Cannabis Business Times' Best Cannabis Companies to Work For - 2027 Is Accepting Entries! Enter now.
Cannabis Business Times' Best Cannabis Companies to Work For - 2027 Is Accepting Entries! Enter now.
Minnesota Judge Blocks State’s Direct-to-Consumer Ban on Low-THC Hemp Edibles | Cannabis Business Times

Create a free Cannabis Business Times account to continue reading

Continue to Site »
Site will load in 15 seconds

Minnesota Judge Blocks State’s Direct-to-Consumer Ban on Low-THC Hemp Edibles

The judge ordered the state’s Office of Cannabis Management to cease enforcing its requirement for in-person deliveries, allowing mail shipments.

Minnesota delivery 321471783
Adobe Stock | New Africa

Tony Lange2(smaller) Mug 2025 Headshot

Minnesota companies selling low-potency hemp edibles can ship their products directly to consumers, an administrative law judge ruled on Feb. 12.

The decision blocks the Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) from enforcing guidance stating that licensed low-potency hemp edible (LPHE) retailers were not permitted to ship their products through the mail because state law requires that the retailers “verify that the customer is at least 21 years of age” before making a sale.

State law also prohibits the sale or delivery of low-potency hemp edibles to a person “who is visibly intoxicated.”

The OCM’s guidance – issued in October 2025 via the office’s FAQ page on its website – indicated that licensed retailers could only verify a customer’s age and sobriety through in-store sales or those made through an employee delivery endorsement from the state.

But a judge put the kibosh on that guidance this week, ordering that the OCM immediately cease enforcing the “unpromulgated rule” on its website.

Minnesota Court of Administrative Hearings Assistant Chief Administrative Law Judge Kristien R. E. Butler ruled that the OCM’s interpretation of statutory language requiring in-person sales and deliveries “does not match the unambiguous, plain language of the statute.”

“Nothing in the plain text of the statute requires licensees with the delivery endorsement to be the exclusive method by which LPHEs may be shipped or delivered to customers,” the judge wrote in the Feb. 12 ruling. “While the office argues its position was nonetheless the Legislature’s intent, the fact the Legislature actively elected to include that sort of precise exclusivity requirement for sales of LPHEs mitigates against such an interpretation.”

In 2025, the Minnesota Legislature codified language for the LPHE delivery endorsements into state law, allowing the OCM to authorize these retailers to “conduct a specified operation activity.”

While Minnesota legalized adult-use cannabis in 2023, launching dispensary sales in September 2025, the state’s law governing hemp-derived cannabinoid edible and beverage products took effect in July 2022. Under the hemp law, Minnesotans 21 and older can purchase cannabinoid products containing no more than 5 milligrams of THC per serving and 50 milligrams per package from licensed retailers.

The original 2022 statute was silent on delivery and shipments for LPHE retailers, and many began direct-to-consumer shipping shortly after the law went into effect. It wasn’t until 2025 that direct-to-consumer shipments became a potential loss of revenue for retailers engaged in the practice.

The administrative law judge’s order this week stems from a complaint filed by nine businesses registered with the OCM to sell hemp-derived cannabinoid products. All nine businesses have shipped their products directly to consumers.

Leili Fatehi, an industry consultant for Blunt Strategies and owner of Crested River Cannabis Co., one of the nine petitioners on the complaint, told The Minnesota Star Tribune that the judge’s ruling firmly rejects an agency overreach.

“It’s an affirmation that Minnesota hemp businesses can continue to operate as they have been, shipping regulated hemp products to customers across the state,” she said.

The court’s decision was simply to determine whether the OCM’s statement/guidance on its FAQ page was an unpromulgated rule or fell within an exception.

The OCM argued that in order not to render the Legislature’s 2025 law “ineffectual and superfluous,” in-person deliveries must be the exclusive method for LPHE retailers to provide their products to customers outside of in-store purchases.

“If any common carrier could deliver any amount of LPHEs directly to consumers by mail or courier, that would negate the entire purpose of a delivery endorsement and the requirements that come with it,” the OCM argued.

But nothing in the “plain text of the statute” requires hemp business licensees with a delivery endorsement to have in-person deliveries as their exclusive method for providing LPHEs to their customers, Butler wrote in the ruling.

LPHE retailers can use other means to verify a person’s age and sobriety, the judge ruled.

“The statutory language has no discussion or requirements regarding what methods licensees must employ to be in compliance,” Butler wrote. “This means, for example, a licensee could complete [its visual sobriety] verification by way of the internet using video-conferencing software.”

The ruling specifically allows licensed LPHE retailers with a delivery endorsement to continue direct-to-consumer shipments. The OCM can still regulate the LPHE marketplace to ensure licensees are performing age verifications and sobriety checks for all deliveries.

Page 1 of 12
Next Page