Texas THC Ban Push Ignores Majority Public Opposition and Lessons of Failed Prohibition

Estimated Time to Read: 9 minutes

Texas lawmakers are again moving to outlaw nearly all hemp-derived THC products via Senate Bill 5 and its House companion, HB 5. A Texas Scorecard article spotlights polling of Republican primary voters showing majority support for a ban, but broader surveys point the other way: the June 2025 University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll found a majority of Texans oppose an outright ban, and a July McLaughlin & Associates poll showed 79% support keeping hemp-derived products legal with added safeguards. That disconnect between a prohibition push and wider public sentiment has even split Republicans.

As State Rep. Brian Harrison (R-Midlothian), one of only two GOP members to vote against the ban last session, put it during the ongoing special session:

With crime labs already overburdened and prohibition’s track record of fueling black markets and expanding government, the smarter path is targeted regulation that protects minors, sets potency and packaging rules, and preserves Texans’ liberty, not a sweeping ban that criminalizes responsible adults.

From SB 3 to SB 5 and HB 5: A Ban Revived

Senate Bill 3, passed earlier this year, would have banned any consumable hemp product containing cannabinoids other than CBD or CBG, even if federally legal and non-intoxicating. It carried steep licensing and registration fees, created new criminal penalties, and was projected to cost the state $37.1 million through 2027.

Governor Abbott vetoed SB 3, warning it was likely preempted by the 2018 federal Farm Bill, could be struck down in court, and would take years to enforce. He also pointed to the harm it could do to veterans, patients, and small businesses that had been operating lawfully since hemp was legalized in Texas in 2019.

SB 5, which passed the Senate 21–8, keeps DSHS as the regulator but otherwise mirrors SB 3’s prohibition. It bans any detectable amount of cannabinoids other than CBD and CBG, eliminating most hemp products on the market. The Legislative Budget Board estimates a $24.2 million net loss to the state over the 2026–27 biennium, plus millions more in lost local sales tax revenue. HB 5, the House companion, is nearly identical in scope, penalties, and fees.

Senate Push, House Hearings, and Legislative Gridlock

In the Senate, the bill’s author, State Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock), painted today’s hemp products as unsafe and unpredictable, rejecting Abbott’s regulatory proposal and declaring the fate of current legal products under a ban “not his concern.” Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) has made prohibition a top priority.

In the House, Public Health Committee Chairman, State Rep. Gary VanDeaver (R-New Boston) has presented HB 5 as a crackdown on synthetic cannabinoids, over-limit THC products, and youth-targeted packaging. Law enforcement leaders testified in support of the ban, arguing that effective regulation would require hundreds of new trained agents and millions of dollars Texas does not have. They showed undercover video of high-potency sales and coaching customers on evading detection.

Industry leaders, veterans, parents, and patient advocates countered that prohibition would punish the compliant, destroy livelihoods, and deprive Texans of safe alternatives to opioids and alcohol. Paige Figi, whose daughter inspired Texas’s CBD law, called the bill “dangerously wrong.” Mitch Fuller of the Texas VFW said it was about “freedom and liberty” and unshackling veterans from dependence on opioids and alcohol. Parents of children with epilepsy warned that the bill would outlaw therapies that keep their children alive.

The hearings are occurring against the backdrop of a Democratic quorum break over redistricting, which has stalled all House floor votes. Abbott has signaled he will call another special session if time runs out without action.

Public Opinion: A Divided Picture

The debate over SB 5 and HB 5 is often framed by polling of Republican primary voters. A Texas Scorecard article highlighted a recent survey showing that 62% of GOP primary voters support a total ban on consumable THC products. That number has fueled some lawmakers’ push for prohibition, but it’s far from the whole story.

When you zoom out to the broader electorate, the picture changes dramatically. The June 2025 University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll found that 53% of Texans oppose a ban, with just 31% in favor. Even among Republicans, the margin is narrow, 46% support versus 39% opposed, and independents (58%) and Democrats (68%) overwhelmingly reject prohibition.

The July 2025 McLaughlin & Associates poll goes further, showing 79% of Texans support keeping hemp-derived products legal with added regulations, including 75% of Republicans, 81% of Democrats, and 82% of independents. Support for safety guardrails like a 21+ age limit, marketing restrictions, and zoning rules to protect minors was overwhelming across partisan lines.

Taken together, these polls tell a clear story: while one poll might suggest that a majority of GOP primary voters favor prohibition, most Texans, across party lines, prefer a regulated, legal market to an outright ban.

Supporters’ Arguments and Why They Fall Short

Some groups are urging lawmakers to ban what they call “psychoactive” THC sales, arguing that there is “undeniable and growing evidence that THC causes great harm to users” and that it can lead to addiction, mental illness, and even psychosis over time. They frame the issue as one of protecting families from a harmful industry, claiming that “liberty does not come with addiction and mental illness” and warning that regulation would be “very costly” and “impossible to implement.” They cite Colorado’s legalization experience, alleging that the state spends nearly $5 for every $1 it collects in THC tax revenue, and contend that a simple ban would bring “more safety and fewer expenses to Texas” while avoiding new bureaucracies.

But these claims ignore a fundamental truth: prohibition has never eliminated demand; it simply drives it underground. Prohibition means more black market activity, more cartel involvement, more parents in jail, and more families torn apart by government overreach. As some who oppose the ban put it, “We’ve seen this movie before. Alcohol prohibition made organized crime richer and communities more dangerous. THC bans are doing the same.”

The Colorado comparison is also incomplete. While legalization has challenges, it has also created a regulated framework with age limits, licensing, lab testing, and enforcement tools, none of which exist in a black market. The costs cited by supporters do not disappear under a ban; they are replaced by criminal enforcement costs, court backlogs, and incarceration expenses, with zero offsetting tax revenue.

And on implementation, Texas law enforcement and crime lab leaders have testified that they already lack the manpower and funding to enforce existing drug laws. A ban would mean more seizures, more tests, and more strain on limited resources, not less. Far from delivering safety and savings, it risks delivering the opposite.

Enforcement Capacity: A Logistical Wall

Even if a ban could withstand a court challenge, enforcement is another matter. Dr. Peter Stout of the Texas Association of Crime Lab Directors testified that there are only 266 licensed forensic scientists in Texas, already overwhelmed with tens of thousands of requests from 19,000 agencies. THC testing is expensive, time-consuming, and low priority compared to violent crimes and fentanyl. A ban would increase seizure volume dramatically, swamping already backlogged labs. Some prosecutors already decline THC cases due to cost and delay.

Why Prohibition Fails, in Principle and Practice

Banning THC will not eliminate demand or supply; it will simply push both underground. Instead of treating adults like criminals, Texas should trust them to make their own choices. Legalize THC for adults, restrict it for minors, and let law enforcement focus on genuine threats, not nonviolent Texans acting peacefully. As Milton Friedman warned, “The costs of drug prohibition are far greater than any of the supposed benefits.” The classical liberal approach here is about freedom and responsibility, not moral panic and top-down control. A nanny-state prohibition on adult use undermines both liberty and accountability.

Federal Context: The Ground Is Shifting

The federal government may soon make prohibitionist state policies even less defensible. The Trump administration is actively considering reclassifying marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, a change that would acknowledge its medical uses, reduce barriers to research, and put it in the same category as ketamine and testosterone. If marijuana itself is reclassified as less dangerous, Texas’s ban on hemp products with trace THC content would be even more out of step and more vulnerable to federal legal challenges.

The Better Path Forward

Governor Abbott’s veto of SB 3 outlined a clear alternative: criminal penalties for sales to minors, restrictions on sales near schools and parks, child-resistant packaging, marketing limits, retailer permits, and age-21 entry rules, THC caps, comprehensive testing, transparent labeling, and excise taxes to fund enforcement. This is how Texas can protect children, shut down bad actors, and respect constitutional and economic realities, all without treating responsible adults as criminals.

The Bottom Line

Republican voters want to keep kids safe and communities strong. But SB 5 and HB 5 are recycled from a bill the governor already deemed unconstitutional and unenforceable. They ignore resource constraints, invite legal challenges, destroy lawful commerce, and move Texas further down the same failed prohibitionist path that has enriched cartels and criminalized peaceful citizens.

Texas should lead with liberty, not fear, and that means rejecting this ban in favor of smart, enforceable regulation.

Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!