## Facts

- Derek Owen, a New Hampshire state legislator, supported proposed state legislation to legalize and regulate cultivation of “industrial hemp.”
- The plant commonly called hemp (Cannabis sativa) can be used for industrial products (e.g., rope), while the drug marijuana is generally derived from the flowers or leaves.
- Cannabis sativa grown for industrial products typically has lower THC concentration than cannabis grown for drug use; Owen’s proposal defined industrial hemp as Cannabis sativa containing 1% THC or less.
- A DEA representative testified at a state legislative hearing that cultivation of Cannabis sativa is treated as manufacture of marijuana and is illegal under federal law absent federal licensing, regardless of industrial intent or THC level.
- The state bill passed a committee recommendation but failed on a close vote in the full house.
- Owen and the New Hampshire Hemp Council filed a federal declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that low-THC “industrial hemp” is not “marihuana” under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) and thus not federally prohibited.
- The district court dismissed the complaint, and plaintiffs appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether 21 U.S.C. § 802(16) defines “marihuana” to include all Cannabis sativa plants, regardless of THC concentration and intended industrial use.
2. Whether applying the CSA to low-THC industrial hemp exceeds Congress’s Commerce Clause power or violates the Tenth Amendment.

## Decision

- The First Circuit affirmed dismissal of the complaint.
- The court held that the CSA’s definition of “marihuana” includes all Cannabis sativa plants, without a THC-based or industrial-use exception.
- The court rejected reliance on legislative history to narrow the statute’s plain language.
- The court upheld Congress’s authority to regulate industrial hemp under the Commerce Clause and found no Tenth Amendment violation.

## Legal Principles

- When a statute’s text plainly defines “marihuana” by reference to Cannabis sativa, a court will not add an unexpressed THC-content limitation or industrial-use carve-out.
- Practical enforcement considerations may support reading a botanical definition as written where strains are not readily distinguishable by appearance in the field.
- Congress may regulate intrastate cultivation of cannabis, including low-THC industrial varieties, as part of a comprehensive federal scheme addressing interstate controlled-substances markets.
- A valid exercise of enumerated federal power under the Commerce Clause does not violate the Tenth Amendment; conflicting state policies cannot displace federal law.

## Conclusion

The court construed the CSA to treat all Cannabis sativa as “marihuana” regardless of THC level or industrial intent and held that Congress may constitutionally regulate and prohibit unlicensed cultivation of industrial hemp under the CSA.


New Hampshire Hemp Council, Inc. v. Marshall, 203 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2000)