Happy 92nd Anniversary of the Passage of the 21st Amendment!

Today marks the 92^nd anniversary of the passage of the 21^st Amendment.  The 21^st Amendment repealed Prohibition that was created with the passage of the 18^th Amendment.  The 21^st Amendment not only repealed the 18^th Amendment, it authorized the states to control alcohol regulation within its border. 

Today there are debates about marijuana and hemp regulation that have some parallels to the events of 92 years ago.  While the contentious debate over alcohol was firmly settled with passage of the 21^st Amendment in 1933, no one has yet introduced a 28^th Amendment for THC yet to firmly resolve the debate over THC.

The passage of the 18^th Amendment was in 1919, but its effective date was delayed for one year and did not take effect until January 17, 1920. Recently, Congress has similarly given a 365-day delay to the effective date of legislation restricting THC from hemp in the marketplace which will become effective after the elections in November, 2026.  

Is the country in a situation like 1919 (pre Prohibition) or like 1933 (post Prohibition)? Is the current mood of the country more like the period of 1919 where legislation could snuff out any claims of legality of this industry? Or is the current mood of the country on the issue of intoxicating hemp THC similar to the country’s position in 1933 where alcohol emerged from the 13-year ban from national prohibition?

There appears to be a lack of historical appreciation by some parties in the current hemp THC debate about this nation’s complicated history of alcohol regulation. There seems to be a popular belief of some in one camp that “Prohibition is over”, “you can’t put toothpaste back in tube”, and, like December 1933 when the 21^st Amendment was passed, the prospects of curtailing a product is a thing of the past and no longer a worry in the year 2025.

However, another historical point that may be more salient is an understanding of our nation’s history in the decades predating passage of the 18^th Amendment in 1919. Alcohol debates were the top political issue of most elections.  This period was marked with fierce debates of “wet” and “dry” and by the mid part of the 1910’s, more than half the states had enacted statewide bans of alcohol. Stakeholders that assumed they were to be perpetually “wet” would soon be surprised by state laws or the passage of the 18^th Amendment making the entire country “dry.”  

Certain hemp beverage interests have been strong proponents of the “we are in 1933” theory; however, there may be some weaknesses to that argument. One headwind is that unlike alcohol, the public does not really know what hemp products are out there. A recent survey by the Center for Alcohol Policy showed that only 31% of Americans had heard of hemp THC beverages.  Most Americans are unfamiliar with the hemp issue.

Once again, the alcohol historical lessons are helpful. The Gallup Corporation has run an annual survey asking about American’s usage of alcohol. For nearly 100 years, Gallup has run this survey and it has remained remarkably consistent.  Nearly one third of Americans do not drink, nearly one third consume frequently, and one third drink occasionally. Alcohol policy is in many ways a constant battle between those that do not drink and those that do, fighting for support for policy positions that weaken or strengthen various alcohol regulations while fighting for the support of the middle cohort that occasionally does drink.  (In a way this is similar to Democrats and Republicans fighting over the support of Independents in elections.)  We know that in 1918 and 1919 the “occasionally drink” group of Americans sided with the non-drinkers and voted to completely ban alcohol. Where will those that have never heard of intoxicating hemp fall on the question of allowing or restricting? The recent vote in Congress restricting hemp sets the nation up to enter a 1919-1920 period where the product is to be curtailed in a year.  Those interested in hemp THC policy are best advised to study alcohol history to see if history will repeat itself.

Proponents of the recent hemp restrictions argue the one-year delay allows farmers to transition their crop planning away from hemp and companies can use up existing hemp inventories is similar to the argument used in 1919.  On the other hand, opponents of a hemp restrictions will claim that one year allows for time for the creation of a regulatory system to regulate the products.  This debate will make for a very interesting 2026.