The Bipartisan HEMP Act Targets Federal Rules for Hemp-Derived CBD

WASHINGTON – Representatives Morgan Griffith, a Republican from Virginia, and Marc Veasey, a Democrat from Texas, introduced a bill on Friday to set the first national standards for hemp-derived CBD products, placing oversight with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The Hemp Enforcement, Modernization, and Protection Act, or HEMP Act, would allow sales of such products [including edibles, drinks, and inhalables] to adults 21-plus, while imposing requirements for packaging, labeling, and testing. Hemp-derived items differ from Cannabis, which the legislation explicitly excludes from its scope. The measure arrives as the U.S. hemp sector grapples with inconsistent state regulations and a looming federal clampdown on products containing trace amounts of THC.

Under the proposal, the FDA would launch a rulemaking process to determine limits on cannabinoids in these products. If the agency misses a three-year deadline, default caps would kick in:

• up to 10 milligrams per serving and 50 milligrams per package for non-intoxicating items,
• 100 milligrams per serving and 500 milligrams per package for inhalables and topicals, and
• 5 milligrams per serving and 30 milligrams per package for those with intoxicating effects like certain THC variants.

Manufacturers would need to register facilities, conduct third-party testing and use tamper-resistant packaging that avoids drawing in minors. Labels would list all [!] cannabinoids, backed by scannable codes linking to lab results, and the products could not include additives like caffeine, nicotine, or melatonin that might alter effects.

Griffith, who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, described the bill as a response to years of federal inaction. “After discussions with stakeholders, federal officials and other relevant authorities, I believe the HEMP Act is a positive step forward to deliver federal clarity to the American hemp sector, protecting consumers and providing a stable marketplace for legitimate producers,” he said in a statement. Veasey, a member of the same committee, echoed the need for uniformity, noting that varying state approaches have fueled market confusion and safety risks.

Industry groups have lined up behind the HEMP Act as a workable alternative. The U.S. Hemp Roundtable called it an “important starting point” that could safeguard public health while sustaining growth in a field employing tens of thousands. The American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) praised its potential to end the “wild west” era of enforcement, though both urged tweaks to THC thresholds, which some view as overly conservative given consumer demand.

Critics, however, see risks. Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), an advocacy group, labeled the bill a “backdoor” route to broader Cannabis acceptance, arguing it could normalize intoxicating substances without sufficient safeguards. Veterans’ organizations have raised alarms about barriers to research on CBD for post-traumatic stress, while Kentucky’s governor advocated state-level control to shield local growers.

The HEMP Act’s bipartisan backing [rare in a polarized Congress] boosts its odds of advancing through the Energy and Commerce Committee, where Griffith holds sway. Yet, the path to success still requires reconciling industry requests for flexibility with enforcement priorities. Projections show the CBD segment, expanding at a rate of 10% annually throughout the decade, is primarily driven by wellness trends and agricultural innovation.

Ultimately, the HEMP Act reflects a calculated strategic shift in hemp policy, prioritizing structure over suppression as the industry navigates tighter THC boundaries.