Federal Court Rejects $29,779 Claim Over Seized Cannabis Products, Rules They Were Marijuana Rather Than Hemp
- The federal court dismissed a lawsuit seeking compensation for nearly $30,000 worth of seized cannabis products after laboratory results confirmed the products exceeded the legal THC limit for hemp and were classified as marijuana.
- Warrior Wash & Emporium and its owner, Joshua Luger, contended the seized items were industrial hemp, but a lab report showed a total delta-9 THC concentration of 23.0103%, far above the 0.3% federal threshold for hemp.
- The plaintiffs’ Fifth Amendment claim argued that retaining the products amounted to an unconstitutional taking, but the court ruled the seizure was lawful because the products were contraband marijuana, not hemp.
- The court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, finding that federal regulations and the lab evidence negated the claim for compensation against the government for the seized cannabis products.
A federal court has dismissed a lawsuit seeking compensation for nearly $30,000 worth of cannabis products seized by federal authorities, ruling that laboratory results showed the products were marijuana rather than federally legal hemp.
In a September 2 ruling, U.S. Court of Federal Claims Judge Elaine Kaplan dismissed the case brought by Warrior Wash & Emporium and its owner, Joshua Luger, against the federal government.
Warrior Wash, a car wash and convenience store located in Fort Yates, North Dakota, within the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, had been selling products the plaintiffs described as “industrial hemp products.”
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) law enforcement officers raided the business in December 2023 and seized 1,280 pre-rolls, two THC disposable products and six containers of gummies. Luger was subsequently charged in tribal court with criminal sale of drugs.
The criminal case was dismissed in May 2024. According to the lawsuit, the special prosecutor relied on a certificate of analysis from KCA Laboratories in concluding that no violation of tribal criminal law had occurred and asked BIA officials to return the seized products.
A tribal court initially ordered the products returned, but federal officials did not comply. A subsequent attempt to recover the products was dismissed after the tribal court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction over the federal government.
Luger and Warrior Wash eventually brought a Fifth Amendment claim arguing that the government’s continued retention of the products amounted to an unconstitutional taking. They valued the seized inventory at approximately $29,778.98.
Kaplan found that the court had jurisdiction to consider the takings claim, but ruled that the claim failed because the laboratory report submitted by the plaintiffs themselves showed the products did not meet the federal definition of hemp.
Under federal regulations, hemp must contain no more than 0.3% total delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis. The laboratory report showed a total delta-9 THC concentration of 23.0103%.
“This value exceeds the legal threshold of 0.3 percent,” Kaplan wrote. “As such, Plaintiffs’ seized ‘industrial hemp products’ do not legally qualify as hemp and instead constitute marijuana, which is contraband.”
The court said the plaintiffs appeared to rely on a measurement of delta-9 THC that did not account for the potential conversion of tetrahydrocannabinolic acid, or THCA, into THC.
Federal hemp regulations use total THC, which accounts for that potential conversion, when determining whether cannabis falls within the legal definition of hemp.
Because the court determined that the seized products were contraband under federal law, Kaplan concluded that their seizure and retention could not support a Fifth Amendment claim requiring the government to pay compensation.
The complaint was dismissed with prejudice.