At a press conference announcing the new cannabis reform package, Johnson praised the “appropriate urgency” with which Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick pushed the deregulation of the Texas THC market into the limelight and exposed the potential risks if the market continues without reform. Ahead of the regular session, Patrick named banning all THC products as his top priority and relentlessly pursued the endeavor.
“It does pose a threat,” Johnson said to a room of reporters. “The unregulated sale of hemp-derived THC products poses grave threats to health overall, particularly to children, as it has been marketed and sold to children.”
But Johnson, like hemp industry experts, does not agree that a total ban is the solution.
“In the regular session, Senators were presented with the option of a ban or nothing,” Johnson wrote in a press release. “Doing nothing was not an option then, and is not an option now. But a total THC ban is neither enforceable nor desirable nor respectful of adult consumers.”
The first of his new bills, Senate Bill 53, provides a comprehensive regulatory framework for hemp-derived THC products. The new limitations would restrict licensing and permitting, cap THC product potency at 5 mg, require product testing and introduce child-safe packaging.
The second bill, Senate Bill 54, would decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana equal to or smaller than 2 ounces and legalize small-scale personal-use cultivation. Decriminalization efforts, similar to Johnson’s, have been controversially implemented by city governments across the state, much to the chagrin of the current Attorney General Ken Paxton. But legalization proponents cite the disproportionate number of inmates, typically people of color, according to Johnson, who are serving time for non-violent marijuana charges.
“Marijuana possession still accounts for over 30% of drug-related arrests, diverts law enforcement resources away from violent crime, damages families and communities, and imposes tremendous unnecessary costs on taxpayers,” he wrote in his release.
How We Got Here
The 89th Legislative Regular Session, which ended in early June, left unfinished business, so Gov. Greg Abbott called a special session, hauling all 181 legislators back to Austin to settle some remaining issues. Chief among them was the fate of the hemp industry in Texas.During the regular session, lawmakers passed Senate Bill 3, a piece of legislation that would outlaw the production, distribution, sale, consumption and possession of any and all hemp-derived THC products. In the version approved by the majority of both the House and Senate, no exceptions were made for beverages or low-concentration products. But in a last-minute move, Abbott vetoed the bill for its expansive nature, citing groups reliant on THC products for pain management, and for poorly written portions that left blind spots for litigation.
“Senate Bill 3 is well-intentioned,” he wrote in his veto. “But it would never go into effect because of valid constitutional challenges. Litigation challenging the bill has already been filed, and the legal defects in the bill are undeniable. If I were to allow Senate Bill 3 to become law, its enforcement would be enjoined for years, leaving existing abuses unaddressed. Texas cannot afford to wait.”
The governor urged lawmakers to rewrite the bill, finding ways to heavily regulate the industry in enforceable ways. Patrick was displeased with this decision.
Now, the Senate has preliminarily passed Senate Bill 5, which is a near carbon copy of SB 3.
“I made Senate Bill 5 a top legislative priority for the Senate because we refuse to let these rogue retailers exploit loopholes in state law to sell dangerous THC products into our communities,” Patrick wrote after the Senate advanced the bill in a 20-9 vote on second reading on Wednesday. A final reading is expected to occur on Friday, and then the bill will be sent to the House, where it is expected to face an uphill battle because of a smaller Republican majority.
Didn't Dallas Decriminalize Already? Technically, yes.
The decriminalization bill in Johnson’s package is another page in the book of lawmakers working to relax Texas’ strict possession laws. By the standards set by the state penal code, possession of any amount of marijuana is illegal without a prescription. But a few cities and counties across the state have allowed voters to decide whether or not low-level marijuana possession should be allowed. Dallas is one of them, although that seemingly will not be the case any longer. In 2024, Dallas joined San Marcos, Austin, Denton, San Antonio, and several other cities in decriminalizing small amounts of marijuana. The change was made possible by Proposition R, which appeared on the November 2024 ballots within Dallas city limits. The amendment passed with a 67% vote, allowing for up to 4 ounces of marijuana, and made Dallas the largest Texas city to decriminalize weed in such a way.
Within 30 days, Paxton, who will be leaving the attorney general’s office to embark on a senatorial campaign in 2026, sued the city of Dallas.
“The City of Dallas has no authority to override Texas drug laws or prohibit the police from enforcing them,” Paxton wrote in a Nov. 2024 press release after filing his suit. “This is a backdoor attempt to violate the Texas Constitution, and any city that tries to constrain police in this fashion will be met swiftly with a lawsuit by my office.”
Staring expensive litigation in the face, Dallas decided not to enforce the amendment in recent months. Now, thanks to an agreement with Paxton's office, the city cannot penalize officers who continue to make arrests and issue citations for low-level marijuana possession. But according to reporting from the Dallas Morning News, marijuana arrests in the city are markedly low following the voter passage of the proposition. Only eight people were charged with possession of marijuana between November and June, and all of them had additional felony charges.
Following the new ordinance's passage, former interim chief of police Michael Igo instructed his officers to stop issuing citations and arrests for possession. But before Igo, Chief Eddie Garcia had warned the city council about the latent effects of Proposition R, disapproving of the measure.
"Who prospers? Drug dealers. Drug houses prosper," Garcia said to the city council in August 2024. "Drug houses and dealers who are already tarnishing lives in our most at-risk neighborhoods."
