The Swamp Strikes Back: D.C. Sneaks Hemp Ban That Hits Texas Farmers First
After forty-one days of furloughs, stalled paychecks, and shuttered government offices, the U.S. Senate late Monday finally passed H.R. 5371, the Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2026, ending the longest government shutdown since 2018. But hidden deep inside the stopgap spending bill that reopens Washington lies a provision that may devastate one of America’s fastest-growing agricultural and manufacturing industries—the hemp market.
What was meant to keep the lights on in D.C. may soon snuff out the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of farmers, processors, and small business owners across the country.
A Hidden Sting in a Lifeline Bill
The Senate approved the measure by a 60-40 vote just before midnight on November 10, ensuring that federal agencies would receive temporary funding through January 30, 2026. On paper, the legislation restores pay to federal workers, secures funding for food assistance programs, and prevents further disruptions to air travel and the military.
But tucked among those spending provisions is language that rewrites federal hemp law—with implications few Americans realize. The so-called “hemp loophole,” which since 2018 has allowed hemp-derived THC products such as delta-8 and delta-10 to be sold legally in most states, has now been effectively closed.
Under H.R. 5371, any consumable product exceeding 0.4 milligrams of total THC per serving, a threshold so low that it disqualifies nearly every existing hemp-derived THC product, will be banned nationwide. The restriction applies to edibles, beverages, tinctures, vapes, and even topicals marketed for personal or household use. Only non-intoxicating CBD and industrial hemp for fiber or seed will remain exempt.
“This Isn’t Regulation—It’s Eradication”
Within hours of passage, hemp producers across the country flooded social media with outrage. Jim Higdon, co-founder of Cornbread Hemp, called the bill “a declaration of war against an entire American industry.” Farmers in Kentucky, Tennessee, Texas, and North Carolina—many of whom had transitioned from tobacco or cotton to hemp after the 2018 Farm Bill—now face the prospect of bankruptcy.
“This isn’t regulation,” said one Texas grower, J. L., who runs a small hemp processing facility near Waco. “It’s eradication. The federal government just made my business illegal overnight.”
Industry analysts estimate the decision could wipe out more than $10 billion in annual economic activity and eliminate up to 400,000 jobs, many of them in rural communities that have few other viable cash crops… all for nothing more than a two and a half month continuing resolution. Poof. It’s all gone.
A Battle Between the Bluegrass and the Beltway
Ironically, the most heated debate came not from Democrats but from within the Republican Party. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) staged a procedural delay to block the bill, warning that the hemp provision would “obliterate” Kentucky’s hemp farmers—many of whom had relied on federal assurances since 2018 that hemp was a lawful, profitable crop.
But Paul’s effort failed. His amendment to strike the ban was tabled 76–24 after intense lobbying from Senate leadership, including Mitch McConnell, the same Kentucky senator who had shepherded hemp legalization into the 2018 Farm Bill.
McConnell, once hailed as the industry’s patron, has since become one of its fiercest critics. He now argues that the “unintended consequences” of hemp legalization—chiefly the unregulated sale of psychoactive THC derivatives in gas stations and convenience stores—have created a public health crisis.
Paul, in floor remarks before the vote, shot back that McConnell’s about-face “betrays the very farmers he once claimed to champion.”
The Texas Angle: Cruz and Cornyn Back the Ban
Both Texas Senators, Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, voted in favor of H.R. 5371. Their “Yea” votes helped secure the 60-vote threshold needed to end the shutdown—and, in doing so, endorsed the controversial hemp restrictions which has put thousands of Texas farmers out of business.
The move stunned many Texas growers who had looked to Cruz and Cornyn as defenders of market freedom and state-level autonomy. “It’s disappointing,” said one Central Texas farmer who shifted to hemp after drought destroyed his corn crop in 2023, according to High Times Magazine. “They talk about fighting big government, but this was Washington picking winners and losers. And we just lost.”
The Political Chess Behind the Hemp Ban
Supporters of the ban, including Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick and a bipartisan coalition of 38 state attorneys general, claim the new restrictions are necessary to curb youth access to intoxicating products that have flooded the market. Patrick had previously pushed for similar restrictions in Texas under Senate Bill 3, which was vetoed by Governor Greg Abbott earlier this year.
But critics suggest corporate money and political convenience played as large a role as public safety.
Documents reviewed by industry watchdogs show major beer and spirits lobbies have quietly funneled campaign donations to lawmakers who supported the hemp restrictions. Hemp-infused seltzers and THC beverages have been eating into alcohol sales, and the new federal limit—0.4 mg per serving—essentially eliminates that competition.
“The alcohol lobby couldn’t regulate us out of existence at the state level,” said Higdon, “so they went to Washington.”
Economic Fallout Already Underway
The hemp sector, which ballooned from a niche market to a $30 billion industry in just seven years, now faces a regulatory cliff. Distributors and manufacturers that invested heavily in delta-8 and delta-10 production facilities may be forced to shutter within months.
“We’ll lose 70% of our revenue,” said C. M., owner of a hemp beverage company in Austin. “We employ local people. We pay taxes. Now Washington has lumped us in with drug cartels.”
Even as markets reel, state officials warn of ripple effects far beyond small business closures. Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, who has supported hemp as a diversification crop, said in a statement that “federal overreach like this punishes responsible farmers and rewards black markets.”
The ban’s 90-day implementation window gives agencies until February 2026 to issue enforcement rules. The FDA and DEA will jointly determine which cannabinoids are deemed “naturally occurring” and which are prohibited. Businesses caught in the gray area could face criminal penalties for noncompliance.
Political Consequences on the Horizon
Strategists are already warning that the move could alienate younger and libertarian-leaning voters ahead of the 2026 midterms. A Gallup poll from November 2025 found that only 40% of Republicans still support marijuana legalization, but nearly 70% of voters under 40 favor looser restrictions on cannabis and hemp.
“The GOP just handed the Democrats a culture-war gift,” one Republican campaign consultant said privately. “You can’t preach free markets and then destroy an entire industry because a beer company made a few phone calls.”
Still, the political establishment appears unmoved. President Trump has not publicly commented on the hemp ban but is expected to sign H.R. 5371 into law, given his administration’s emphasis on “law and order” and curbing intoxicating products.
The Road Ahead
The House is expected to approve the bill swiftly, eager to claim credit for ending the shutdown before Thanksgiving. Once signed, the hemp restrictions will take effect within three months, leaving the industry little time to adjust.
In Kentucky, Texas, and dozens of other states, warehouses filled with unsold hemp beverages and gummies may soon become evidence in federal enforcement actions.
What began in 2018 as a bipartisan success story—an effort to revive rural economies and replace illicit markets with legitimate commerce—has ended in yet another cautionary tale of Washington politics.
The Senate’s passage of H.R. 5371 may reopen the government, but in doing so, lawmakers—including both Texas senators—have closed the door on a generation of American entrepreneurs who staked their livelihoods on the promises of deregulation and innovation.
For them, the lights in Washington may be back on—but the future of the Republican Party just went dark.
OPINION – For years, Texas conservatives have watched Republicans campaign as fighters back home, only to return to Washington and govern like cautious corporate managers. That frustration is now boiling over in the growing divide between Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Senator John Cornyn, a battle that increasingly defines the Republican Party in Texas.
Paxton has become one of the most aggressive conservative legal figures in America. Cornyn, meanwhile, is increasingly viewed by grassroots Republicans as an establishment insider tied to the old Bush era wing of the GOP. The contrast could hardly be sharper.
Paxton built his reputation fighting the Biden administration on immigration, election disputes, COVID mandates, and federal overreach. Supporters say he has consistently used the Attorney General’s office to defend Texas sovereignty and conservative values. President Donald Trump praised Paxton during his 2022 reelection fight, calling him “a true warrior for conservative values” while endorsing him against challenger George P. Bush.
For many Texas Republicans, Trump’s support mattered because Paxton was already viewed as willing to confront Washington directly rather than negotiate with it.
Cornyn has found himself on the opposite side of many of those same debates. Conservatives sharply criticized his role in bipartisan gun negotiations after the Uvalde shooting, but immigration remains the biggest source of anger among the Republican base. Cornyn has long supported expansions of employment based immigration programs, including H1B visa policies favored by major corporations.
Critics argue those programs have displaced American workers in industries like engineering, healthcare, technology, and data services by allowing companies to import cheaper foreign labor. Over the years, outsourcing firms and tech companies have repeatedly faced backlash after replacing American employees with foreign visa workers, sometimes even requiring laid off staff to train their replacements before leaving.
Cornyn argues skilled immigration helps fill labor shortages and strengthens the economy. But many Texas conservatives increasingly see the system as benefiting multinational corporations while middle-class American workers fall behind.
Paxton has aligned himself almost entirely with border hawks and immigration enforcement advocates. He has repeatedly sued the Biden administration over border policies and backed Texas efforts to secure the southern border independently of federal action. Supporters argue those lawsuits helped slow federal policies they believed encouraged illegal immigration and weakened state sovereignty.
Some conservatives also frame the immigration debate in cultural and security terms, warning that unchecked migration and weak assimilation policies can destabilize communities and strain public resources. Paxton supporters often portray him as defending Texas from the kinds of social fragmentation seen in parts of Europe.
Cornyn’s critics increasingly label him a “RINO,” shorthand for Republican In Name Only, arguing that he represents donor class priorities rather than grassroots conservatives. Trump allies have also criticized Cornyn as part of the “old Republican guard” that voters rejected during Trump’s rise. Cornyn’s primary supporter is the Lone Star Freedom Project, a dark money 501c(4) operated by former Texas Governor Rick Perry.
Opinion sections are where political realities become unavoidable. The reality is this: many Texas Republicans no longer want cautious institutional Republicans who focus on compromise while Democrats aggressively push cultural and political change nationwide.
They want confrontation. They want resistance. They want politicians willing to fight publicly and relentlessly.
That explains why Paxton continues to maintain strong support despite years of legal and political attacks. Many conservatives interpret those attacks not as proof he should step aside, but as proof he threatens entrenched political interests.
Cornyn, meanwhile, increasingly represents a Republican era many grassroots voters believe failed to defend the border, protect American workers, or stand firmly against Washington’s expansion of power. In today’s Texas Republican politics, that perception may be impossible to overcome.
Featured
“Judge Speedy” Hits the Wall: Bexar County Jurist Resigns, Accepts Lifetime Ban from Texas Bench
SAN ANTONIO, Texas — The political and legal downfall of Bexar County Judge Rosie Speedlin-Gonzalez came to a dramatic conclusion after the embattled jurist resigned from office and accepted a permanent lifetime ban from serving on the Texas bench .
The resignation agreement, signed in April and confirmed by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, ends months of controversy surrounding Speedlin-Gonzalez, who faced criminal charges and multiple judicial misconduct complaints stemming from a heated courtroom confrontation involving a San Antonio defense attorney.
Speedlin-Gonzalez, an openly gay Democrat who had served on Bexar County Court-at-Law No. 13 since 2018, formally agreed she would be, “forever disqualified from judicial service in the State of Texas.” The agreement prohibits her from serving as a judge, accepting judicial appointments, or performing judicial duties in the future.
The scandal centered on a December 2024 courtroom incident involving defense attorney Elizabeth Russell. Prosecutors alleged Speedlin-Gonzalez ordered Russell handcuffed and detained in the jury box during a contentious exchange after accusing the attorney of coaching her client during a probation revocation hearing.
A Bexar County grand jury later indicted the judge on charges of unlawful restraint and official oppression. Court documents alleged that Speedlin-Gonzalez knowingly restrained Russell without consent while acting under the authority of her judicial office.
The incident generated national attention and quickly became one of the most talked about judicial controversies in Texas. Video clips and courtroom details circulated widely online, while critics questioned whether the judge had crossed a clear constitutional line by using courtroom authority against a practicing attorney during active proceedings.
KSAT reported last month that special prosecutor Brian Cromeens later moved to dismiss the criminal charges after Speedlin-Gonzalez agreed to resign and permanently leave the judiciary. According to reports, prosecutors concluded the resignation and lifetime ban sufficiently addressed the public interest concerns surrounding the case.
The resignation agreement also referenced several additional complaints against the now former judge. One complaint alleged she displayed an “unprofessional demeanor” toward a criminal defendant and failed to timely address motions involving bond modifications and habeas corpus requests. Three additional complaints accused her of abusing judicial authority by issuing “no contact” orders restricting communications among court personnel and former employees.
Speedlin-Gonzalez had already faced disciplinary scrutiny before the handcuffing controversy erupted. According to the San Antonio Express-News, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct previously issued a public warning after she congratulated winning attorneys on social media and posted their photographs on her official judicial Facebook page. The commission also reportedly ordered additional education after complaints involving a pride flag displayed inside her courtroom.
In January, shortly after the indictment became public, Speedlin-Gonzalez defended herself in comments to the New York Post.
“I’m a proud public servant, I’m LGBTQ, I own a gun, I’m bilingual, I’m an American citizen, and I have every right to defend myself,” Gonzalez told the outlet. “As long as I walk in righteousness and have God at my side I will be fine.”
The judge was suspended without pay earlier this year while disciplinary proceedings continued. During that suspension, visiting judges rotated through County Court-at-Law No. 13 to handle pending cases and specialty court matters.
Court-at-Law No. 13 is known in part for overseeing Reflejo Court, a specialty program focused on first time domestic violence offenders and treatment based intervention programs.
The controversy also arrived during a difficult reelection season for Speedlin-Gonzalez. In March, she lost her Democratic primary race to challenger Alicia Perez, effectively ending her political future even before the disciplinary case concluded.
The agreement signed by Speedlin-Gonzalez states that by accepting resignation and permanent disqualification, she does not admit fault or guilt regarding the allegations against her. Such provisions are common in negotiated judicial disciplinary settlements.
One narrow exception remains under the agreement. Speedlin-Gonzalez may still officiate wedding ceremonies, provided she does not wear judicial robes or imply she retains judicial authority while conducting them.
Speedlin-Gonzalez was widely described as the first openly LGBT judge elected in Bexar County. Supporters frequently highlighted that milestone during her tenure on the bench, while critics argued the attention surrounding identity politics often overshadowed concerns about courtroom conduct and professionalism.
Permanent judicial disqualifications remain relatively uncommon in Texas, particularly involving sitting elected county judges. The case now joins a growing list of disciplinary actions taken by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct against jurists accused of misconduct or abuse of authority.
Trump’s “UFO Files” Drop Lands With a Thud, Leaving Believers and Skeptics Equally Unsatisfied
Department of War – For years, UFO believers promised the truth was buried somewhere deep inside government vaults, hidden behind classified markings and decades of official denials. The long-awaited disclosure, they said, would prove humanity is not alone. So when the Trump administration released a major archive of UFO-related material this week, anticipation exploded across social media and conspiracy circles alike. The result, however, landed with all the excitement of opening a mystery safe only to discover it filled with newspaper clippings, hobby magazines, and blurry photos of distant lights in the sky.
The files were released through the federal archive portal at www.WAR.GOV/UFO Files and include videos, audio recordings, witness statements, correspondence, and archival documents connected to unidentified flying objects, now often called unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAPs.
The website also prominently features a statement from Donald Trump posted from Truth Social:
“Based on the tremendous interest shown, I will be directing the Secretary of War, and other relevant Departments and Agencies, to begin the process of identifying and releasing Government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life, unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), and unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and any and all other information connected to these highly complex, but extremely interesting and important, matters. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”
The Department of War website also states that additional material will continue to be released on a weekly basis, suggesting the current archive represents only the first phase of a broader disclosure effort. That announcement has kept many UFO enthusiasts hopeful that more substantial evidence could still emerge in future document dumps.
For now, however, the initial release appears to contain little that fundamentally changes the public understanding of UFO phenomena.
Despite years of sensational claims about craft performing maneuvers that supposedly “defy physics,” none of the videos included in the archive appear to show anything close to that. The objects captured on camera are consistently small, far away, and moving in mostly straight lines at what appear to be ordinary, subsonic speeds. There are no impossible right-angle turns, no instantaneous acceleration, no sudden stops, and no visible flight characteristics beyond what could plausibly be explained by conventional objects or optical effects.
File: DOD_111688964 – Taken 2024-06-01 – The United States Northern Command submitted a report of an unidentified anomalous phenomenon (UAP) to the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) consisting of 21 seconds of video footage from an infrared sensor aboard a U.S. military platform in 2024. An accompanying mission report, DoW-UAP-D8, described the UAP as consisting of an object with a vertical pole or bar attached to the bottom of the object. The observer also reported that the UAP may instead be a reflection from an object in the water.
Most of the footage consists of little more than bright shiny objects against the sky, filmed from such extreme distances that meaningful identification becomes nearly impossible. A few clips appear consistent with balloons or commercial drones. Others show glowing or reflective orbs with no discernible structure or detail. None of the material independently verifies the extraordinary claims often promoted by UFO media personalities and internet commentators.
The release arrives after years of mounting public fascination with UFOs. Congressional hearings, Pentagon acknowledgements of unexplained aerial sightings, and endless online speculation helped create expectations that the government might eventually reveal evidence of non human intelligence. Those expectations likely contributed to the enormous interest surrounding this document dump.
But much of the archive reads less like disclosure and more like an oversized collection of unresolved anecdotes and cultural memorabilia. Witness statements describe strange lights, odd movements, and unusual sightings, but almost none are supported by physical evidence, radar tracking, or technical analysis capable of independent verification. Some are handwritten personal accounts submitted decades ago by ordinary citizens reporting mysterious experiences investigators apparently could neither confirm nor explain.
A surprisingly large portion of the collection focuses on civilian UFO enthusiast organizations that published magazines and newsletters dedicated to sightings and theories about alien life. Rather than classified military revelations, many files simply document the activities of hobbyist groups fascinated by UFO culture during the Cold War era and beyond.
The archive also includes letters from school children asking the government whether flying saucers and aliens are real. While historically interesting as a reflection of American pop culture and public curiosity, the letters offer no evidentiary value regarding extraterrestrial life. Some of the material feels more appropriate for a museum exhibit on twentieth century UFO fascination than for a headline generating government disclosure project.
NASA related recordings and footage included in the release similarly failed to produce dramatic revelations. Most involve routine aerospace operations, ambiguous observations, or discussions about unidentified objects without any conclusion that they originated from beyond Earth. NASA has consistently maintained there is no confirmed evidence of alien visitation, and nothing in this release appears to alter that position.
Reaction online quickly shifted from excitement to frustration. Some UFO believers claimed the truly important files are still hidden behind classification barriers and that the public release was carefully sanitized before publication. Skeptics argued the archive merely reinforces what critics have long maintained, that UFO mythology survives largely because blurry footage and incomplete information allow people to project extraordinary conclusions onto ordinary phenomena.
Notably absent from the release are the kinds of materials long promised in sensational documentaries and conspiracy forums. There are no recovered alien craft, no biological specimens, no authenticated extraterrestrial communications, and no government memos admitting contact with non human intelligence. More importantly, there is no footage of any object displaying flight characteristics that genuinely challenge known physics.
That disconnect between public expectation and documented reality may ultimately be the biggest story.
For decades, UFO culture has operated on the assumption that earth shattering proof exists just beyond public reach. Every blurry light becomes a possible spacecraft. Every vague government statement fuels another round of speculation. Entire media industries now thrive on the promise that disclosure is always right around the corner.
Yet when the files finally arrived, they mostly revealed what Americans have seen for generations, distant lights, uncertain observations, stories without proof, and a government willing to catalog mystery without necessarily solving it.
Perhaps future weekly releases from the Department of War will contain something more compelling. But if this first archive is any indication, Americans waiting for undeniable proof of alien visitation may need to lower their expectations considerably.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login