⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

Hemp businesses are fighting to keep selling drinks and other hemp-derived products in Ohio after a change in state law. Titan Logistics and nine other companies sued local prosecutors, challenging rules they say shut their products out of the Ohio market. This is not an appeal from a drug conviction. It is a request to stop enforcement while a constitutional lawsuit proceeds. Senate Bill Fifty-Six narrowed Ohio's definition of hemp. Some products that still qualified as hemp under federal law became marijuana under Ohio law, bringing them into the state's marijuana licensing system. The businesses say that system favors established in-state operators while new licenses remain unavailable. On July thirteenth, twenty twenty-six, the district court granted a preliminary injunction protecting the plaintiffs and people dealing in their products from enforcement tied to that reclassification. A preliminary injunction is temporary protection during litigation, not a final judgment that the businesses have won their case. Ohio appealed, arguing that the protection was too broad. The central legal principle is the dormant Commerce Clause. It generally prevents states from protecting local businesses by discriminating against interstate trade. Federal hemp status does not, by itself, answer every question about state regulation. Here, the panel will examine whether access to Ohio's market is genuinely equal, and what relief is needed if earlier geographic restrictions still have effects. You will hear repeated references to Rule C, the part of Ohio's dispensary rule restricting transactions with locations outside Ohio. Listen for the difference between removing a discriminatory rule and undoing its continuing effects, and between protecting these businesses and exempting them from neutral licensing and testing requirements. Ms. Sridharan will argue first for Ohio. She will contend that the state is removing outdated restrictions and should be allowed to apply its licensing system. Andy Mayle will represent the hemp businesses. He will argue that they need meaningful access now, and that protecting their customers and distributors is necessary for effective relief.

Titan Logistics Group LLC v. Beth Tischler (No. 26-3648) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, argued October 22, 2026.