Despite the development of a cannabis industry legal under state laws, state laws legalizing medicinal and recreational adult cannabis use are in conflict with the federal Controlled Substances Act, which classifies cannabis as a Schedule I controlled substance and makes cannabis use and possession illegal on a national level. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that it is the federal government that has the right to regulate and criminalize cannabis, even for medical purposes, and thus federal law criminalizing the use of cannabis preempts state laws that legalize its use.
A prior U.S. administration attempted to address the inconsistent treatment of cannabis under state and federal law in the Cole Memorandum which Deputy Attorney General James Cole sent to all U.S. Attorneys in August 2013 that outlined certain priorities for the Department of Justice ("DOJ") relating to the prosecution of cannabis offenses. The Cole Memorandum provided that enforcing federal cannabis laws and regulations in jurisdictions that have enacted laws legalizing cannabis in some form and that have also implemented strong and effective regulatory and enforcement systems to control the cultivation, processing, distribution, sale and possession of cannabis conduct in compliance with those laws and regulations was not a priority for the DOJ. The DOJ did not provide (and has not provided since) specific guidelines for what regulatory and enforcement systems would be deemed sufficient under the Cole Memorandum. On January 4, 2018, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions formally issued the Sessions Memorandum, which rescinded the Cole Memorandum effective upon its issuance. The Sessions Memorandum stated, in part, that current law reflects "Congress' determination that cannabis is a dangerous drug and cannabis activity is a serious crime", and Mr. Sessions directed all U.S. Attorneys to enforce the laws enacted by Congress and to follow well-established principles when pursuing prosecutions related to cannabis activities.. It is not yet known whether the Department of Justice under President Biden and Attorney General Garland, will re-adopt the Cole Memorandum or announce a substantive marijuana enforcement policy. Attorney General Garland indicated at a confirmation hearing before the United States Senate that it did not seem to him to be a useful use of limited resources to pursue prosecutions in states that have legalized and that are regulating the use of marijuana, either medically or otherwise. There can be no assurance that the federal government will not enforce federal laws relating to cannabis in the future. The uncertainty of federal enforcement practices going forward and the inconsistency between federal and state laws and regulations presents major risks for our business and operations. Any such change in the federal government's enforcement of federal laws could cause significant financial damage to us and our stockholders.
Under federal law, and more specifically the federal Controlled Substances Act, the possession, use, cultivation and transfer of cannabis is illegal. It is also federally illegal to advertise the sale of cannabis, or to sell paraphernalia designed or intended primarily for use with cannabis, unless the paraphernalia is authorized by federal, state, or local law. Our business involves the cultivation, production and sale of cannabis and cannabis products, and, therefore, violates federal law. Further, we provide services to customers that are engaged in the business of possession, use, cultivation and/or transfer of cannabis. As a result, law enforcement authorities, in their attempt to regulate the illegal use of cannabis, may seek to bring an action or actions against us, including, but not limited to, a claim of aiding and abetting another's criminal activities. The federal aiding and abetting statute provides that anyone who "commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal." 18 U.S.C. §2(a). As a result of such an action, we may be forced to cease operations and our investors could lose their entire investment. Such an action would have a material negative effect on our business and operations.
If the Federal Government were to change its enforcement practices, or were to expend its resources enforcing existing federal laws on those involved in the cannabis industry, such action could have a materially adverse effect on our operations, our customers or the sales of our products up to and including a complete cessation of our business.
It is possible that additional federal or state legislation could be enacted in the future that would prohibit us or our clients from selling cannabis, and if such legislation were enacted, the demand for our products and services, and those of our clients, likely would decrease, causing revenues to decline. Further, additional government disruption in the cannabis industry could cause potential customers and users to be reluctant to use our products and services, which would be detrimental to us. We cannot predict the nature of any future laws, regulations, interpretations or applications, nor can we determine what effect additional governmental regulations or administrative policies and procedures, when and if promulgated, could have on our business.