Ohio lawmakers appear to be hitting the pause button on any potential changes to the state’s recently passed recreational marijuana law. Although Senate Bill 56 cleared the Senate in February, its future in the House remains uncertain as legislators prepare to break for the summer.
What Was Issue 2?
For context, Issue 2 was a citizen-initiated law passed by Ohio voters in 2023 with a 57% majority. It paved the way for the legalization of adult-use cannabis, with sales beginning in August 2024.
It also established guidelines for revenue allocation, which included funding local communities, supporting social equity in the cannabis industry, financing substance use research, and covering administrative costs.
The success of Issue 2 represented a significant moment for Ohio, as it responded to the public’s demand to regulate cannabis thoughtfully and in alignment with growing national trends.
However, as the law’s implementation progresses, some lawmakers have sought to revisit its provisions through Senate Bill 56 (SB 56).
What is Senate Bill 56?
Introduced by State Sen. Steve Huffman in January, SB 56 aims to revise numerous provisions of Issue 2. Among other changes, the proposed bill would:
- Reduce THC levels in recreational marijuana extracts from 90% to 70%.
- Limit the number of dispensary licenses to 400.
- Prohibit smoking cannabis in most public spaces, allowing it only in private residences and outdoor concert venues.
- Regulate intoxicating hemp products by requiring their sale through licensed dispensaries, subjecting them to packaging and labeling requirements.
The inclusion of intoxicating hemp products, such as Delta-8 THC, has proven to be a particularly divisive issue. While some lawmakers argue that regulating hemp through dispensaries enhances public safety, opponents, including small business advocates, contend that it risks harming legitimate hemp businesses that sell these products in their stores.
Why the Delay?
For two consecutive weeks, the Ohio House Judiciary Committee declined to vote on whether to advance Senate Bill 56 reports the Ohio Capital Journal. This delay reflects deeper controversies within the legislature. Lawmakers have expressed differing opinions about the bill’s provisions on hemp regulations as well as the allocation of marijuana tax revenue.
Some Republicans have pledged to get rid of Issue 2’s social equity components altogether, arguing against its distribution of revenue to programs aiming to diversify the cannabis industry and address past injustices caused by prohibition.
However, Democrats, like House Minority Leader Dani Isaacsohn, have argued that Issue 2 represents the clear will of Ohio voters, emphasizing that, “The people of Ohio spoke very clearly on this issue…“They knew what they were voting on, and they voted to pass adult-use cannabis recreationally here in the state of Ohio.”
Beyond these ideological clashes, legislative hurdles have further stalled progress. With lawmakers preoccupied by Ohio’s two-year operating budget, which takes precedence and must be signed by July 1, SB 56 remains overshadowed.
State Rep. Brian Stewart said, “We are going to push pause…We’re going to take the summer and come back and potentially take another crack at it.”
The Stakes of a Postponed Decision
The delay has consequences. First, Ohio cities and local governments cannot access their share of the marijuana tax revenue promised under Issue 2 until they reach a consensus on regulations.
Second, small hemp businesses are left in limbo, uncertain about their future under potentially stricter rules requiring hemp products to be sold exclusively in dispensaries.
Perhaps more importantly, the law’s delay highlights the larger tension between direct voter-driven initiatives and legislative oversight. Issue 2 passed as a citizen-initiated law, but SB 56 demonstrates lawmakers attempting to regulate a voter-approved initiative. Since it is not a constitutional amendment, lawmakers have the authority to amend its provisions.
This creates an ongoing power dynamic between upholding voter mandates and introducing frameworks perceived to add clarity or safeguards.
What’s Next for Senate Bill 56?
Come fall, the Ohio legislature will face pressing questions regarding SB 56, particularly around regulatory frameworks for hemp and marijuana revenue distribution.
The bill is expected to resume deliberations, though the road ahead looks far from straightforward. Legislators tasked with modifying Issue 2 must grapple with balancing public sentiment, economic implications, and the logistical challenges of enforcement.
Additionally, as debate continues, local advocates continue to demand transparency and fairness. For some grassroots organizations, the postponement is an opportunity to refine proposed legislation further.
Others, however, see it as an unnecessary delay that hinders progress toward a state-level milestone for cannabis reform.
Senate Bill 56 is just more proof of the complexities that arise when governments translate voter initiatives into law. While Ohio’s Issue 2 was a shift toward marijuana legalization, its unfinished business reveals the extent to which politics still shape its rollout.
For now, Ohioans must wait as lawmakers work, leaving people across the state—from local governments to hemp retailers to marijuana advocates—in prolonged uncertainty.
Moving forward, one thing is clear: the dialogue around SB 56 will draw significant attention as Ohio lawmakers resume negotiations later this year.
