilepsy; Positive status for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS); Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS); Crohn’s disease; Sickle cell anemia; Parkinson’s disease; Post-traumatic stress disorder, subject to evidence that an applicant experienced one or more traumatic events; Multiple sclerosis; Cachexia or wasting syndrome; Severe or persistent nausea in a person who is not pregnant that is related to end-of-life or hospice care, or who is bedridden or homebound because of a condition; a terminal illness when the patient’s remaining life expectancy is less than six months; or a condition resulting in the individual receiving hospice care.

Polls have shown that North Carolina voters are broadly supportive of both medical and recreational cannabis.

Seventy-two percent of registered voters in the state said they are in favor of medical cannabis use, according to a survey released in April. The same poll found that 57% of North Carolina voters believe recreational cannabis should be legal, too.

Support for medical cannabis included 64% of North Carolina Republicans, 46% of whom said they are in favor of recreational pot being made legal.

A pro cannabis trade group in Puerto Rico is hoping to advance the discussion of full recreational cannabis reform on the island. To this end, they have just released a report which predicts how recreational cannabis legalization might benefit the U.S. territory, located just southeast of Cuba. According to the analysis, the maturation of the industry here would take about five years and would take a trajectory seen in the development of the casino vertical, which developed here in the early decades of the twentieth century.

The island is not the only jurisdiction to consider this kind of economic development, particularly post-Pandemic. Nor is it the only popular tourist destination. This segment of the economy is, however, critically important to the island’s economy and has become increasingly so during the second decade of this century. It currently accounts for 10% of the total economy. Indeed, before COVID, much of the critical infrastructure was damaged thanks to Hurricane Maria and tourism was used to rebuild the island.

Beyond this, the island is no stranger to the production of other recreational commodities. This includes the world’s largest rum distillery, the Bacardi factory, located in Cataño. It is also increasingly a crypto firm haven. Because of Donald Trump, 98% of the land on the island is currently considered an “opportunity zone” designed specifically to bring foreign investors here.

Cannabis Reform in Puerto Rico

Cannabis has been illegal in Puerto Rico since 1932 when Act 12 specifically outlawed the same. Penalties for planting, importation, purchase, and sale of the plant ranged from a one month to one year in jail.

In 2013, right after the success of two American state referendums in Colorado and Washington State, Representative José Luis Báez proposed decriminalization. The Governor, Alejandro Garcia Padilla, signed medical cannabis reform two years later.

This reform includes allowing patients to have a 30-day supply of the drug, but not in smokeable form. Home grow remains illegal, and patients must purchase their meds through state-licensed dispensaries. There are an estimated 115,000 Puerto Rican patients.

The Legal Status of The Island

Puerto Rico is today an unincorporated U.S. territory. It is not a state. How U.S. federal law is interpreted here is also a hotly contested topic. According to what some consider highly racist decisions enshrined in Supreme Court case law and handed down in the early part of the last century, the island, along with the Philippines and Guam, are places where constitutional rights enjoyed within the continental U.S. and incorporated territories do not apply. Indeed, according to these legal precedents, the U.S. Constitution applies within the United States proper, the District of Columbia and “incorporated territories” while only the “fundamental limitations” apply in unincorporated ones.

What this means when it comes to things like the constitutional rights of states (see the earliest cannabis reform at the state level as a constitutional amendment at this level), cannabis is certainly in a very strange gray zone.

Displacement of Locals?

One of the tragic impacts of the last hurricane was that in its aftermath, residents were often forced to sell their homes and for a variety of reasons. This has led to investment banks buying large tracts of distressed real estate here over the past several years and locals being unable to afford to live here (or at least own property and sustain a decent standard of living). This has also led to local protests against foreign development, including the privatization of public resources, like beaches.

The development of a cannabis industry in this kind of environment may well prove profitable for foreign firms. How it would benefit the local population in terms of sustainable economic redevelopment is another matter.

Should cannabis products in California come with warnings about rare, adverse reactions for people living with schizophrenia and other mental illnesses, or does it fuel false or exaggerated beliefs about cannabis?

Senate Bill 1097, the Cannabis Right to Know Act, was introduced February 16 by Sen. Richard Pan, and is sponsored by the Public Health Institute, a nonprofit. On June 21, it was amended in the Committee on Business and Professions, as support for the bill gained steam.

Some researchers say people must already have a predisposition for a mental disorder like schizophrenia for these types of negative reactions to occur, while others disagree. Others say certain types of products shouldn’t be a big concern.

“Cal NORML agrees that consumers should be educated about the risks of psychotic reactions, especially in connection with high-THC concentrates and dabs,” Dale Gieringer told High Times. “Cyclical vomiting syndrome is another concern. We doubt whether label warnings are a useful way of informing them, though. Consumers are already jaded by the proliferation of inane Prop. 65 warnings.”

Gieringer has been the state coordinator of California’s NORML branch since 1987, before adult-use regulations took effect, ramping up safety efforts. Requiring warnings like this on products like topicals and CBD products isn’t the solution, he says.

He continued, “We don’t think SB 1097 is the right answer. It doesn’t make sense to be posting these warnings on harmless products like topicals or high-CBD varieties. Consumers weren’t consulted by the authors of SB 1097. We think more research is needed to determine the best way of informing consumers about the risks of THC over-consumption.”

On June 30, the Kaiser Health News profiled an instance of a teen who had an adverse reaction to pot, and it was later revealed that he was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Liz Kirkaldie’s grandson didn’t have a good experience with cannabis, but he suffered from schizophrenia. The pot appeared to enhance delusions like hearing voices. “They were going to kill him and there were people coming to eat his brain. Weird, weird stuff,” Kirkaldie said. “I woke up one morning, and no Kory anywhere. Well, it turns out, he’d been running down Villa Lane here totally naked.”

“The drug use activated the psychosis, is what I really think,” she said.

Seek and ye shall find, and there are plenty of peer-reviewed studies that show the negative outcomes from cannabis use. According to a study published in The Lancet Psychiatry on March 19, 2019, the focus is on high-potency pot, and the risk is over four times greater for people who use high-potency pot daily than for those who have never smoked. But often these risks are blown out of proportion.

Fearmongers have banked on studies like these, such as Alex Berenson, author of Tell Your Children: The Truth About Marijuana, Mental Illness, and Violence—who was permanently banned from Twitter for you guessed it, the spread of misinformation. The way arguments are presented makes it seem as though schizophrenia is common.

But what do other researchers say about the link between schizophrenia and pot?

Other researchers say drugs, nicotine, and other factors that aren’t pot muddy up the results in studies searching for a real correlation between pot and schizophrenia, nor other mental disorders.

A 2014 study, led by Ashley C. Proal and Dr. Lynn E. DeLisi of Harvard Medical School recruited pot smokers with and without a family history of schizophrenia, as well as non-smokers with and without such a history. But this time, the pot users did not use any other drugs, so they could rule out those factors. What they actually found was a heightened schizophrenia risk among people with a family history—regardless of cannabis use.

“My study clearly shows that cannabis does not cause schizophrenia by itself,” Dr. DeLisi told the New York Times in 2019. “Rather, a genetic predisposition is necessary. It is highly likely, based on the results of this study and others, that cannabis use during adolescence through to age 25, when the brain is maturing and at its peak of growth in a genetically vulnerable individual, can initiate the onset of schizophrenia.”

Other experts backed up Dr. DeLisi’s guess that schizophrenia warnings could be a bit inflated. “Usually it is the research types who are doing ‘the sky is falling’ bit, but here it is switched,” said Dr. Jay Geidd, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego. “The researchers are wary of overselling the dangers, as was clearly done in the past. However, clinicians overwhelmingly endorse seeing many more adolescents with ‘paranoia’”

SB 1097 now heads to an appropriations committee, sent on June 22, for another reading.

City lawmakers in Washington, D.C. adopted an emergency ordinance on Tuesday designed to ease access to the medical cannabis program in the nation’s capital by allowing all adults to “self-certify” their eligibility to use medicinal pot. Under the proposal, adults 21 and older would no longer be required to submit a recommendation to use medicinal pot from a health care provider when they apply for a medical cannabis identification card.

Supporters of the measure maintain that the bill will make it simpler for patients to gain access to medical cannabis, particularly for those who have difficulty seeing a doctor. Out of thousands of physicians practicing medicine in Washington, D.C., only 620 are registered to issue medical pot recommendations. In January, the city council passed a similar measure that allowed adults 65 and older to self-certify for medical cannabis card eligibility, but that ordinance expired on May 1.

“This self-certification is urgently needed for consumers and dispensaries alike,” said Councilmember Janeese Lewis George, as quoted by the DCist. “Expanding our patient base is a necessary first step to putting them on an equal playing field.”

Washington, D.C. Dispensaries Face Competition From Illicit Businesses

The emergency ordinance passed on Tuesday was introduced by Councilmembers Kenyan McDuffie and Mary Cheh. Proponents of the bill also hope that it will help regulated medical dispensaries compete with the illicit cannabis economy.

“Due to the lower barriers to access in the gray market, a significant number of medical marijuana patients have shifted from purchasing their medical marijuana from legal medical dispensaries to the illicit gray market, creating a significant risk to the long-term viability of the District’s legal medical marijuana industry,” McDuffie and Cheh said in a statement accompanying the emergency bill. “If this trend continues, it is possible that gray market sales could wipe out the District’s legal marijuana dispensaries.

Cheh and McDuffie went on to state that given the “benefits that regulated and safe legal dispensaries provide to medical marijuana users in the District, it is vital that the industry survive until the District can stand up a regulated recreational market and transition toward full regulation of recreational marijuana products.”

The council members noted that Washington, D.C.’s permitted medical marijuana dispensaries face stiff competition from the city’s gray market for cannabis, which takes advantage of recreational cannabis decriminalization loopholes to operate with virtual impunity. One popular scheme features businesses who sell cheap merchandise at hyper-inflated prices and include what is ostensibly a gift of cannabis with the purchase.

“Savvy business owners have pushed the legal limits on the gifting industry,” McDuffie said ahead of the vote. “I’ve had medical dispensaries that have reached out to me and my staff and say that if we don’t pass this measure, it could put their businesses into jeopardy.”

Although possession of cannabis has been legalized since the passage of a 2014 ballot measure, the federal government has blocked implementation of the law that would allow for the opening of recreational pot retailers. At Tuesday’s meeting, Council Chairman Phil Mendelson said that he would still like to see additional legislation that targets Washington D.C.’s cannabis gifting shops, noting that the business will be vital infrastructure for a potential legalized adult-use cannabis market.

“It’s not an equal playing field and will never be as long as there are illegal cannabis gifting shops,” he said. “As long as there are these businesses, the legal industry won’t be there to step in [when legalization happens].”

The city council passed the ordinance by a unanimous vote at its meeting on Tuesday. The bill is now headed to the office of Mayor Muriel Bowser for her consideration. In a letter sent to the council on Tuesday, Bowser said that she is in favor of the legislation, according to media reports.

Viridis Chief Operations Officer and Founder Todd W. Welch sent an email on June 17 with a statement addressing the company’s values and recent information that has come to light regarding the CRA.

“These CRA allegations against Viridis are from last August and continue to be baseless, meritless and totally detached from science, facts and data,” said the statement. “We intend to defend our business against these false claims during the court process and show the vindictive and retaliatory nature of the CRA’s actions which are clearly designed to cause maximum disruption and damage.”

“Court-ordered proficiency test results that Viridis is in possession of, which the CRA had been withholding, will directly contradict these findings, and we’re confident the truth will prevail when all facts come to light,” the statement continued. “We hope these legal proceedings will pave the way for more transparency, accountability, and reforms at the CRA. Our hope is that the CRA can one day fulfill its true mission of promoting patient and product safety instead of unfairly targeting Michigan businesses trying to grow, compete and create jobs.”

The email also shared that nearly all of the company’s customers have returned, with an added 63 new customers. The company supports testing for approximately 62% of the state’s flower.

The CRA (formerly called the MRA, or Marijuana Regulatory Agency, as of April 2022) issued a recall for products tested by Viridis Laboratories and Viridis North in November 2021, with claims that Viridis products contained “inaccurate and/or reliable results,” for products analyzed within the range of August 10 and November 16, 2021. This resulted in the recall of an estimated $229 million in product value.

The MRA claimed that Viridis’ methods of testing were “unreliable” and “inaccurate,” which Viridis responded to by filing a Court of Claims lawsuit against the MRA on November 23.

By December 3, the court ruled that the CRA must release half of the accused products, which were tested by Viridis North, LLC. Viridis Attorney Kevin Blair praised the court decision, even if “the entire recall was completely without merit.” “This ill-advised recall has caused irreparable harm not only to Viridis but to growers, retailers and consumers throughout the state. The MRA needs to be held fully accountable for violating state law, ignoring the advice of respected national experts and causing mass disruption to the Michigan cannabis industry,” he said in a press release.

Months later in February 2022, more news came forward regarding the CRA’s conduct. Judge Thomas Cameron released a court opinion that “the issuance of the recall against the Bay City facility was, on the Court’s review of the record, arbitrary and without basis.”

Shortly after this, it was revealed that CRA had instructed its agents not to seize illegal cannabis found at CRA-licensed facilities. New evidence from CRA depositions shared troubling truths about the inner workings of the MRA when it comes to following its own policies.

In March, Senator Aric Nesbitt questioned the CRA and its management. “I think it was poorly communicated to your licensees and it didn’t seem like you had thought through the impact on the wider marketplace before acting on the recall, and I thought it was very poorly done and very clumsy in the implementation of the recall,” Nesbitt said at a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Licensing and Regulatory Affairs/Insurance and Financial Services.

Most recently in May, the CRA filed formal complaints about the accuracy of Viridis’s THC test results. According to Viridis CEO Greg Michaud, described that allegations from the CRA “continue to be baseless, meritless and totally detached from science, facts and data.”

Furthermore, Michaud shared that the CRA’s Inter-Laboratory Proficiency Test, which was obtained via a court order, reveals some shocking finds about other lab testing facilities in Michigan. The test results are not yet public, but Welch’s email suggests that more news will be announced soon.