Importers of Cannabis Paraphernalia Should Seek Rulings in Wake of CIT Decision, Law Firm Says
Importers of cannabis-related goods should seek customs rulings to "interpret the laws of every State that has repealed prior prohibitions" pertaining to cannabis paraphernalia to better facilitate the importation of these goods, law firm Neville Peterson said in a blog post.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
While CBP's enforcement policies regarding its import ban on cannabis-related goods were unclear following a recent Court of International Trade decision permitting the goods to be imported, a recent customs ruling from CBP gave importers a sign that the "belligerent agency" is acknowledging the decision, the post said. The ruling, N335656, "confirms that importers of marijuana-related drug paraphernalia through Washington State ports are exempted from the federal prohibition."
Since the ruling is limited to Washington state, "additional vigilance by the industry is required," though the shift from CBP does invite more companies to apply for additional rulings. "[W]e see this as a clear indication that CBP is open to expanding its application of the exemption, but only if importers force them to," the post said. Applying for more rulings "may pave the way for a more harmonized legal framework that better integrates state-level cannabis legalization with federal importation regulations."
In September 2022, the trade court found in Eteros Technologies USA v. U.S. that CBP cannot seize or forfeit imports federally deemed "drug paraphernalia" but whose delivery and possession were made legal at the state level (see 2209210034). The court cited a Supreme Court ruling to find that a state's revocation of a ban qualifies as an action permitting the conduct originally covered by the ban, thus qualifying Washington state's decision to lift its ban for the federal exemption in the Controlled Substances Act.
Neville Peterson attorneys noted that CBP still told importers that its positions issued prior to this decision "were unchanged." This position "could not stand, and yet, due to the narrowness of the jurisdictional powers of the CIT," the court couldn't be "reenlisted" to order CBP to acknowledge the decision, the law firm said.