When Ohio voters approved Issue 2 in November 2023, they believed they were legalizing recreational cannabis with clear protections for responsible adult use. Now, less than two years later, the Ohio House of Representatives has passed Senate Bill 56—a piece of legislation that fundamentally alters what voters approved while simultaneously imposing strict new regulations on the hemp industry.
The bill, which passed the House on an 87-8 vote, is yet another instance of state lawmakers rewriting voter-approved initiatives. While proponents frame SB 56 as necessary regulation to protect public safety and align Ohio’s hemp and cannabis markets, critics see it as government overreach that strips away critical consumer protections and criminalizes behavior voters explicitly legalized.
This legislative maneuver comes on the heels of Governor Mike DeWine’s executive order earlier this month banning hemp-derived products—an action temporarily halted by a Franklin County judge following a legal challenge from the hemp industry. Senate Bill 56 now attempts to accomplish through legislation what the governor’s emergency order could not.
What Senate Bill 56 Actually Does
Senate Bill 56 is a massive overhaul affecting both Ohio’s hemp and recreational cannabis industries. The legislation spans hundreds of pages and touches dozens of existing statutes, but its most consequential changes fall into several key categories.
Hemp Industry Gets Strict New Framework
The bill creates an entirely new regulatory structure for hemp products, particularly those containing intoxicating levels of THC. For years, hemp-derived products existed in what lawmakers called a “legal gray area,” available at gas stations, smoke shops, and retail stores without significant oversight.
Under SB 56, intoxicating hemp products can only be sold at licensed dispensaries, with limited exceptions. Bars and restaurants can still sell low-THC beverages—those containing 5mg or less for on-site consumption and up to 10mg for take-home purchases. However, most other intoxicating hemp products must now flow through the same licensed retail channels as recreational marijuana.
The bill also imposes a new $1.25 per gallon tax on intoxicating hemp beverages and requires hemp dispensaries to obtain expensive licenses costing $75,000 for a two-year period. These dispensaries must also derive at least 80% of their revenue from hemp products to maintain their permits.
Hemp industry representatives have expressed mixed reactions to the new regulations. Some voiced optimism about finally having clear guidelines, while others, are actively lobbying the Senate to reject the bill. The hemp and marijuana industries have often been at odds, with several dispensaries arguing that hemp products should not be sold without a full marijuana license.
Potency Limits and Product Restrictions
One of the more technical but significant changes involves THC concentration limits. The legislation reduces the maximum THC content in cannabis extracts from 90% down to 70% of plant material. Supporters argue this addresses safety concerns about highly concentrated products, while opponents see it as arbitrary interference with consumer choice.
The bill limits how companies can market and package cannabis products, focusing on preventing items that appeal to children. Manufacturers cannot design products to look like candy, fruit, or cartoon characters. While these provisions may seem reasonable on their surface, they represent legislators imposing restrictions voters never requested when they approved Issue 2.
Public Consumption Gets Eliminated
Issue 2 allowed for some degree of public marijuana consumption, but SB 56 eliminates this entirely. Under the new legislation, cannabis can only be consumed on privately owned property. This means no smoking or vaping at outdoor bar patios, parks, or other public spaces.
The bill goes further by prohibiting consumption in violation of residential lease agreements, giving landlords explicit authority to ban marijuana use in rental properties. While landlords already had this right in many cases, the legislation codifies it and extends the prohibition to include vaping—even though vaping produces far less odor than smoking.
Rep. Brian Stewart defended these restrictions, stating, “We are taking care of children. We are saying you can’t manufacture products that look like teddy bears and fruit and candy. We are saying you can’t have advertising that targets children. No public consumption but you can consume on your own property.”
Anti-Discrimination Protections Vanish
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of Senate Bill 56 is its elimination of anti-discrimination protections that Issue 2 explicitly included. The voter-approved measure contained language preventing responsible cannabis consumers from losing their children, their professional licenses, access to transplant waiting lists, and other vital services solely because they use marijuana legally.
“It is profoundly disappointing to see the House Judiciary Committee advance legislation to roll back cannabis freedoms and protections that Ohio voters overwhelmingly approved,” Karen O’Keefe, director of states policies at the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), told Marijuana Moment. “The committee substitute would open the door to harassment and interrogation of cannabis consumers by criminalizing any cannabis that wasn’t home grown or obtained from an Ohio retailer. It would also remove protections that prevent responsible cannabis consumers from losing their children, professions, and even their lives for cannabis use.”
SB 56 strips away these protections entirely. This means that even though recreational cannabis is legal in Ohio, consumers could still face adverse actions from licensing boards, child protective services, healthcare providers, and other institutions. Parents could lose custody of their children. Professionals could lose their licenses. Patients could be removed from organ transplant waiting lists.
The bill does maintain limited protections for medical marijuana patients, but adult-use consumers who voted for Issue 2 specifically to gain these safeguards now find themselves vulnerable to discrimination and harassment.
Out-of-State Cannabis Becomes Contraband
Another significant change involves the treatment of marijuana purchased outside Ohio. Senate Bill 56 criminalizes possession of any cannabis that wasn’t either home-grown in Ohio or purchased from an Ohio-licensed dispensary.
This means that even though marijuana is legal in neighboring Michigan, Ohioans cannot legally bring it across state lines—even in quantities that would otherwise be legal. The bill treats out-of-state cannabis as “contraband,” opening the door to interrogations about the source of one’s marijuana and potential criminal charges for possession of perfectly legal amounts of cannabis that simply came from the wrong place.
This creates a practical enforcement nightmare while doing nothing to enhance public safety. How exactly are law enforcement officers supposed to determine where someone’s marijuana came from? The legislation provides no clear answer, raising concerns about pretextual stops and searches targeting cannabis consumers.
Home Growing Faces New Penalties
While Issue 2 allowed home cultivation of limited amounts of marijuana, SB 56 imposes harsh new penalties for exceeding those limits. The bill creates felony-level trafficking penalties for home growers who exceed the plant limit, even if they have no intent to sell or distribute.
Additionally, the legislation restricts how much of a home grow can be shared with others. Under Issue 2, adult-use consumers could transfer up to 2.5 ounces of plant material or 15 grams of extract to another adult without remuneration. Senate Bill 56 maintains these limits but adds new restrictions and potential criminal liability for violations.
The bill also requires marijuana to remain in its original packaging during transport, creating yet another technical violation that could ensnare otherwise law-abiding cannabis consumers.
Local Governments Finally Get Revenue Share
One positive aspect of the House’s version of SB 56 involves sharing tax revenue with local governments. The legislation would send $47.5 million in fiscal year 2026 and $49 million in 2027 to communities that host dispensaries.
This provision addresses a longstanding complaint from municipalities that bear the costs of hosting cannabis businesses without receiving direct financial benefits. Rep. Brian Stewart highlighted this as a significant improvement, noting that it brings together “both parties, all factions of this issue.”
However, this single beneficial change does little to offset the bill’s wholesale rewriting of what voters approved.
Pattern of Legislative Overreach
Senate Bill 56 fits into a troubling pattern of Ohio legislators overriding or significantly modifying voter-approved initiatives. Citizens spend time gathering signatures, educating the public, and winning at the ballot box. They expect lawmakers to respect and enact their will. They don’t expect the same politicians they bypassed through the initiative process to immediately rewrite it.
Lake County Rep. Jamie Callender defended the legislation, calling it “a huge step toward legalization in Ohio” and claiming it “ends the risk of the legislature overturning the will of the voters.” But this framing rings hollow when the bill eliminates key protections voters specifically approved and criminalizes conduct they explicitly legalized.
Cannabis reform advocates have been blunt in their assessment. One unnamed advocate stated that it is “profoundly disappointing to see the House Judiciary Committee advance legislation to roll back cannabis freedoms and protections that Ohio voters overwhelmingly approved.” They warned that the bill “will lead to interrogations over the source of cannabis and arrests over conduct voters legalized.”
What Happens Next For Ohio Senate Bill 56?
The House made several changes to the Senate’s original version, particularly around revenue sharing with local governments and certain hemp provisions. These modifications mean the Senate must either accept the House version or work to reconcile the differences between the two chambers’ bills.
The legislation has passed the House and now heads to Governor DeWine’s desk. Given the governor’s recent executive action to ban intoxicating hemp products, he is expected to sign it into law.
For Ohio’s cannabis and hemp consumers, this represents a critical moment. The legislation fundamentally alters what they voted for, stripping away protections they believed they had secured through the democratic process. Whether lawmakers choose to respect voter intent or continue down this path of legislative revision will say much about the state of democracy in Ohio.
The Bigger Question About Voter Initiatives
Beyond the specific provisions of Senate Bill 56 lies a more fundamental question: What is the point of voter initiatives if elected officials can simply rewrite them at will?
Ohio voters spent significant time, energy, and money to get Issue 2 on the ballot and secure its passage. They researched the issue, debated the specifics, and made their voices heard through the democratic process. When nearly 57% of voters approved the measure in November 2023, they had every reason to believe their decision would be respected and implemented as written.
Instead, legislators immediately began working to modify, restrict, and in some cases eliminate what voters approved. While lawmakers argue they’re simply implementing reasonable regulations to address unforeseen issues, the scope and nature of changes in SB 56 go far beyond technical adjustments.
This dynamic creates a troubling precedent. If politicians can overturn voter-approved initiatives designed to bypass them, why would citizens bother with the initiative process? What’s the point of spending months gathering signatures and running campaigns if lawmakers can undo the results in the next legislative session?
These aren’t theoretical concerns. Ohio has seen this pattern repeated with various initiatives in recent years, eroding public trust in both the initiative process and in government generally.
Looking Forward
As Senate Bill 56 moves through its final legislative steps, Ohio’s cannabis and hemp consumers face an uncertain future. The bill creates clear winners and losers: established marijuana dispensaries gain protection from hemp competition, local governments receive new revenue streams, and children may benefit from marketing restrictions.
But recreational cannabis consumers lose critical protections they believed they had secured. They face potential discrimination in employment, housing, healthcare, and family law. They risk criminal charges for possessing cannabis purchased in neighboring states or for minor technical violations around transport and packaging. They’ve lost the ability to consume cannabis in any public setting, even outdoor spaces where smoking is otherwise permitted.
The hemp industry faces its own challenges, navigating expensive new licensing requirements and restrictions that may force many existing businesses to close or dramatically restructure.
Whether these changes represent reasonable regulation or government overreach depends largely on one’s perspective. What’s undeniable is that Senate Bill 56 significantly rewrites what Ohio voters approved when they passed Issue 2. For those who believe in respecting the democratic process and honoring voter intent, that alone should give serious pause.
