Texas politics around cannabis and hemp products are heating up again, with a new THC order from Governor Greg Abbott at the center of controversy. On September 10, the Governor issued Executive Order No. GA-56 aimed at “protecting children from hemp and hemp-derived products” while clarifying regulations for retailers. The move came after Abbott vetoed legislation that would have banned hemp-derived THC altogether and instead placed the issue on a special session agenda.
While Abbott framed his THC order as a step toward public safety, Lt. Governor Dan Patrick has been one of its most vocal critics. Patrick, who strongly supported the original ban, argues the new THC order sends a confusing signal to the market. In his view, it creates the impression that the state is endorsing hemp-derived THC products rather than restricting them.
Patrick listed several concerns about the THC order: it does not halt the manufacture or sale of what he calls “dangerous” synthetic or Delta-9 THC products; it allows stores to continue operating near schools; and it does little to address driving while intoxicated on THC or the growth of an unlawful resale market to minors. He also warned that local law enforcement lacks the resources to enforce the rules implied by the THC order.
Another point of dispute is how federal law interacts with the THC order. The executive order notes that the federal government allows states to regulate hemp and its naturally occurring derivatives but not to ban them outright. Patrick counters that courts have repeatedly ruled states can ban THC products and that several already have. This legal disagreement sits at the heart of the Texas debate over the Governor’s THC order.
Most hemp-derived THC in Texas is created by chemically converting cannabinoids such as CBD into Delta-8 or Delta-9 THC. Critics argue that, because these forms are not naturally occurring, they fall outside the protections cited in the THC order. Supporters of the Governor’s approach say the measure simply clarifies the current market while legislators work toward a permanent solution.
Patrick, while opposing recreational use, still supports prescribed medical cannabis, including CBD and CBG. But he insists the THC order could open a pathway to broader legalization, something he vows to resist. “We do not want to be another failed Colorado,” he said.
For now, Texas retailers and consumers must navigate a confusing landscape shaped by vetoed bills, special sessions, and a contested THC order that could define the state’s cannabis policy for years to come.