Texas Judge Temporarily Blocks State Ban on Smokeable Hemp Products
A Travis County judge handed the hemp industry a partial win, halting enforcement of new DSHS rules that banned natural smokeable hemp and restricted interstate sales.
By CBDWorldNews Editorial Staff | April 23, 2026
Travis County District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble temporarily blocked Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) rules that banned natural smokeable hemp products and restricted interstate hemp commerce. The ruling gives hemp businesses a reprieve from regulations that took effect on March 31, 2026, and changed the way THC levels are calculated for product compliance.
Industry plaintiffs argued that DSHS overstepped its statutory authority by imposing the rules without legislative approval or a public comment period. Judge Gamble agreed on enough points to issue a temporary restraining order on two of the most contested provisions.
What DSHS Changed on March 31
The new DSHS rules altered the regulatory landscape for Texas hemp businesses in three key ways.
First, the agency banned natural smokeable hemp products outright. Flower, pre-rolls, and other combustible hemp items that had been legal under previous state rules became noncompliant overnight. This hit a large segment of Texas hemp retailers, particularly small shops that depended on smokeable products as a core revenue source.
Second, DSHS changed the methodology for calculating THC content. The previous approach measured delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis, consistent with the federal standard established in the 2018 Farm Bill. The new rules broadened the calculation, pulling products that previously tested under the legal threshold into noncompliant territory.
Third, the agency imposed steep increases to licensing fees. Manufacturer license costs jumped from $258 to $10,000. Retail licenses rose from $155 to $5,000. For the hundreds of small hemp businesses operating across Texas, those numbers represent a barrier that many cannot clear.
What the Judge Blocked
Judge Gamble’s order temporarily halted enforcement of two provisions: the ban on natural smokeable hemp products and the restriction on interstate hemp sales. Hemp businesses can resume selling smokeable products and shipping across state lines while the legal challenge proceeds.
However, the judge declined to block the new licensing fees. She deferred that question to an April 28 hearing, where both sides will present fuller arguments. That hearing will likely determine whether the fee increases survive legal scrutiny or get rolled back alongside the other provisions.
“DSHS exceeded its statutory authority by imposing these rules without legislative approval or public comment.” — Industry plaintiffs’ filing
The distinction matters. Even with the smokeable ban lifted temporarily, the fee increases alone could force many operators out of business. A manufacturer facing a jump from $258 to $10,000 in annual licensing costs has to generate significant additional revenue just to cover the regulatory overhead. For small and mid-sized operations, that math does not work.
The Industry’s Legal Argument
The plaintiffs built their case around a straightforward claim: DSHS acted beyond the authority the Texas legislature granted it. State agencies in Texas can write rules to implement laws that the legislature passes. They cannot, the plaintiffs argued, create entirely new regulatory categories or impose bans that the legislature never authorized.
The smokeable hemp ban is a clear example. The Texas legislature legalized hemp under House Bill 1325 in 2019. That law did not single out smokeable products for prohibition. When DSHS banned them through rulemaking rather than legislation, the agency drew a line the plaintiffs say it had no power to draw.
The lack of a public comment period strengthened the industry’s position. Texas administrative law generally requires agencies to allow public input before adopting new rules. DSHS skipped that step, which gave the plaintiffs procedural grounds in addition to their substantive arguments.
A second related lawsuit is also pending, suggesting that the legal pressure on DSHS will continue regardless of how this particular case resolves. Multiple industry groups have signaled they will keep challenging the rules through every available avenue.
What This Means for Texas Hemp Businesses
For now, Texas hemp retailers and manufacturers can breathe. Smokeable hemp products are back on shelves, at least temporarily. Interstate commerce restrictions have lifted. Businesses that pulled inventory or paused operations after March 31 can resume normal activity.
But the April 28 hearing looms large. If Judge Gamble declines to block the fee increases, many small businesses will face a difficult choice: absorb costs that dwarf their previous licensing expenses or shut down. The gap between a $155 retail license and a $5,000 retail license is not a rounding error. It represents a fundamental shift in who can afford to participate in the Texas hemp market.
Consumers searching for Texas-compliant hemp and CBD products can check updated availability through CBDProducts.com, which maintains state-specific product listings and retailer directories.
Industry participants should also monitor developments through compliance resources like SafeCBD.com, which tracks regulatory changes and testing requirements across all 50 states.
A Pattern Across States
Texas is not the only state where regulators have tried to restrict hemp through agency rulemaking rather than legislation. Similar disputes have played out in Louisiana, Florida, and several other states where health departments or agriculture agencies adopted rules that the hemp industry considered overreach.
Judge Gamble’s ruling could influence how those fights develop. A clear judicial statement that state agencies cannot ban legal products without legislative backing sends a signal to regulators elsewhere. It does not bind courts in other states, but it adds to a growing body of case law that favors the industry’s position on agency authority.
The next milestone is April 28. The fee question will test whether courts are willing to scrutinize not just outright bans but also economic barriers that achieve the same practical result. A licensing fee high enough to close most businesses functions as a ban by another name. Whether Judge Gamble sees it that way will shape the Texas hemp market for the foreseeable future.
These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. CBD products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
