The Windy City of Chicago Wants to Ban Hemp to “Protect Kids.”
The Windy City of Chicago Wants to Ban Hemp to “Protect Kids.” Funny, Because the Only People I’ve Actually Caught Marketing to Kids Were Licensed Cannabis Companies.
By F’nAround Media
Let’s get something straight up front:
The only reason this whole “hemp and kids” thing even started here with us, the FOIAs, the investigations, the watchdog work into it is because I literally caught licensed cannabis companies interacting with children at a public event.
Branded tents.
Kids handling the packaging.
Freebies.
Photo ops.
It wasn’t hemp.
It wasn’t gas-station gummies.
It was state-licensed cannabis companies doing TikTok-friendly outreach at a family event.
I sent the photos in.
I filed the FOIAs.
And guess what happened?
IDFPR opened active investigations into them for marketing and advertising to minors. Read our articles on it.
So imagine my shock when Chicago suddenly turns around and says:
“We must ban hemp to protect the children!”
Really?
Because the kids I saw weren’t crowding around hemp gummies.
They were hanging out with your licensed cannabis brands.
Fast-forward to today.
I filed a FOIA months ago asking for records on hemp vs. cannabis messaging around minors because of those cannabis companies.
And what came back?
Not hemp data.
Not safety memos.
Not anything about kids.
Instead, I received 70+ pages of blacked-out emails about:
• Cannabis enforcement
• Cannabis rulemaking
• Cannabis policy memos
• “Medical cannabis funds”
• Governor’s Office strategy meetings
• Multi-agency edits
• Budget office coordination
Everything except hemp and kids.
And the funniest part?
Why do “hemp protection” emails have subject lines about cannabis money?
Did hemp bounce a check?
Did a gummy open a shell company?
How did we go from “protect the kids” to “attach revised cannabis funds memo”?
It’s like ordering a salad and getting a stack of IRS audits from a BBQ joint.
Chicago’s official story:
“We’re banning hemp to protect minors.”
The real story:
The only people actually caught marketing directly to kids were licensed cannabis companies.
And now the FOIA trail is packed with cannabis strategy, cannabis money, cannabis rulemaking, while hemp somehow gets blamed for everything.
So explain this to me like I’m five:
If hemp is the danger…
why is almost every single page of evidence about cannabis money?
Why did the FOIA response look like someone spilled ink across a political strategy meeting?
Why does the ban match the talking points but not the facts?
Chicago can’t claim this is about “saving the children” when the only documented child exposure came from licensed cannabis companies at their own event the same companies that benefit financially from banning hemp.
And now that contradiction is out in the open.
So before the City Council rushes to ban hemp, maybe they should answer one simple, hilarious, unavoidable question:
Who’s really being protected here the kids, or the cannabis companies?
The redacted attachment is entry 299 in the timeline.
