In 2018, Congress legalized hemp. Defined it chemically — 0.3% delta-9 THC — signed it into law, made it legal in all fifty states. Hawaii read that statute and substituted its own chemistry, declared products Congress legalized to be contraband, and on June 23 announced it would enforce that against businesses like mine.

Maybe you don’t care about hemp. That’s understandable. Hell, you may even oppose it ardently. That, too, is acceptable—we live in a free country, after all. But states picking and choosing which federal laws they deem worth following is not remotely okay. In fact, it is a disastrous experiment America has seen before, the results of which fill the most shameful pages in the national scrapbook!

In 1832, the Supreme Court told Georgia its laws had no force in Cherokee territory. Georgia ignored the ruling, nobody made it comply, and the price was the Trail of Tears — roughly four thousand men, women, and children dead on a forced march. That's state nullification at full scale. Nobody loses a court case. They lose everything.

After Brown v. Board, Prince Edward County, Virginia chose to shut down its entire public school system rather than integrate — and kept it shut for five years. White kids got vouchers to private academies. Black kids got nothing. And in 1957, Arkansas deployed armed National Guard troops to block nine Black teenagers from a high school; it took the 101st Airborne to walk children past a mob. If you think that era ended, ask Alabama — which in 2023 openly refused a direct Supreme Court order to redraw its congressional map, until a federal court took the pen away.

Now here's where Hawaii enters the story — because ten days ago, the Supreme Court of the United States told you everything you need to know about how this state treats federal law.

In 2024, the Hawaii Supreme Court dismissed binding Second Amendment precedent with the line that "the spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons" — citing the HBO drama The Wire as authority. Hawaii then kept enforcing a law making it a crime for licensed permit holders to carry onto any private property open to the public without express permission.

On June 25, in Wolford v. Lopez, the Supreme Court struck that law down, 6-3, as a violation of the Second Amendment. And the majority went out of its way to answer the Aloha line directly: the Second Amendment cannot yield to the spirit of Aloha any more than it yielded to the spirit of the Big Apple or the Windy City — it applies the same way in the fiftieth state as in the other forty-nine. Worse: among the historical laws Hawaii offered to justify itself was a statute from Louisiana's Black Code — and the Court said that tainted artifact "cannot be taken seriously" as evidence of what the right to bear arms means. To defend defying the Constitution, this state reached for the legal machinery of racial oppression. That happened. Not even two damn weeks ago.

As if this weren’t shocking enough, pay attention to the case caption. Wolford v. Lopez. As in Anne Lopez — Hawaii's Attorney General. The same shameless, inconsistent, and wretched Anne Lopez named in my case. On June 25 the Supreme Court dismantled her defense of one state law defying federal law. On July 2 — seven days later — her office stood in federal court in Honolulu defending another one. Different case, same blatant lack of respect or regard for federal. God willing, the same outcome for both!

Yet the hypocrisy runs even deeper! While Hawaii criminalizes hemp — which Congress legalized — the same state licenses eight dispensaries selling marijuana, which remains federally illegal. It bans what Congress permitted and blesses what Congress prohibited. No theory of federalism explains both moves. Only one thing does: the state protects the businesses it has chosen and destroys the ones it hasn't. In Honolulu, federal law isn't a rulebook. It's a costume — worn when useful, dropped when not.

History teaches one last thing. Nullification never costs the officials who order it. Orval Faubus, the Arkansas governor who sent armed troops to keep nine Black children out of a public high school in open defiance of federal court orders, was never punished for it. His voters in fact nauseatingly rewarded him with six terms. The officials of Prince Edward County, Virginia who padlocked every public school in their county for five years rather than obey federal desegregation law died comfortably in their beds, never held to account for the generation of children they left without an education.

And Hawaii just lost at the Supreme Court, yet every official who built that unconstitutional law collected a paycheck the next morning, including Anne Lopez! That is the constant across two centuries of states defying federal law: the bill never lands on the government. It lands on the governed — the kids locked out of their schools, the families forced down the road, the permit holder made a criminal, the shopkeeper with empty shelves.

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

That said, we must address what was broadcast, because the details matter.

The “Always Illegal” Fabrication
During the segment, Department of Health spokesperson Andrew Goff claimed our smokable and vape products have “always” been illegal under Hawaii law. This isn’t a legal gray area; it is a verifiable falsehood, and the proof lives on his own department’s website.

The ban on inhalable hemp was never passed by the Hawaii Legislature. It came from a DOH interim rule enacted on August 9, 2021. By definition, an interim rule is a temporary agency mandate—the exact opposite of longstanding law. Crucially, a rule taking effect in 2021 cannot retroactively outlaw a product before 2021 existed.

You cannot ban what is already forbidden. If a ban was required in 2021, the products were legal beforehand. The calendar does not lie, even if the State does.

What should alarm every Hawaii citizen is this blatant abuse of power. An unelected agency bypassed the Legislature to unilaterally criminalize entire categories of federally legal products. That isn’t law enforcement; that is a rogue bureaucracy writing its own laws and treating law-abiding citizens as criminals.

The “Protect the Children” Charade
Then there is Representative Scot Matayoshi, hiding behind the most cynical shield in politics: “protecting the children.”

That claim collapses under the slightest scrutiny. The independent business owners he is trying to bankrupt have real families with real children. Those kids rely on this revenue for food, rent, and survival in one of the most expensive states in the country. How does driving a family into financial ruin protect the children inside it?

It doesn’t. Destroying a household mathematically guarantees harm to the kids inside it. “Child safety” is just a convenient costume designed to mask the intentional destruction of working families to clear the market for a protected few.

If safety were the true objective, the state would focus on testing, dosing, age-gating, and labeling—safeguards responsible operators already champion. Instead, the only “solution” offered is the total eradication of competition. That tells you exactly what they are protecting, and it isn’t children.

The Coordinated Squeeze
Look at the full picture: the DOH, the Attorney General, a shielded oligopoly of licensed cannabis operators, and compliant politicians are collectively suffocating Hawaii’s independent hemp industry. Unable to outcompete us in the marketplace, they went looking for a win by rigging the rules in back rooms.

They have inflicted profound damage. They have jeopardized everything we built and dealt heavy blows to our families. I won’t pretend it doesn’t hurt. It does.

But wounded is not finished. Bloodied is not beaten.

We are standing our ground, and we will see them in court—where political theater falls apart, facts govern, and “always illegal” crashes straight into a calendar that proves otherwise.

Lance Alyas,

Founder, Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

ODP provides federally lawful, hemp-derived products protected under the 2018 Farm Bill. This suspension is not due to any wrongdoing on our part; it is the direct result of sudden, coercive enforcement threats from the Hawaii Department of Health and Attorney General aimed squarely at lawful products.

The timing is no coincidence. This suspension comes just 24 hours before our July 2 appearance in federal court to seek a preliminary injunction halting these actions. Throughout this litigation, the State consistently argued that ODP faces “no harm” because there was no active enforcement. That was their entire defense.

Then, on June 23, the State abruptly reversed course, publicly announcing immediate statewide enforcement beginning July 1. The same officials who assured a federal judge we faced no harm manufactured that exact harm just days before our hearing.

Because of these aggressive threats, we cannot sell our core products without exposing our staff and customers to state retaliation. The State’s defiance of federal law has rendered lawful inventory unsellable overnight, inflicting massive, immediate economic damage on our business. This is the exact, irreparable harm we are asking the federal judge to prevent.

This is no longer a hypothetical argument in a legal brief. It is happening in real time.

The abrupt timeline forces small businesses across Hawaii into an impossible choice: risk aggressive state action, or pull lawful products from the shelves and gut their own revenue. The State deliberately built this trap, and every independent operator is currently caught in it.

We will take the evidence of this immediate, state-inflicted harm directly to the judge on July 2.

To our customers: we intend to reopen our retail locations following the hearing, operating within whatever legal framework the court establishes. We remain steadfastly committed to providing safe, reliable access to the Honolulu community we built this business to serve.

Lance Alyas,

Founder, Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

Yahoo News has now covered my Hawaiʻi hemp lawsuit after Reason Magazine and Reason News reported on the case.

That is a major moment.

For months, I have been speaking out about what is happening to Hawaiʻi’s hemp industry, CBD retailers, and small cannabis-adjacent businesses. I am Lance Alyas, founder of Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions, a federally compliant hemp and CBD retailer with four locations in Honolulu and Waikīkī.

My business operates in the legal hemp industry. We sell hemp products, CBD products, hemp-derived cannabinoid products, topicals, tinctures, powders, and other federally compliant hemp items sourced from licensed suppliers and backed by testing documentation.

Now, Hawaiʻi is preparing to enforce harsh new hemp regulations that could threaten retailers, destroy inventory, shut down small businesses, and reshape the entire Hawaiʻi hemp and CBD market.

Reason Magazine covered this issue. Reason News brought national legal and policy attention to it. Then Yahoo News picked up the story.

That means this is no longer just a Honolulu business issue.

This is now a national hemp industry story.

Yahoo News and Reason News Brought National Attention to Hawaiʻi’s Hemp Crackdown

The headline says what small hemp businesses in Hawaiʻi have been warning about:

“Lawsuit Argues Hawaii’s Harsh New Hemp Regulations Will Stifle Competition.”

That headline matters because it gets to the core of the issue.

This lawsuit is not only about one business. It is about whether Hawaiʻi can use hemp enforcement, cannabis regulation, and state licensing power to crush federally compliant hemp retailers while protecting a small group of state-licensed medical cannabis dispensaries.

Reason Magazine and Reason News helped explain why this matters beyond Hawaiʻi. Yahoo News helped amplify it to a much larger audience.

That matters for every small business owner, hemp farmer, CBD retailer, cannabis policy advocate, consumer, and entrepreneur watching what states are doing after the 2018 Farm Bill created a legal national hemp market.

I Built Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions Under the Federal Hemp Framework

I founded Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions in Honolulu, Hawaiʻi, to serve the legal hemp and CBD market.

We are not hiding. We are not operating in the shadows. We are a real Hawaiʻi small business with retail locations, employees, leases, inventory, customers, tax obligations, compliance documents, testing paperwork, suppliers, and a public brand.

Our customers include local residents, Waikīkī visitors, CBD consumers, hemp consumers, wellness customers, and people looking for legal hemp alternatives.

We built this business around the federal hemp framework created by the 2018 Farm Bill, which legalized hemp so long as it contains no more than 0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight.

That law created a national hemp industry.

It created opportunities for hemp farmers, CBD brands, hemp manufacturers, testing labs, distributors, logistics providers, and retailers like Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions.

Now Hawaiʻi’s new hemp rules and enforcement actions threaten to undermine that entire framework.

Hawaiʻi’s Hemp Enforcement Begins July 1

The Hawaiʻi Department of Health and the Department of the Attorney General have announced that statewide hemp retail enforcement begins July 1, 2026.

For Hawaiʻi hemp retailers, that date is critical.

The state has warned that enforcement may include administrative penalties, fines, product embargo, seizure, destruction of noncompliant hemp products, and civil action.

For a small business, that is not just regulation.

That is survival.

For a Honolulu hemp retailer like Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions, the threat of inventory seizure or forced closure is not theoretical. It affects employees, landlords, suppliers, customers, and the entire local hemp economy.

That is why Reason Magazine, Reason News, and Yahoo News covering this story is so important.

The public deserves to know what is happening before small businesses are destroyed.

This Is About Hawaiʻi Hemp, CBD, Cannabis Competition, and Small Business Rights

Hawaiʻi has a limited medical cannabis dispensary system. Only a small number of state-licensed medical marijuana dispensaries are allowed to operate.

Hemp retailers like mine operate outside that closed medical cannabis licensing system.

We serve a different market: legal hemp, CBD, federally compliant hemp products, and hemp-derived products sold through retail channels.

But that competition appears to have become a problem for powerful interests.

Reason’s coverage discussed the tension between Hawaiʻi’s medical cannabis dispensary industry and independent hemp retailers. It also discussed how communications from the medical cannabis industry raised concerns about hemp businesses operating in the state.

That is exactly why this case matters.

When government regulation threatens small hemp businesses while benefiting a protected cannabis licensing system, the public deserves answers.

When a state appears to use hemp enforcement to reduce competition against medical cannabis dispensaries, the public deserves transparency.

When a legal hemp retailer in Honolulu faces possible product seizure, inventory destruction, and forced business disruption, people deserve to know why.

My Lawsuit Challenges Hawaiʻi’s Hemp Laws and Regulations

My federal lawsuit challenges Hawaiʻi’s hemp laws and regulations because I believe they violate constitutional protections and conflict with the federal hemp framework.

The lawsuit raises serious legal issues, including:

Hawaiʻi’s restrictions on federally compliant hemp products

The effect of Hawaiʻi hemp laws on interstate commerce

Whether the state can punish businesses that relied on federal hemp law

Whether the rules are clear enough for businesses to understand and follow

Whether small hemp businesses are being denied fair treatment and due process

Whether Hawaiʻi is using hemp regulation to protect medical cannabis dispensaries from competition

This case is about the future of legal hemp in Hawaiʻi.

It is about whether CBD retailers, hemp shops, and small cannabis-adjacent businesses can survive in Honolulu, Waikīkī, Oʻahu, Maui, Kauaʻi, and across the islands.

It is about whether the 2018 Farm Bill actually means anything when a state decides to crush the hemp market after businesses have already invested.

Why Reason Magazine and Yahoo News Coverage Matters

Reason Magazine and Reason News covering my story matters because Reason focuses on civil liberties, government overreach, free markets, regulation, and individual rights.

That is exactly the framework this story belongs in.

This is not just a cannabis story.

This is not just a CBD story.

This is not just a Hawaiʻi politics story.

This is a story about government power, small business survival, hemp law, cannabis competition, economic liberty, regulatory fairness, and due process.

Yahoo News picking up the Reason article matters because it brings the story to a much broader audience.

Now people outside Hawaiʻi can see what is happening here:

A small business built under federal hemp law is facing harsh state enforcement.

A legal hemp market is being squeezed.

A limited medical cannabis system appears to benefit from restrictions on hemp competitors.

Consumers could lose access to hemp and CBD products.

Employees could lose jobs.

Retailers could lose inventory.

Business owners could lose everything.

That is why national coverage matters.

Hawaiʻi’s Hemp Industry Is at a Breaking Point

Hawaiʻi’s hemp industry is not just one shop or one lawsuit.

It includes hemp retailers, CBD stores, local entrepreneurs, workers, customers, suppliers, farmers, wellness brands, and consumers across Oʻahu and the neighbor islands.

In Honolulu and Waikīkī, hemp and CBD retail stores serve both local residents and tourists. Hawaiʻi’s visitor economy, wellness market, cannabis culture, and hemp industry all overlap.

But harsh enforcement could push legal hemp retailers out of business and leave consumers with fewer options.

That is not consumer protection.

That is market destruction.

A fair system would regulate hemp responsibly. It would set clear rules. It would allow compliant businesses to operate. It would focus on age verification, testing, labeling, packaging, and safety.

Instead, Hawaiʻi’s approach threatens embargo, seizure, destruction, and forced closure.

That is why I am fighting.

This Is About Competition

One of the most important words in the Yahoo News and Reason headline is competition.

Hawaiʻi’s medical cannabis market is limited. Hemp retail is more open. That means hemp businesses compete with state-licensed dispensaries for some consumers.

Competition is supposed to benefit the public.

Competition lowers prices. Competition creates access. Competition gives consumers choices. Competition encourages better service, better products, and better innovation.

But when government regulation is used to eliminate competition, the public loses.

Small businesses lose.

Consumers lose.

Only protected incumbents win.

That is why this lawsuit is bigger than Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions.

This case is about whether Hawaiʻi will allow fair competition in hemp, CBD, and cannabis-adjacent markets — or whether the state will protect a small group of licensed cannabis businesses by crushing the independent hemp industry.

July 1 Enforcement. July 2 Court.

The timing is urgent.

Hawaiʻi hemp enforcement begins July 1, 2026.

My court date is July 2, 2026.

That means the future of Hawaiʻi’s hemp industry is being tested right now.

This is the moment when small hemp businesses, CBD retailers, cannabis consumers, civil liberties advocates, free market supporters, and anyone who cares about government overreach should be paying attention.

I never wanted this fight.

I wanted to build a lawful business in Honolulu. I wanted to serve customers. I wanted to create jobs. I wanted to operate within the hemp laws created by the 2018 Farm Bill.

But when the state threatens my business, my inventory, my employees, my leases, my customers, and my future, I have no choice but to fight back.

Thank You to Reason Magazine, Reason News, and Yahoo News

I want to thank Reason Magazine and Reason News for reporting on this case and explaining why Hawaiʻi’s hemp crackdown matters.

I also want to thank Yahoo News for picking up the story and helping bring national attention to what is happening to hemp retailers in Hawaiʻi.

This issue deserves national attention.

Hawaiʻi’s hemp enforcement is not just local news. It is a warning to every hemp business in America.

If a state can encourage entrepreneurs to rely on federal hemp law, allow a market to grow, and then later threaten seizure, destruction, and closure, every hemp and CBD business in the country should be concerned.

The 2018 Farm Bill created a legal hemp industry.

Now Hawaiʻi is testing whether that industry can survive state-level enforcement designed to restrict it.

I Will Keep Fighting for Hawaiʻi’s Hemp Industry

I am Lance Alyas, founder of Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions.

I am a Honolulu hemp retailer. I am a Hawaiʻi small business owner. I am part of the legal hemp, CBD, and cannabis-adjacent industry.

And I am fighting because I believe Hawaiʻi’s hemp crackdown is wrong.

I believe small businesses deserve due process.

I believe consumers deserve access.

I believe legal hemp businesses deserve fair treatment.

I believe competition should not be destroyed by regulatory pressure.

And I believe the public deserves to know exactly what is happening.

Thanks to Reason Magazine, Reason News, and Yahoo News, more people now do.

This fight is not over.

July 1 is enforcement.

July 2 is court.

And I will keep fighting for Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions, for Hawaiʻi’s hemp industry, for CBD retailers, for small businesses, and for everyone who believes the government should not be allowed to destroy legal businesses to protect politically favored competitors.

Lance Alyas
Founder, Oʻahu Dispensary & Provisions
Lead Plaintiff, Alyas v. Lopez
Honolulu, Hawaiʻi

I run a hemp business in Honolulu. Four retail locations, a workforce, leases I’ve personally guaranteed, and an inventory of products that are legal under federal law — every one of them sourced from licensed suppliers and tested to the standard Congress wrote into the 2018 Farm Bill. I did everything the law asked of me. On July 1, the State of Hawaiʻi is going to start treating that as a crime.

On June 23, the Department of Health and the Attorney General announced that statewide enforcement against hemp retailers begins July 1, 2026. Embargo. Seizure. Destruction of inventory. Civil injunctions. Forced closure of retail locations. A date certain, in writing, from the State itself.

Here’s the part they’re hoping you don’t notice. A federal judge is scheduled to rule on whether that exact enforcement regime is constitutional on July 2 — the very next day. My case, Alyas v. Lopez, No. 1:26-cv-00035, has been pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaiʻi for months. The hearing on my motion to stop this enforcement, and on the State’s motion to throw my case out, is set for July 2. The State knows that. And it has chosen to start seizing and destroying federally legal product on July 1 — one day before the court can rule. It is not waiting for the court. It is moving to act before the court can stop it.

I want to be precise about what the State admitted in its own announcement, because this is not my characterization. It is theirs.

The State now lists hemp flower, pre-rolls, and vape products as “prohibited product categories.” Remember, Hawaiʻi’s own Legislature legalized those products in 2023 through Act 263. The elected representatives of this state voted to repeal that prohibition. The Department of Health did not like the result, so it is reinstating the ban by press release — a ban the people’s lawmakers struck from the books. That is not how this works. An agency does not get to overrule the Legislature because it prefers the old rule. That is the heart of my case, and the State just put it in writing for me.

The State is also going to enforce its own homemade definition of legal THC against products that pass the federal test. Congress set a national standard for what counts as hemp. Hawaiʻi invented a different one, and it is now moving to seize and destroy products that are legal everywhere else in the country because they fail a test Congress never wrote. That is one state trying to nullify a federal law, and it is the reason this case matters far beyond my four stores.

And it does reach beyond my stores — beyond Hawaiʻi entirely. The announcement makes clear that out-of-state sellers who ship federally legal hemp into Hawaiʻi are swept in too. Register with Hawaiʻi, or stop serving Hawaiʻi’s customers. A state is reaching across its own borders to control commerce in a product that federal law made legal. That should concern anyone who cares about whether states can wall themselves off from the national market one “definition” at a time.

The announcement is dressed up as a routine registration deadline. Pay your fifty dollars, file your paperwork. But the regime behind that friendly language carries consequences that go well past fines and forms, and the statute reaches a great deal further than the press release lets on.

I didn’t break any rules. I followed them — the rules as Congress actually wrote them. Every product I carry was tested and compliant. Every supplier I bought from was licensed. I built a legitimate business, in the open, in full compliance with federal law, and the State of Hawaiʻi is preparing to take it apart the literal day before a judge can tell them whether they’re even allowed to!

The hearing is July 2, 2026, before the Honorable Judge Jill Otake, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaiʻi, on my motion for a preliminary injunction and the State’s motion to dismiss. The State’s announcement is public in the Department of Health newsroom. Read it for yourself. Then ask why a government so confident in its authority is in such a hurry to act one day before a court can review it.

I’ll be in that courtroom on July 2. I’d rather be in my stores, doing the legal business I built, but I can’t be. The State is forcing the choice. Fortunately, the court will decide whether it had the right to. The same court the State audaciously disrespects, but with authority nonetheless!

A few months ago, I received a message from someone I had never met. They weren’t seeking attention. They weren’t looking for credit. In fact, they wanted exactly the opposite. They wanted to remain anonymous.

What they provided was a tip.

At the time, I had no idea how significant that tip would become.

What followed was months of investigation, public records requests, document analysis, and conversations that would ultimately uncover information far more significant than I ever expected. The deeper I dug, the more questions emerged. Every answer seemed to lead to three more.

What started as a single lead soon grew into hundreds of pages of records.

Emails.

Government communications.

Industry correspondence.

Timelines.

Names.

Connections.

Patterns.

The kind of information that often remains buried unless someone is willing to spend the time and effort to follow the trail wherever it leads.

And it all started because one person decided to step forward.

Regardless of your views on hemp, cannabis, government regulation, or any of the individuals involved, there is a larger principle at stake.

Transparency matters.

The public deserves to understand how policies are developed, who influences them, and what conversations take place behind closed doors before decisions affecting businesses and citizens are made.

The role of whistleblowers in that process cannot be overstated.

Throughout history, some of the most important revelations have not come from powerful institutions. They have come from ordinary people who witnessed something they believed the public deserved to know.

Without that anonymous source, much of what I have uncovered may never have become public.

That reality has stayed with me throughout this investigation.

It is also why I am writing this today.

Because I know there are others.

There are government employees who have seen things that concern them.

There are industry insiders who know information the public has never heard.

There are individuals sitting on documents, emails, and evidence that could help complete the picture.

If that is you, I want you to know something:

You are not alone.

If you have information relevant to government accountability, public policy, regulatory actions, or matters affecting Hawaii’s citizens and businesses, I encourage you to reach out.

Every major investigation starts somewhere.

Mine started with one whistleblower.

The next chapter may start with another.

I heavily urge any industry professionals, politicians, and similar level individuals to come forward and provide any tips you can about corruption the Hawaiian hemp industry, the government, and any corruption that may be going on. Thank you

Secure contact: lancea2026@proton.me

The truth only comes to light when people are willing to shine a flashlight into the darkness.

Lance A

There are moments when a stack of documents changes everything.

For me, that moment arrived when I obtained government records showing what was happening behind the scenes while Hawaii lawmakers were advancing legislation that would ultimately devastate much of the state’s hemp industry.

The documents tell a story that deserves public scrutiny.

And it begins with a simple fact:

Google ranked our business #1.

Not because we were politically connected.

Not because we had special licenses.

Not because we received government favors.

We earned that position the old-fashioned way: by serving customers, collecting reviews, investing in marketing, and building a business that consumers chose to support.

That success appears to have attracted the attention of powerful competitors.

The Email That Changes Everything

On January 23, 2025, Hawaii Representative Scot Matayoshi introduced House Bill 1482.

That bill would later become Act 269—the law now being challenged in federal court.

What happened next is remarkable.

According to records obtained through Hawaii’s public records process, Karlyn Laulusa, CEO of Noa Botanicals, contacted state officials the very same day.

In those communications, my company was specifically identified.

The reason?

Because we were highly visible.

Because we were competing.

Because consumers were finding us.

The documents include references to our business’s Google rankings and online presence. Rather than celebrating consumer choice and market competition, the communications focused on eliminating what was viewed as a problem.

The problem wasn’t public safety.

The problem was competition.

Follow the Timeline

The sequence of events matters.

A restrictive hemp bill appears.

Industry insiders begin communicating with regulators.

Specific competitors are identified.

Lists are exchanged.

Meetings are requested.

Government enforcement intensifies.

And eventually, legislation is enacted that dramatically benefits one group of market participants while severely harming another.

Readers can decide for themselves whether that sequence is merely coincidence.

But it raises questions that deserve answers.

Questions about influence.

Questions about fairness.

Questions about who government is really serving.

Hawaii’s Hemp Industry Wasn’t a Threat to Public Safety

One of the most important facts often missing from this discussion is that Hawaii’s hemp industry was not some tiny fringe market.

The state’s own commissioned cannabis market analysis estimated that consumers were spending millions of dollars every month on hemp-derived products.

That represents a massive amount of consumer demand.

Consumers were voting with their wallets.

They were choosing products.

Choosing businesses.

Choosing alternatives.

In a free market, that’s how competition works.

But when an industry gains enough market share to threaten entrenched interests, something else can happen.

Those interests can attempt to change the rules.

Competition Is Supposed to Be Won in the Marketplace

Every business owner understands competition.

If another company has better prices, improve your prices.

If another company has better service, improve your service.

If another company ranks higher online, improve your marketing.

That’s capitalism.

What’s not supposed to happen is using political influence to achieve what couldn’t be achieved through competition.

When businesses begin lobbying for laws that destroy competitors rather than protect consumers, the public deserves to know.

When government officials receive complaints that specifically identify competing businesses, the public deserves to know.

When regulatory power appears to align with private economic interests, the public deserves to know.

Transparency is not optional.

It is essential.

The Federal Lawsuit

Those concerns are now at the center of ongoing federal litigation.

The lawsuit challenges Hawaii’s hemp restrictions and raises serious constitutional questions regarding due process, regulatory authority, and the state’s treatment of businesses that relied on prior law.

The case is about more than hemp.

It is about whether government can change the rules after businesses have invested millions of dollars, hired employees, signed leases, and built legitimate operations.

It is about whether politically connected interests should be allowed to influence outcomes behind closed doors.

And it is about whether small businesses receive equal protection under the law.

Why This Matters Beyond Hemp

Even readers who have never purchased a hemp product should care about this story.

Because today it is hemp.

Tomorrow it could be another industry.

Another entrepreneur.

Another local business.

Another group of consumers whose choices become inconvenient for established interests.

The principle remains the same.

Government should not be used as a weapon against competitors.

Laws should be written to protect the public—not to protect market share.

And regulators should serve citizens—not special interests.

The Receipts Exist

For months, many people dismissed concerns about what was happening in Hawaii as speculation.

The records tell a different story.

They show communications.

They show timelines.

They show who was talking to whom.

And they show that some of Hawaii’s most powerful cannabis interests were actively focused on businesses like mine while legislation was moving through the system.

That deserves scrutiny.

That deserves accountability.

And that deserves public discussion.

The public can review the evidence and reach its own conclusions.

As for me, I intend to continue asking questions.

And I intend to continue fighting.

Not because it’s easy.

Not because it’s profitable.

But because no business should have to wonder whether its biggest competitor is trying to beat it in the marketplace—or in the halls of government.

The fight continues.

And now the public can see why.

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

National cannabis publication Ganjapreneur has now joined the growing list of media outlets covering my federal lawsuit against the State of Hawaii over its hemp regulations and enforcement actions.

The article, published June 3, 2026, highlights the legal battle between Oahu Dispensary & Provisions and Hawaii officials over laws and regulations that have effectively eliminated much of Hawaii’s federally compliant hemp market. According to the lawsuit, approximately 80% of the products my company previously sold became illegal under Hawaii’s current regulatory framework.

For a small business owner, this isn’t just another court filing.

It’s a fight over whether state agencies can redefine federal law, criminalize previously lawful commerce, and destroy businesses that relied on Congress’s definition of hemp under the 2018 Farm Bill.

Why This Hawaii Hemp Lawsuit Matters

At the center of the dispute is a simple but important question:

Can a state agency impose a different definition of hemp than the one established by Congress?

The federal 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp containing no more than 0.3% Delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis. However, Hawaii’s regulatory approach has relied on a “total THC” interpretation and additional product restrictions that go far beyond federal requirements.

The lawsuit argues that Hawaii’s system creates a conflicting regulatory framework that effectively criminalizes products that remain federally lawful. It also challenges enforcement mechanisms that can result in product seizures, destruction of inventory, business penalties, and substantial financial harm.

This case is not merely about one business.

It raises broader questions involving:

• Federal preemption

• Interstate commerce

• Due process rights

• Administrative agency authority

• Hemp industry regulation

• Small business protections

National Media Attention Continues To Grow

The Ganjapreneur feature follows coverage from multiple outlets that have reported on the legal challenge and Hawaii’s evolving hemp regulations.

What began as a local dispute has increasingly become part of a national conversation regarding hemp-derived cannabinoids, THCA products, regulatory overreach, and the future of the post-Farm Bill hemp industry.

Across the country, businesses are challenging state-level restrictions, and courts are being asked to determine where the boundaries lie between federal hemp protections and state regulatory authority. Similar legal disputes have emerged in multiple states as regulators attempt to tighten restrictions on hemp-derived products.

The Stakes For Hawaii Businesses

For many Hawaii hemp retailers, distributors, and consumers, the consequences are significant.

Businesses have invested substantial capital into inventory, storefronts, employees, marketing, and compliance systems based on the federal legal framework established by Congress.

When regulatory interpretations change after those investments have been made, the impact can be devastating.

The lawsuit argues that businesses deserve clear rules, fair notice, and constitutional protections before their products are rendered illegal and their livelihoods placed at risk.

Beyond Hemp: A Question Of Government Accountability

Regardless of where someone stands on cannabis policy, this case ultimately raises a larger issue:

Should government agencies be permitted to create restrictions that exceed what lawmakers enacted?

That question extends far beyond hemp.

It affects every regulated industry and every business owner who relies on predictable rules to operate.

Federal courts will ultimately decide the legal merits of these claims, but the growing public interest demonstrates that many people recognize the importance of the issues involved.

Read The Ganjapreneur Article

I appreciate Ganjapreneur for bringing national attention to this case and helping inform the broader cannabis and hemp community about what is happening in Hawaii.

As this litigation moves forward, I will continue providing updates, court filings, media coverage, and analysis regarding the lawsuit and its implications for hemp businesses, consumers, and constitutional rights. I’m in it for the long haul.

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

$6.17 million per month in hemp sales.

Thirty-one percent of the entire cannabis market.

Think about what that means. Nearly one out of every three cannabis dollars spent in Hawaiʻi is being spent outside the State’s eight-license dispensary system. That’s not a rounding error, and it’s not a niche corner of the market. It is a massive share of consumer demand.

This isn’t my number or an industry estimate. It wasn’t pulled from a trade publication or an advocacy group. It comes from the State’s own consultant, working under contract for the agency that regulates the market.

That’s what makes it so revealing.

A Receipt, Not a Catalyst

The report didn’t start the State’s enforcement campaign against hemp businesses. That was already underway.

What the report does show is exactly what those businesses represent: competition.

It shines a bright light on questions of motivation, interests, favoritism, and market protection. It puts hard numbers on what regulators have been seeing in the marketplace all along. For the first time, the scale of that competition is quantified in black and white.

Consumers are choosing hemp.

Not the black market. Not anonymous sellers operating in the shadows.

They are choosing transparent storefronts that sell tested, labeled products out in the open. They are choosing businesses that publish certificates of analysis, identify themselves to regulators, and operate in plain view of the public.

Whether regulators like that outcome or not, it reflects a clear consumer preference.

To the consumer, that’s a choice.

To a protected industry, that’s a threat.

The report becomes a receipt. It confirms that millions of dollars every month are bypassing the system the State spent years building around just eight license holders.

Despite limited competition, enormous barriers to entry, and a market effectively closed since 2016, consumers are still sending 31% of their dollars somewhere else.

The State’s own data shows that a substantial portion of the market is finding value outside the framework the government spent years constructing.

That’s a reality no regulator can ignore.

The State’s Answer

And what is the State’s response?

Not more competition.

Not a broader marketplace.

Not a serious examination of why consumers prefer these products.

There has been no effort to expand licensing opportunities, reduce barriers to entry, or ask why consumers are voting with their wallets in such significant numbers.

Instead, pressure remains focused on the very businesses capturing that market share.

The businesses operating openly become the easiest targets precisely because they have storefronts, employees, inventory, and public identities. They aren’t difficult to find. They are already standing in the light.

That’s why the $6.17 million figure matters.

Not because it proves why any single decision was made, but because it reveals the economic reality sitting behind the debate. It provides context that was missing before. It shows what is actually at stake in the fight over hemp.

The Department of Health paid to learn where consumers are spending their money.

The answer came back clearly:

31% of the market is choosing something outside the State’s preferred system.

For a regulatory structure built around a small number of license holders, that’s an extraordinary finding. It helps explain why hemp has become such a focal point in Hawaiʻi’s cannabis policy debate.

The Question

Read the report.

Then ask yourself a simple question:

When the interests of consumers and the interests of the eight-license system diverge, which one does the Department choose to protect?

The State’s own report may have already provided part of the answer.

Lance Alyas

ODP LLC

President Donald J. Trump

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, D.C. 20500

Mr. President,

Thank you for the job you are doing for this country! You are fighting for working families, for American farmers, and for small business owners who have been forgotten by Washington for decades. The country owes you more than it knows. The world, in fact, does too!

My name is Lance Saher Alyas. I am a Chaldean American, and I own Oahu Dispensary and Provisions LLC in Hawaii, a hemp business operating in full compliance with the federal delta-9 THC standard you established when you signed the 2018 Farm Bill. That signature created the modern American hemp industry from zero. Hundreds of thousands of jobs, billions in economic activity, and millions of families across every state depending on it.

I am writing because that very industry and those it supports are under coordinated attack, and the next decision in front of you is bound to be one of the most consequential of not just your second term, but your entire presidency.

The State of Hawaii adopted rules that conflict directly with the federal standard you signed into law. That conflict forced me into federal court to defend my right to operate under your Farm Bill, in active litigation, Alyas v. Lopez, No. 1:26-cv-00035 (D. Haw.). Legal experts following the case are confident I’ll prevail. Yet even a win there will be hollow once Section 781 hits. The same political machine that opposes you on everything else is betting you will not step in to protect your own policy.

That’s because Section 781 of the Continuing Appropriations Act takes effect November 12, 2026, less than six months from now. When it does, the conflict that destroyed countless businesses in Hawaii will be replicated against every hemp business in America. Every farmer, every processor, every retailer, every trucker, every packager, every lab technician, every small business owner in every state whose paycheck comes from this industry will be facing what I am facing now. This $30 billion industry and virtually all others connected to it will not survive without your direct intervention.

Millions of families are watching. Millions of livelihoods depend on it. Millions of Americans built their lives on a federal standard you created, and they are praying the man who signed it into law will defend it now.

Mr. President, you literally built this industry. It’s fitting, then, that only you can defend it, and you have the authority as President to do so.

Thank you again for everything you have done and everything you are still doing for this country. I am one small business owner among millions asking you, the man who legalized hemp, to defend what you built.

Don’t let your signature die on your watch.

God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.

Lance Saher Alyas

Owner, Oahu Dispensary and Provisions LLC

Plaintiff, Alyas v. Lopez, No. 1:26-cv-00035 (D. Haw.)

Target just put intoxicating hemp THC beverages on shelves in nearly 400 stores across Florida, Texas, Illinois, and Minnesota. Five milligrams. Ten milligrams. The kind of can you grab off a cooler shelf next to a Celsius and walk to the register without a second thought.

Same products. Same lab tests. Same interstate supply chain running through every state in the country — including Hawaii, where Act 269 is written to treat those exact cans as felony contraband.

Think about what that means. The product didn’t change. The chemistry didn’t change. The certificate of analysis didn’t change. Hawaii changed the law — specifically, Hawaii changed the testing methodology used to define what counts as hemp. Not the federal standard. Not Congress’s standard. Hawaii’s own invented standard, applied through HAR Chapter 11-37, using a post-decarboxylation “total THC” calculation that the 2018 Farm Bill never authorized any state to impose as a criminal enforcement trigger.

So the same can that rings up clean at a Target register in Tampa triggers inspection, seizure, forfeiture, destruction of inventory, and criminal prosecution in Honolulu. Not because the product is dangerous. Not because it fails federal law. Because Hawaii rewrote the definition of hemp to protect the regulated medical cannabis industry from competition — and their own legislative record says so.

That’s not regulatory caution. That’s regulatory capture dressed up as public safety!

The state put a target on the backs of retailers and consumers alike. Small business owners who followed federal law, sourced compliant products, maintained certificates of analysis for every batch, and built livelihoods around a federally legal industry — now facing the threat of criminal prosecution for selling the same product Target is rolling out in four states this week.

That’s why we filed. That’s why we’re not going away.

Alyas v. Lopez, U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii, No. 1:26-cv-00035 is a live federal case challenging Hawaii’s Act 269 and the administrative rules that implement it. The legal question at the center of the case — whether a state can substitute its own testing methodology for Congress’s delta-9 THC standard and use that substitution to re-criminalize federally lawful hemp — isn’t just a Hawaii question. It’s the question every hemp business in America is going to face. Hawaii is just eight months ahead of the rest of the country.

We stood up…because someone had to!

If your products complied with the 2018 Farm Bill, you could operate legally.

Then came Hawaiʻi.

What started as a federally compliant hemp business in Waikīkī evolved into one of the most aggressive state-level enforcement campaigns in modern hemp history — involving multiple agencies, coordinated raids, regulatory reinterpretations, mounting taxpayer-funded litigation, and what many are now calling a direct constitutional collision between federal hemp law and state enforcement power.

And now, that battle sits in federal court.

Alyas v. Lopez may become one of the most important hemp lawsuits in America.

Because this fight is no longer just about one business.

It is about whether states can quietly rewrite federal hemp law through bureaucracy after Congress already legalized hemp nationwide.

Hawaiʻi’s Hemp Crackdown May Be the Blueprint Other States Are Preparing to Copy

Across the United States, hemp operators are watching something dangerous unfold:

• Texas attempting “Total THC” restructuring

• States pushing intoxicating hemp bans

• Agencies using administrative rules to redefine legality

• Regulatory bodies trying to erase years of legal commerce overnight

• Federally compliant businesses suddenly treated like criminal enterprises

Hawaiʻi became one of the clearest examples.

The State claims this is about “public safety.”

But buried in Hawaiʻi’s own legislative documents is language suggesting something very different:

Protection of licensed marijuana businesses from hemp competition.

That statement appears in Standing Committee Report 1817 — a document now cited directly in federal litigation.

And once that entered the court record, everything changed.

They Tried a Sting Operation First

According to the federal complaint, enforcement did not begin with legislation.

It began with targeted operations.

The expectation appeared simple:

Pressure the business.
Create fear.
Force closure.

Instead, the opposite happened.

More locations opened.

More customers arrived.

And the conflict escalated.

Soon, multiple agencies allegedly began appearing in rapid succession — different uniforms, different departments, same pressure campaign.

One week it was one agency.
Then another.
Then another.

Until federal court became unavoidable.

Alyas v. Lopez: The Federal Hemp Lawsuit That Could Redefine State Authority

The lawsuit now pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaiʻi raises constitutional questions that extend far beyond Hawaiʻi tourism districts or Waikīkī storefronts.

The case challenges whether a state can:

• Redefine federally legal hemp through administrative rules

• Use “Total THC” standards to criminalize products Congress legalized

• Target interstate hemp commerce

• Retroactively reinterpret legality after years of allowing operations

• Use regulatory enforcement to economically shield licensed cannabis industries

At the center of the dispute is the argument that Hawaiʻi effectively changed hemp law without Congress ever changing federal hemp law.

That distinction matters enormously.

Because the 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp federally using a specific statutory definition centered on delta-9 THC concentration.

Not “Total THC.”

Not future hypothetical conversion calculations.

And not administrative reinterpretations years later.

The Hemp Industry Is Watching Hawaiʻi Closely

This case arrives during one of the most volatile periods in hemp history.

Search trends for:

• “THCA legality”

• “2018 Farm Bill hemp loophole”

• “Total THC hemp ban”

• “federal hemp lawsuit”

• “hemp preemption”

• “state hemp crackdown”

• “intoxicating hemp regulation”

have exploded nationwide.

Millions of dollars are flowing through the hemp market while states scramble to control products that federal law arguably still protects.

That tension has created chaos across the industry.

Some businesses closed immediately under pressure.

Others relocated.

Others entered litigation.

And now Hawaiʻi sits at the center of the constitutional battlefield.

The Real Human Cost of Hemp Enforcement

This story is not only about statutes and agencies.

It is about customers.

Veterans.
Kupuna.
Cancer patients.
People struggling with sleep, pain, anxiety, PTSD, inflammation, and addiction alternatives.

For many consumers, hemp products became accessible precisely because they did not require entry into Hawaiʻi’s tightly controlled medical marijuana system.

That accessibility created competition.

And competition created political pressure.

Now the people caught in the middle are the consumers who relied on those products most.

Taxpayer Dollars vs. One Small Business

One of the most controversial aspects of the case involves the scale of state resources allegedly deployed against a single hemp operator.

According to public filings and related reporting, multiple government lawyers, agencies, and administrative resources became involved over months of litigation and enforcement activity.

Meanwhile, the business owner funding the federal challenge is allegedly paying privately out of pocket.

That imbalance has become a major public narrative surrounding the case:

Can a state spend massive taxpayer resources attempting to shut down federally compliant hemp commerce while simultaneously claiming the products were “always illegal”?

And if they were always illegal — why were these businesses openly operating for years?

Those are questions federal court may eventually force the state to answer under oath.

Why This Case Could Impact Every Hemp Operator in America

The significance of this lawsuit extends far beyond Hawaiʻi.

If the State prevails:

• Other states may attempt similar “Total THC” reinterpretations

• Administrative agencies may gain broader power to reshape hemp legality without Congress

• Hemp commerce nationwide could face massive instability

If the plaintiffs prevail:

• Federal preemption arguments could strengthen nationwide

• State hemp bans may face increased constitutional scrutiny

• Hemp operators across America could gain a roadmap for litigation

That is why attorneys, regulators, cannabis operators, lawmakers, and hemp businesses across the country are quietly watching this case.

Because the ruling may influence the future structure of the entire hemp economy.

Hawaiʻi May Have Triggered a National Constitutional Fight

This is no longer just a local business dispute.

It is becoming a test of:

• federal supremacy,

• interstate commerce,

• due process,

• administrative overreach,

• and the future of federally legal hemp itself.

The irony is impossible to ignore.

Congress legalized hemp in 2018.

Now businesses are allegedly being forced to spend millions defending that legalization against the very governments that allowed the industry to exist in the first place.

That contradiction is exactly why this lawsuit matters.

And why the entire country may soon know the name:

Alyas v. Lopez

Follow the Case

Case: Alyas v. Lopez
Court: U.S. District Court, District of Hawaiʻi
Case No.: 1:26-cv-00035

#Hemp #THCA #FarmBill #2018FarmBill #HempIndustry #CannabisNews #CannabisLaw #FederalCourt #Constitution #Hawaii #Waikiki #HempBusiness #THCALegal #CannabisIndustry #HempLegalization #InterstateCommerce #FederalPreemption #CannabisPolitics #CBD #Delta8 #Delta9 #HempNews #CannabisCommunity #SmallBusiness #Entrepreneur #CivilRights #DueProcess #LegalNews #AlyasVLopez #ODP

I have said since the day I filed that what is happening to hemp in Hawaiʻi is not regulation. It is outlawing through paperwork. It is a ban dressed in technical vocabulary, engineered to deliver through bureaucracy what the State of Hawaiʻi could never deliver through legislation.

And a court in Texas just confirmed it.

The Texas Ruling

Just two days ago, a state judge in Travis County issued a temporary injunction halting the central provisions of Texas’s new hemp scheme. The “total delta-9” testing standard that quietly lumped THCA into the THC count to render compliance unattainable by design. Frozen. The punitive fee hikes. Frozen. The smokable hemp ban, the transport restrictions, the enforcement mechanisms built to throttle compliant operators into submission. All frozen.

The court ruled that Texas had likely exceeded its statutory authority. That its agencies never seriously examined the economic destruction they were about to unleash. That less burdensome alternatives were never even on the table. The whole edifice was administrative overreach with a chemistry report bolted to the front.

The judge stripped off the disguise.

The Same Script in Hawaiʻi

Anne Lopez and Ken Fink should be reading every page of that Texas record, because the script Hawaiʻi is running is the script Texas just lost.

When a state shifts the standard after businesses have built themselves around federal law, that is not regulation. That is an ambush.

When it engineers a testing methodology designed to fail, that is not science. That is rigged math.

When it deploys fees, transport restrictions, licensing pressure, and the threat of seizure to drive compliant operators out of business, that is not public health. That is coercion in technical clothing.The State of Hawaiʻi does not get to override federal law because it finds the market inconvenient. That is not opinion. That is the Supremacy Clause.

The Game Is Ending

The hemp industry in this state has been forced into a fixed conversation. Object, and you are dangerous. Comply, and the bar moves. Ask for clarity, and you get a threat. Sue, and officials act personally indignant that anyone would dare to question them.

Texas just demonstrated what happens when a court actually examines the construct. The injunction does not resolve every legal question forever, and no honest person should pretend otherwise. But it demolishes the comfortable assumption that this kind of regulatory move is obviously lawful, obviously safe, and obviously immune from real judicial challenge.

It is not. It is fragile. It is defeatable. And when a federal judge in Hawaiʻi looks at the same questions, I am highly confident the answers won’t come back differently!

I am not asking for favor. I am not asking for an exemption. I am asking the State of Hawaiʻi to follow the law.

Texas was the warning shot. Hawaiʻi is next in the crosshairs. Alyas v. Lopez is not going away. Federal law does not bow to state agencies that have outrun their authority, and neither do I!

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

I knew intuitively, before I submitted it, that most readers would likely agree with me. After all, I‘ve been on this island long enough to feel where the public actually sits on this. Not where the legislature sits. Not where the eight license holders sit. But where the person in line at Foodland sits.

So on a subconscious level, at least, I expected the response to be supportive. Yet even being aware of that didn’t prepare me for the actual impact of reading the many positive comments and being struck by the sheer force of them all.

Being The Named Plaintiff Is A Lonely Job

You spend months watching the case through pleadings and motions. You start to feel like the argument belongs to you. Like you’re the only one still holding it up. Then, dozens of strangers tell you, in their own words, that they’ve been watching the same thing and reached the same conclusion without anyone putting it in their mouth.

One commenter denounced the state’s approach harshly, comically lambasting it “cosplay enforcement.” Another fumed at the pedantic, belittling way that the people are treated by their government, as if ignorant children incapable of deciding for themselves. Another raised the valid point about how the tourism authority courts the exact demographic that shows up in every other destination market with a medical card already in their wallet. Still others pointed to a decades-old study predicting that criminalizing cannabis here would push locals toward harder drugs, and asked the question I couldn’t ask in print. If they knew the outcome, was the outcome the point.

I had been carrying those observations privately for a long time. Seeing them come back at me, from people who don’t know me and owe me nothing, did something I didn’t expect. It reminded me the argument isn’t mine. I’m just the one with standing to file it. And it reminded me that we all, at a base level, are guided by the same principles, share the same overarching values, and ultimately, share in the human experience and its finer nuances.

No one needs to be taught that mistreating others is wrong, or that unfairness is problematic. Studies show even chimpanzees and other animals react ferociously when they observe their counterparts being rewarded with additional food or benefits that are not fairly divided or connected to their independent achievements.

People Are Pragmatic. They Always Have Been.

There’s a fashionable cynicism now that says people are tribal. Misinformed. Only capable of thinking inside whatever script their team handed them. I don’t buy it. I’ve never bought it.

What I read in those comments was people reasoning from first principles. Nobody had to be persuaded that unfairness is bad. Nobody needed an economist to explain that shutting down compliant operators shifts demand to noncompliant ones. Nobody required a lecture on the difference between passing a law and reinterpreting one.

They arrived at all of it on their own. Because those aren’t ideological positions. They’re pragmatic ones. They’re what people figure out when you leave them alone long enough to think.

We’re all working from the same material at root. We want the rules to be stable. We want enforcement pointed at actual harm. We want small operators to be able to plan. We want our neighbors treated fairly and justly, just as we want for ourselves.

The Legislature Does Not Hear From These People

The gap between what the public actually believes and what the state does in the public’s name, though, is grossly mismatched and wildly disproportionate.

Shockingly, it is in fact far wider than most people realize. Legislators hear from and act due to the influence of lobbyists. They are shaped and guided by those with their own selfish interests at the core and at the forefront, such as licensed operators with paid representation, or massive entities with endless cash to burn in their quest to stomp out the small businesses and little guy.

They don’t hear often enough from the majority of constituents who don’t or can’t write, plead, or cajole their officials. Worse—far worse—they don’t care!

What Matters In The End

Ultimately, the court will resolve the legal question. Alyas v. Lopez is where that gets answered. But the broader question — what kind of state Hawaiʻi wants to be, whether small business can plan here, whether enforcement is proportional to actual harm — that one can’t be answered by a single judge because no single judge can substitute their own judgement for that of all of our own.

Those broader questions get answered by the people. People like you and I, writing articles, reading the comments under a Civil Beat op-ed, writing their own comments—deciding, sharing, and expressing whether any of this sounds right to them.

Based on what I saw and read this weekend, it most certainly doesn’t. But I’ll let you be the judge!

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

Not metaphorically. Not as a team-building exercise at some corporate retreat. I mean I stood at the open door of a Cessna at eighteen thousand feet, looked down at the green patchwork of earth below, felt the wind trying to pull the breath out of my chest — and I jumped anyway. Out of the airplane of a company that would soon claim 11 lives in a horrifying aviation accident.

People ask me what that feels like. The honest answer is that the scariest part isn't the jump. It's the moment before. It's standing at the threshold with every rational instinct screaming at you to step back, sit down, go home. The jump itself is almost a relief. Once you commit, the decision is made. All that's left is to fall well.

I think about that a lot these days.

What Risk Actually Looks Like

Real risk tolerance isn't about being reckless. It's about making a clear-eyed calculation that the cost of standing still is higher than the cost of moving forward — and then moving forward anyway, even when you can't see the landing. It requires you to look directly at the thing that could hurt you, understand it fully, and choose forward anyway. That's not bravado. That's a discipline.

When the Supply Chain Burned

Last year, a supplier we trusted betrayed that trust in the most consequential way possible — selling us products that weren't what they claimed to be, with forged documentation to cover their tracks. A customer was harmed. We ended up in federal court.

Every voice around me had the same advice: go quiet, pull back, wait for the smoke to clear. And I understood that instinct. But I kept asking the same question I always ask at the threshold — what does standing still actually cost? Folding inward wasn't protection. It was abandonment dressed up as caution.

So instead of going quiet, we sued. We fought back publicly, on the record, in federal court. We rebuilt our verification protocols from scratch and kept our doors open. The crisis didn't break us. It sharpened us.

The Threshold

We are, at our core, creatures of forward motion. Stillness is not our natural state — action is, even when action is frightening, even when the available actions are all bad ones. I don't think it's an accident that the image most seared into the collective memory of September 11th isn't the impact or the collapse — it's the jumpers. Because those people, in the most impossible moment imaginable, were still choosing. Still asserting that they would not simply be acted upon by the world. That instinct — raw, ancient, almost involuntary — is the deepest thing in us. It is what we are made of. And when everything else is stripped away, it is what remains.

The threshold is the hardest part. Not the fall. Not the landing. The moment of decision — when you can still turn back, when turning back would be completely understandable — that's where character is actually formed. Every time you turn back, the hesitation becomes a habit. The habit becomes an identity.

I decided a long time ago — standing at a literal open door at eighteen thousand feet — that wasn't going to be my identity.

That same decision is why we now have an active federal lawsuit against the State of Hawaii. The state has moved to regulate our business out of existence — not because we have harmed anyone, but because we have succeeded where their system has failed. We could have accepted that quietly. We could have thrown in the towel like so many others, decided to take the safe route and forget our our kiosks, and otherwise roll over and let the machinery of government trample over us unopposed. That was the cautious choice. That was the reasonable choice. But it was never going to be our choice.

The question is never whether the risk is real. It always is. The question is whether the cost of not jumping is higher than the cost of jumping. In my experience — from that Cessna door to a federal courtroom — the answer has almost always been yes.

So I jump.

Lance Alyas,

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

A man had walked up to one of our kiosks visibly intoxicated—slurring his words, unsteady on his feet. My employee, who had been with us for maybe two months at that point, looked at him, said we couldn’t serve him, and suggested he come back another time. He left without incident.

When I heard the story later that afternoon, I had one question: did my employee feel supported in making that call?

The answer was yes. That’s when I knew my training methodologies were working.

Most retail operations centralize decision-making authority because managers don’t trust employees to exercise good judgment. The result is an environment where every edge case requires managerial approval, which quietly trains employees to avoid responsibility and gradually erodes their ability to read situations independently. I took the opposite approach. From day one, every person working one of our kiosks has unconditional authority to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, without explanation or approval. We never refuse service unless the customer is trying to cause some sort of problem or is too intoxicated.

The logic is simple. The person standing at the kiosk is the one interacting directly with the customer. They see body language, tone, timing, and context—all the micro-signals that determine whether a transaction should happen. I’m not always there to read the situation. Requiring employees to ask permission doesn’t add oversight or improve outcomes; it adds delay, creates inefficiency, undermines their authority, and—perhaps worst of all—teaches them that their judgment doesn’t matter.

This approach requires hiring differently. I don’t only hire for product knowledge or retail experience. I hire for judgment. During interviews, I ask how candidates have handled conflict, how they read people, and what they do when they feel uncomfortable. You can teach someone most of what they need to know about products and industry rules in a week or two. But attitudes, instincts, and situational awareness are shaped over an entire lifetime. You can’t reliably teach the willingness to say no under pressure.

In another case, an employee refused service to someone who became verbally aggressive after being told no. The situation escalated briefly. Threats were made. A small crowd formed. My employee stayed calm, didn’t engage, and didn’t back down. Her clear authority to make that decision unilaterally is what allowed the situation to de-escalate.

The common argument against this kind of policy is that it leaves money on the table. In the narrowest sense, that’s true. But strategically—and ethically—it’s wrong. The cost of serving the wrong person once, whether through liability, reputational damage, or harm to people involved, far exceeds the cumulative revenue from dozens of refused transactions. More importantly, employees who feel trusted perform better and stay longer. Turnover in this industry is brutal. Anything that improves retention pays for itself many times over.

What I’ve learned is that distributed authority produces better outcomes than centralized control—but only if the authority is real. You can’t give people nominal power while quietly signaling that you’ll question their decisions later. Autonomy has to be unconditional, or it doesn’t work.

My team doesn’t need my permission to refuse service because they aren’t extensions of my judgment. They’re independent operators with authority that is genuinely theirs, not borrowed.

And that makes us better at what we do.

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

As I navigated the complex and ever-evolving world of hemp retail, I realized that success isn’t about square footage; it’s about strategy, efficiency, and building meaningful relationships with customers. Our “Little Green Kiosk” model was born out of necessity and curiosity. What if we could create a retail experience that was both intimate and engaging, one that would allow us to connect with customers on a deeper level?

The Birth of a New Retail Paradigm

Our kiosks are designed to be efficient and streamlined, with a focus on showcasing our products in a unique and compelling way. We’re not just selling hemp; we’re curating an experience. Every detail, from the layout of our displays to the scent of our products, is carefully considered to create an immersive experience that draws customers in and keeps them coming back.

One of the biggest advantages of our kiosk model is the lower overhead costs. With a smaller footprint, we save on rent, utilities, and staffing costs. This allows us to invest in high-quality products, employee training, and customer experience. In an industry where profit margins can be thin, every dollar counts. By keeping our costs low, we can maintain healthy profit margins and invest in the business.

The Power of High Foot Traffic

Our kiosks are strategically located in high-traffic areas of Waikiki, ensuring that we get maximum visibility and foot traffic. This is especially important in the hemp industry, where word-of-mouth and in-person experiences are crucial. By being in the right location, we can reach a large and diverse customer base, from tourists to locals.

I’ve seen firsthand how our kiosks can stop people in their tracks. A customer will be walking down the street, and they’ll catch a glimpse of our bright green branding or the enticing aroma of our products. Suddenly, they’re curious, and they’re drawn in. It’s like a mini-experience, right on the street.

Agility in Action

Small kiosks are inherently more agile than large storefronts. We can quickly adjust our product offerings, pricing, and promotions in response to changing market conditions. This flexibility allows us to stay ahead of the competition and adapt to the rapidly evolving hemp industry. Whether it’s a new product launch or a limited-time promotion, we can pivot quickly and make changes on the fly.

This agility has been particularly valuable in the hemp industry, where regulations and consumer preferences are constantly changing. By being nimble and responsive, we can stay ahead of the curve and capitalize on emerging trends.

Curating a Product Line that Delights

Although with limited space compared to traditional storefronts, we actually offer a much larger selection than virtually all other retailers in the state. Every inch of space is optimized, and we’ve managed to bring in brands that were never available in Hawai‘i before—names like Jeeter, Cookies, Litto, and other major California heavyweights that customers once had to travel or order online to find.

That mix of exclusivity and accessibility gives our kiosks the feeling of discovery. Our customers appreciate that we take the time to understand their preferences while constantly refreshing the lineup to keep things exciting. We’re not just transactional; we’re relational—and that’s why they keep coming back.

The Human Touch

One of the most rewarding aspects of our kiosk model is the human connection we make with our customers. We’re not just a faceless corporation; we’re a small, local business that genuinely cares. Our team is made up of locals with real island character—each with their own eccentric charm that reflects the community we serve. Beyond business, we actively give back through beach cleanups, native tree plantings, healing blind people, and collaborations with other local entrepreneurs. Supporting Hawai‘i’s small business ecosystem isn’t just a slogan for us—it’s part of who we are. We take the time to listen, to recommend, and to connect, and that authenticity is what transforms a quick sale into a lasting relationship.

The Future of Hemp Retail

As the hemp industry continues to evolve, I’m confident that our kiosk model will remain a winning strategy. We’re not just building a business; we’re building a brand and a lifestyle. And with our kiosk advantage, we’re well-positioned to succeed in the years to come.

In conclusion, our kiosk model has been a game-changer for our business. By embracing small retail, we’ve created a lean, agile, and customer-focused business that thrives in a competitive market. If you’re looking for a unique and effective way to retail hemp, I highly recommend giving the kiosk model a try. It might just be the best decision you ever make.

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

People think running a hemp business is about botany or legal loopholes. They’re wrong. It’s about retail fundamentals, and I learned them not in a boardroom, but on the front lines of Waikiki. Operating four small kiosks taught me more about business than any MBA ever could.

The single best decision I made was choosing four small footprints over one large store. Conventional wisdom said to build a destination dispensary. But tourists don’t plan hemp purchases; they make them on impulse. A single store can only capture one stream of foot traffic, while four strategic kiosks intercept customers throughout their day in multiple streams across different locations. The math of rent is equally compelling—four small locations cost less in total than one prime storefront, while diversifying my risk. If one spot has a slow day, the others compensate.

Success in tourist retail means becoming a student of human movement. I learned to read the rhythms of Waikiki: the morning rush to the beach, the exploratory late-morning wanderers, the evening crowds heading to dinner. I didn’t just look for the busiest streets; I looked for the decision points—where paths converge and tourists pause, deciding what to do next. That moment of hesitation is where a sale is won.

Building a team in Hawaii’s impossible labor market meant rethinking hiring. I stopped prioritizing hemp expertise and started hiring for attitude—genuine friendliness, reliability, and what I call “situational awareness.” You can teach someone about cannabinoids in a week; you can’t teach them to be punctual or perceptive. To keep them, I pay above market rate, treat scheduling with religious seriousness, and acknowledge that my employees have complex lives in a state with a punishing cost of living.

Our customer relationships are built in three-minute transactions. In that brief window, every second counts. We greet with immediate warmth, listen before we prescribe, and translate industry jargon into plain language. We empower customers to make their own choices rather than pushing products. This isn’t just customer service; it’s building trust in an industry where many customers are nervous. Our clean, professional kiosks and transparent policies reinforce that we have nothing to hide.

The mental challenge of operating in regulatory limbo is constant. I’ve learned to compartmentalize—to be fully present with customers and staff without letting the underlying anxiety show. I celebrate small wins explicitly to counter the weight of uncertainty, and I focus my energy on what I can control: how we treat people, how we manage inventory, and the quality of our service.

These lessons transcend hemp. They are about the universal fundamentals of retail: location must match your model, hire for character and train for skill, and trust is the ultimate competitive advantage. Cleanliness, staff presentation, and how you handle a complaint might seem like small details, but they compound into the single biggest factor in whether a business thrives or fails. No matter what happens with regulations, the capabilities forged in this pressure cooker are mine forever. And that is something no one can take away from me.

Lance Alyas
Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

That number has never changed. Not once. Not in the entire recorded history of cannabis and hemp in the United States has a single person died of a cannabinoid overdose. Not an adult. Not a teenager. Not a child. Zero fatalities. The number is not disputed. It is not a talking point. It is a medical and toxicological fact that no serious researcher anywhere on earth has successfully challenged.

Now let me give you the numbers that Anne Lopez, Kenneth Fink, and the rest of Hawai’i’s regulatory apparatus would prefer you never read in the same sentence as their names.

The Numbers They Bury

The CDC reported that last year alone, 4,000 Americans under 21 died from alcohol poisoning. Not accidents. Not drunk driving. The substance itself killed them. Here in Hawai’i, the Prevention Resource Center documented 600 alcohol-related deaths in a single year. Twelve were under 21. Twelve children dead from a substance sold at every grocery store, every resort minibar, every gas station within walking distance of every school on every island in this state.

I say this not as a statistic. I say it as someone who lost a family member to alcohol. I know what that grief does to a family. God bless everyone carrying that weight. I carry some of it myself.

But I also know exactly what a smokescreen looks like. And I know who is paid to generate it.

Follow the Money

When Anne Lopez mobilizes her office against federally compliant hemp retailers, ask yourself who benefits. When Kenneth Fink advances regulations designed to eliminate every hemp operator in this state, ask yourself who drafted them and whose attorneys were in the room. When legislators invoke the safety of children to justify criminalizing a product that has killed precisely nobody, ask yourself who is funding their campaigns and hosting their fundraisers.

The answer is not complicated. Hawai’i’s licensed medical cannabis dispensaries paid millions for state-protected monopoly licenses designed from inception to prevent competition. Eight licenses. The entire state. A closed market maintained by legislative capture so brazen it would embarrass a first-year political science student. When that wall is threatened by small, federally compliant hemp operators, these businesses do not compete or innovate. They make phone calls. They write checks. And then, with remarkable efficiency, the Attorney General and the Department of Health discover an urgent public health crisis that nobody noticed until it started costing the monopoly market share.

That is not governance. That is a protection racket with a state seal on the letterhead.

“Protecting the Children”

When officials invoke child safety to justify this campaign, they are not making a public health argument. A public health argument requires data. And the data does not support a single element of their position. Cannabis and hemp have killed zero people. Zero children. Zero adults. The number has never moved.

Meanwhile the substance they license and sell in every tourist corridor on this island killed 600 people in Hawai’i in a single year. Twelve were under 21. And no narcotics division ran undercover operations into Waikīkī bars. No Attorney General held a press conference about the epidemic killing children with the product that generates hundreds of millions in tax revenue and employs the donors.

Instead they came for the hemp kiosks. The businesses with zero documented overdose deaths in the entire history of the product’s existence.

If Attorney General Anne Lopez or Department of Health Director Kenneth Fink can produce a single peer-reviewed study, a single coroner’s report, a single documented fatality attributable to hemp — I will adjust my position accordingly and issue a public apology to them!

That offer stands. It has never been accepted, though, and surely won’t ever be because they can’t produce a document that does not exist. They can’t point to a crisis that does not exist. What exists is a monopoly losing money and officials paid to protect it.

What Actually Protects Children

Real child protection looks like mandatory consumer education, child-resistant packaging enforced uniformly, a properly funded poison control infrastructure, and honest science-based labeling. That framework I support without reservation. That conversation I will have with any lawmaker or parent in this state who wants to have it with the actual numbers on the table and the lobbyist checks disclosed.

What I will never accept is criminalizing businesses that the data has never implicated in a single death, while the actual killing continues at 600 per year and nobody on Beretania Street loses a moment of sleep.

Zero is still zero.

The only question left is whether the people running this state are too corrupt to say it out loud — or simply too compromised to care!

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions

360.

Not degrees. Deaths. That’s right, 360 deaths. That is how many people died of drug overdoses in Hawai’i in 2024.

Three hundred and sixty people on these islands in a single year — a 43% increase since 2021. Methamphetamine killed 275 of them. A 50% single-year surge. Eleven people under 21 died of drug overdoses in 2023, most of them killed not by meth but by counterfeit prescription pills pressed with fentanyl — fake Xanax, fake Adderall, fake Percocet — that look identical to legitimate medication and can be lethal in a single dose.

Cannabis and hemp? Zero. Z. E. R. O. The number has never moved.

The Crisis That Doesn’t Fit the Narrative

When state officials invoke public health as justification for their enforcement priorities, those words carry an implicit promise — that the machinery of government is aimed at actual threats, in proportion to actual harm. That the resources follow the bodies.

In Hawai’i in 2024, the bodies were with methamphetamine. Two hundred and seventy-five of them. A 50% single-year surge that should have triggered emergency sessions, crisis funding, and full mobilization of every public health dollar in this state.

Instead, Kenneth Fink’s Department of Health advanced regulations targeting hemp retailers. Anne Lopez’s office pursued enforcement actions against businesses selling a product with a death count of zero. The legislature found urgency to close the hemp loophole while the meth loophole — the one that swallowed 275 people last year — remains wide open.

This is not a resource allocation question. It is a values question. And the values on display are not the ones these officials campaign on!

The Children They Should Actually Be Protecting

Every parent in this state should understand what is actually threatening their child. It is not a hemp kiosk. It is a counterfeit pill that looks exactly like a legitimate prescription, costs less than a movie ticket, and can stop a heart before anyone reaches a phone. That is the emergency. That is where the press conferences should be.

The fact that they aren’t tells you everything about what is actually driving enforcement priorities in this state!

What Zero Means

Zero does not mean hemp is without risk or that no regulation is warranted. But it does unequivocally mean that in the entire documented history of cannabis and hemp in the United States, no coroner has ever listed either as a cause of death. Not once. Meanwhile Hawai’i’s drug-related emergency department visits increased 36% between 2021 and 2023. Pediatric and adolescent admissions rose sharply, driven almost entirely by synthetic opioid exposure. NOT ONE of those cases involved hemp!

Real child protection looks like aggressive interdiction of the fentanyl supply chain pressing counterfeit pills into teenage social networks. It looks like treatment infrastructure that can absorb a 36% surge without turning people away. It looks like a Department of Health that wakes up every morning with meth and fentanyl at the top of its list and doesn’t move on until those numbers stop climbing.

That is the conversation I will have with any official in this state willing to have it honestly, with the actual mortality data on the table.

Zero is still zero. Three hundred and sixty is not.

The difference between those two numbers is where the priorities of this state should live.

Right now, they don’t!

Lance Alyas

Oahu Dispensary and Provisions