David Hua

David Hua Author Profile

David Hua, founder of Meadow cannabis POS, weighs in on wWhat it's like to judge the Emerald Cup cannabis vape carts category

What it's like to Judge the Emerald Cup cannabis vape carts

By [David Hua, CEO & Co-Founder of Meadow](https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidhua/ "David Hua, CEO & Co-Founder of Meadow")

In the early spring of 2021, I was given the honor of helping judge [The Emerald Cup](https://theemeraldcup.com), which is Northern California's destination for cannabis, and the largest cannabis competition in the world. This event has become a sought-after annual celebration that honors the finest sungrown cannabis harvests of California. Shoutout to the farmers; The Golden State is truly home to the best cannabis in the world.

The COVID-19 pandemic forced the 2021 cup to become a digital event with safety protocols that were unlike previous years — we were not able to gather in person to smoke and sample all of the products — but I was honored to be a part of the historic gathering (even if it meant we were gathering on Zoom and tasting our own, sanitized supply of products — there would be no communal *puff, puff, pass* this year).

**I received my Emerald Cup judges kit for the 2021 vape cartridges category in early February, which included six CO2 cartridges, 17 distillate cartridges, and 44 live resin cartridges—I had a total of 67 vape cartridges to score.** My team consisted of 7 other vape cart judges, all fellow cannabis entrepreneurs, advocates and operators:

- Eliza Maroney, Co-Founder, Lucky Box Club
- Amit 'Bamboo' Vachher-Gnanathurai, Nursery & Plant Breeding Manager, Posibl Project
- Arian Roman, CEO/Founder, Alysida Health, KushQueen, MyCanna
- Del Potter, Chief Science Officer, Leef Labs/Aya Biosciences
- El Rock, NorCal Territory Executive, Phinest Cannabis
- Etienne Fontan, Vice President and Co-Owner of Berkeley Patients Group
- Nicole Powell, Head of Procurement

We each had our work cut out for us. Each judge was asked to submit our top 3 favorite products for the CO2 and Distillate category, and the top 10 for Live Resin since there were so many. Our combined scores would then be added up and analyzed to find the collective winners for this year's Emerald Cup.

<callout align="left">
### __What's the difference between a cannabis cartridge containing C02, Distillate and Live Resin?__

In short: These are the three most common extraction techniques that cannabis manufacturers use to extract cannabis oil.

__C02: __ 
Extracted from dried and cured plants using cooled CO2; often, food-grade terpenes or terpenes derived from cannabis are added back into the oil to create flavored pens.

__Distillate:__
Similar to CO2 extraction, just with more refinement and processing, using pressure, steam and heat to separate components through distillation. Color is often light yellow to golden honey colored. Sometimes terpenes are added to create a thinner product (easier to vape).

__Live Resin:__
After harvest, cannabis plants are flash frozen and kept in subcritical temperatures throughout the extraction process, preserving their flavorful profiles, cannabinoids and natural terpenes. Includes concentrates, budders, waxes.

</callout> 

Scoring for The Emerald Cup is based on a number of factors: we were to give each product a number based on the experience, oil appearance, onset, vaporization, effect, and "uniqueness" which encompassed things like packaging, hardware and any other standout features.

I had my scoring spreadsheet ready to fill in for each product; it was time to create a strategy for how I was going to make my way through the pile of cannabis packages. I had just a little over a month to judge the category, which meant I needed to be tasting and judging a least 2 carts a day; I knew I wanted to have time at the end of the month to compare notes and re-taste standout products.

![Emerald Cup 2021 vape cartridges judging](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/2zlaqCkyZtCf6qZ3oLQaNw/8ecaf2f730cad9f7d028b7841712c0a1/4.png)

Before starting the judging, I completed a 30-day cannabis detox, something I do every year to clean out my endocannabinoid system. (Fun fact: most of the time people call me "Hua," my last name, but it's a joke around the office that I become "David" when I go that long without weed. I become another person; cannabis helps me be calm and patient and I am less of both of those things when I'm fully sober).

Eager to get cannabis back into my body, I dumped all of the products on a big table in the backyard of Meadow HQ. At first glance, I saw several brands I recognized: Alien Labs, Flow Kana, Jetty, Raw Garden, Heavy Hitters, Legion of Bloom, Chemistry, and Beezle. There were also some new brands in the mix that I was excited to get to know. I compared the physical inventory on hand with my spreadsheet of products; I added dates on the spreadsheet next to the products I would taste each day throughout the coming month, and organized the physical inventory of products into C02, distillate, and live resin piles to make it easy to grab a new pen for each tasting session. I was to start with the C02 pens and taste them all in a row, then move to distillate, and wrap up with live resin, so that I could compare the pens to the others in their category before moving on to the next type of product.

For the next five weeks, I tried to sample each vape cartridge on it's own (most days I tasted one cart each morning and one each afternoon); I wanted to be able to judge how each concentrate affected me, both the onset of the high and how long the experience lasted, which required giving each product its own time and space to linger and the experience to unfold. As I began to taste different products, I began to get a better sense of the subtle differences between each cart—some of the distillates overdid it with syrupy fruit flavors that covered up the actual taste of cannabis; some live resins were so terpy, I sneezed as if I'd just stuck my nose in a field of spring flowers. I liked to see the variance in color—some were golden yellow syrups while others were like thick brown molasses. The [Bloomfield vape carts](https://thebloomfieldco.com/ "Bloomfield vape carts") (both Notorious THC Live Terpene and Sauce Distillate Cartridge and Pineapple Muffin Live Terpene and Sauce Distillate Cartridge) got extra points in my 'uniqueness' category for listing the full cannabinoid content on the packaging; I'd like to see more concentrates brands give consumers this kind of fuller picture of what's actually inside to help them understand more about the subtle nuances of the plant. We should encourage consumers to think about more than just the THC content.

It was challenging to pick the winners; I've never experienced so many different vape pens in my life, and the subtle (and sometimes bold) differences between all of them was impressive. The experience left me with a deeper respect for the farmers, the manufacturers, the hardware makers, the lab testers, and all of the other hands that go into crafting these clean, high quality cannabis products. At the end of the judging window, I added up the numbers in each category, triple checked my math, tasted and retasted products, and confirmed my scores.

The products that I personally gave the highest scores and was most excited about were the Blue River Chocolate Orange Jelly Sauce Cartridge from fresh baked x Blue River, and the Arcata Fire Live resin Runtz cape from ArcataX x Great Expectations Farm x Lightwork Distributors. I was glad to see they each took first place in their respective categories; the other judges clearly had good taste! 

[Blue River Chocolate Orange Jelly Sauce Cartridge](https://www.blueriverterps.com/products/blue-river-jellysauce-cart "Blue River Chocolate Orange Jelly Sauce Cartridge") (2021 Winner of The Emerald Cup [Cartridges, Distillate](https://theemeraldcup.com/2021-award-winners?_sft_contest_categories=cartridges-distillate "Cartridges, Distillate") Category)

- fresh baked x Blue River

- Category: Cartridges, Distillate

- Origin: Los Angeles County

My tasting notes: The orange chocolate flavor combination is solid and smooth; it tastes   rich and luxe, not like some of the other overly pungent fruity flavors. It would make a great dessert smoke. I also liked the "Draw Indicator" feature on the custom battery to help control the size of the hit (great for those morning tasting sessions before conference calls). 

**ARCATA FIRE LIVE RESIN VAPE – RUNTZ** (2021 Winner of The Emerald Cup [Cartridges, Live Resin](https://theemeraldcup.com/2021-award-winners?_sft_contest_categories=cartridges-live-resin "Cartridges, Live Resin") Category)

- [ArcataX](https://arcatax.com/ "ArcataX") x Great Expectations Farm x   Lightwork Distributors

- Category: Cartridges, Live Resin

- Origin: Humboldt County

My tasting notes: In addition to having a great taste, oil appearance,   taste, effect and experience, this product got bonus points from me in the uniqueness category for the following reasons:

- They use a ceramic (not plastic) cartridge made by [AVD](https://avd710.com/ "AVD710.com") which helped with flavor and temperature control. In addition to being a better experience for the consumer, in general I like to see the industry move away from single-use plastic and find ways to create more sustainable products.

- Local [SunGrown Packaging](https://www.sungrownpackaging.com/ "SunGrown Packaging"), made in Oakland. I like to see California cannabis companies supporting other homegrown California businesses.

I actually liked the Arcata House of Extracts carts so much that I reached out to [ArcataX on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/arcatax/ "Arcata House of Extracts Instagram: @arcatax"); they said [Sonoma Patient's Group](https://www.sonomapatientgroup.com/ "Sonoma Patient's Group website") was the closest dispensary to me that carried their products.  I used their online menu to place an order for several different types of their cartridges, and picked it up several days later. When something is this good, it's worth the 60-minute drive from San Francisco to Santa Rosa, and you want to have extras to share with fellow cannaisseurs.

![Arcata Fire House of Extracts](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/6hPhlvz4Jzx6abnDraHUK3/6f6295b097fc9e733c071814c60c1166/what_it-s_like_to_judge_the_emerald_cup.png)

I loved learning more about the different types of extractions and having this opportunity to taste California's best cannabis oils, and find new things to enjoy and share with my community. 

Below are the top 3 winners in each category; view the full list of the 2021 award winners at [The Emerald Cup website](https://theemeraldcup.com/2021-award-winners "The Emerald Cup website").

![Emerald Cup Top 3 Distillate Cartridges](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/7Byz5z5ooFUuRPYLkylkMr/2c6fd2d181c500d62c4ab58f94a352cb/3.png)

![Emerald Cup Top 3 Co2 Cartridges](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/7uEO2gUbDPwzQkGfzm7oZn/cc1c35f45f16911990eb896f6e9ce6b8/2.png)

![2021 Emerald Cup Top 3 Live Resin Cartridges](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/3i3vN7H6mPI09W6g8u8UHx/f1043191ac36e615264a9bb99358aa22/1.png)

__Below is the full top 10 winners for the Live Resin cartridges:__

1st place: ARCATA FIRE LIVE RESIN VAPE – RUNTZ, ArcataX x Great Expectations Farm x Lightwork Distributors

2nd place: URSA LIQUID DIAMOND SAUCE CARTRIDGE “TAR HILL PINK LEMONADE”
URSA EXTRACTS, Bear Extraction House x Tar Hill Cannabis

3rd place: URSA NOVA BLUEBERRY MUFFIN CARTRIDGE, URSA Extracts

4th place: BANANA CREME – SOLVENTLESS VAPE, Jetty Extracts

5th place: KRYPTOCHRONIC – LIVE RESIN PEN, Alien Labs

6th place: LEMONATTI – LIVE RESIN PEN, Connected Cannabis

7th place: URSA EXTRACTS LEMON SUPER GLUE LIQUID DIAMOND SAUCE, URSA Extracts

8th place: ALIEN MINTS – LIVE RESIN PEN, Alien Labs

9th place: COLLINS AVE – PINK ROZAY 0.5G CARTRIDGE, ArcataX x 1L Garden Supply

10th place: CRESCO X FLORACAL MENTHOLOTTI – LIQUID LIVE RESIN, SLO Cultivation Inc. dba Cresco Labs x Floracal Farms

---

Shout out to the Taylor, Vicki, Tim; The Emerald Cup team worked so hard to organize everything remotely, safely delivering judges kits and making sure this historic event continued, despite the chaos of a global pandemic. It was a bright spot in my COVID quarantine and I'm grateful for the opportunity to participate and get to know more brands and products in our California cannabis community.

__>> Learn more about Meadow's role in other [cannabis events](https://getmeadow.com/community-and-events "cannabis events") in California__

Go inside the experience of judging this historic cannabis cup 

What's It Like to Judge The Emerald Cup Contest

Aria Biswas

A smiling white woman with long, flowing blonde hair wearing a sleeveless gray top.

History of cannabis criminalization in US

The Cannabis 411 is a joint venture between Meadow and [The Cannabis Conservancy](https://cannabisconservancy.com/ "The Cannabis Conservancy"). The series aims to take an in-depth look at issues surrounding Cannabis criminalization, commerce, cultivation, and consumption.

### Overview
From the California Poison Amendment to the formation of the DEA, in the past 110 years a lot has changed in how Cannabis is criminalized and regulated in the United States. This issue of the Cannabis 411 focuses on the legal bodies and decisions that have moved the U.S. down the road of Cannabis Criminalization during the 20th and 21st centuries. There is a special focus on California, as the state has been a trailblazer for Cannabis. Though California was the first Western state to criminalize Cannabis, the state also attempted decriminalization decades before the rest of the country, and has pioneered the way for compassionate care. In order to write a document and not a book, this issue does not touch on every single law, nor does it delve into the many implications surrounding these laws. 

### Criminalization
The 20th century, particularly the first half, saw a sea change in government's involvement in the products that people consumed. As the nascent industry took shape, Cannabis and other drugs were shuffled between acts and amendments by a variety of state and federal bureaus. After decades of shakedown, the U.S. Government placed Cannabis in the strictest possible federal category. Nearly 50 years later, that is where it remains. Many states, including California, continue to craft new Cannabis laws that are a better fit for their health, safety, and economy. At present, any and all state laws that give any freedoms related to Cannabis are in violation of Federal law.

<figure>
 ![E.W. Kemble's "Death's Laboratory" 1906](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/4Y2RNF7Na9iBQlcAVSKvds/597ba8ab6def5db0e94c8b64b66a1c5c/Pure_Food_and_Drug_Act_1906.png)
  <figcaption>Source: E.W. Kemble's "Death's Laboratory" 1906</figcaption>
</figure>

### The Pure Food and Drug Act - 1906
In 1906, the U.S. passed the Pure Food and Drug Act. In part a reaction to "The Jungle", Upton Sinclair's expose on the Chicago Meat Industry, as well as the fraudulent yet flourishing patent medicine industry, the Pure Food and Drug Act made labeling of all food and drugs mandatory for the first time.

Furthermore, the act mandated that any product containing one of 11 potentially habit-forming drugs must include the amount of that substance on the label. These drugs were acetanilide, alcohol, alpha or beta eucaine, cannabis indica, chloral hydrate, chloroform, cocaine, heroin, morphine, and opium.

According to Thomas Szasz, author of "Our Right to Drugs", the phrasing of the law tells us the government more or less accepted the existence of a market in drugs, including cannabis, cocaine, heroin, and morphine.[1]

### The California Poison Act Amendment - 1913
In 1913, the California State Board of Pharmacy added "loco-weed" to the state's Poison Act, effectively banning its sale. Many sources claim this was a legislative error.[2]

### The Harrison Act - 1914
The Harrison Act levied a tax on anyone involved in the creation or movement of narcotics (specifically opium or coca products). The act originally excluded doctors, and did not explicitly include Cannabis; however, it is noteworthy for a few reasons. It is the first example of this sort of federal taxation, and paved the way for future prohibition, and it is an example of how frequently drugs were incorrectly classified in U.S. law. The Act was first enforced by the Treasury Department's Bureau of Internal Revenue.[3]

### The California Poison Act Amendment - 1915
In 1915, California expanded on its Poison Act Amendment, banning non-prescription sale of "flowering tops and leaves, extracts, tinctures and other narcotic preparations of hemp or loco week (Cannabis sativa), Indian hemp".[4]

### Eighteenth Amendment - 1919
The Eighteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution banned the production and distribution (though not consumption) of alcohol; it went into effect the following year.[5]

### Narcotic Division - 1921
The Narcotic Division was formalized in the Federal Bureau of Internal Revenue in 1921. It is one of the earliest predecessors to the DEA.[6]
Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Tax - 1922
The aptly named Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Tax banned the import and export of narcotics in the U.S. Like the Harrison Act, it only mentioned Opium and Coca, but was used as a stepping stone for further Cannabis prohibition down the line. It led to the creation of the Federal Narcotics Control Board.[7]

### California penalties increase - 1925–1929
As anti-narcotics sentiment hardened in California in the 1920s, so did penalties. Illegal sale, which had initially been a misdemeanor punishable by a $100-$400 fine and/or 50–180 days in jail for first offenders, became punishable by 6 months to 6 years in 1925. Possession, which had previously been treated the same as sales, became punishable by up to 6 years in prison. In 1927, the law against opium dens was finally extended to Indian hemp, as originally envisioned in the 1880 Walker bill. In 1929, second offenses for possession became punishable by sentences of 6 months - 10 years"[8]

### Federal Bureau of Narcotics - 1930
Established in 1930, the Bureau of Narcotics was a merger of the Narcotics Division (1921) and the Federal Narcotics Control Board (1922). The Bureau was headed by Harry Anslinger, who played a key role in the U.S.'s increasingly stricter drug laws.[9] Mr. Anslinger has a troubled legacy. He is positively credited with dismantling many violent gangs throughout the country, and for running a successful government bureau on a shoestring budget during the Great Depression.[10]

However, Mr. Anslinger viewed Cannabis as the same, if not worse than, heroin, and would frequently give statements about cases of violence and insanity purportedly caused by Cannabis. With the inclusion of these embellished and apocryphal examples, Mr. Anslinger's testimony often reads like the script of a racist and misogynistic propaganda film - and a poorly written one at that. Unfortunately, his lies about Cannabis are one of the longest lasting parts of his legacy.[11]

<figure>
 ![War on Dope Harry Anslinger](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/6dLH2IVRV3fVUXuLlELf4b/38a04c8c83e44eb7b7496c6dbb9eaf9d/War_on_Dope.png)
  <figcaption>Source: Green Flower Media</figcaption>
</figure>

### The Uniform State Narcotic Act - 1932
The Uniform State Narcotic Act expanded on the Harrison Act to impose greater fines on those in violation of drug laws. Another aim of this act was to encourage states to pass further legislation against drugs; California had already done so with its Poison Act Amendment.[12]

### Twenty-first Amendment - 1933
The Twenty-First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution repealed the Eighteenth Amendment, thus ending the country's prohibition of alcohol.[13]

### Reefer Madness Released - 1936
The propaganda film Reefer Madness was first released in 1936; it may be best understood by watching the trailer.[14]

### The Marihuana Tax Act - 1937
While the basis of the Marihuana Tax Act was to simply tax the legal sale of Cannabis, the Act's provisions were so expensive and extensive that it effectively rendered all Cannabis and its derivative products beyond the reach of any average citizen.[15]

<figure>
![Marihuana Tax Act of 1937](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/1CwKvEhn9PXEp5MJSMVeRo/73b2c40435e0b0eb7608ab7473df9478/Marijuana_Tax_Act_of_1937.png)
  <figcaption>Source: U.S. Customs and Border Patrol</figcaption>
</figure>

### Boggs Act - 1951
The Boggs Act imposed more serious sentences for drug convictions, including large fines and mandatory minimum sentences for first convictions.[16]

### Narcotic Control Act - 1956
The Narcotic Control Act further expanded the fines and mandatory minimum sentences of the Boggs Act.[17]

### Federal Bureau of Drug Abuse Control - 1965
The Bureau, a DEA predecessor, was part of the Food and Drug Administration.[18]

### Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs - 1968
Part of the Department of Justice, the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs was a merger of the Bureau of Narcotics and the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control.[19]

### Leary v. United States - 1969
In 1965, Dr. Timothy Leary was arrested for possession of Cannabis in Texas under the Marihuana Tax Act. He appealed this sentence, stating that the Act violated his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination; his case, Leary v. United States, reached the Supreme Court. In 1969, Leary won his case, as the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously deemed the Marihuana Tax Act unconstitutional. Dr. Leary's name may be familiar from his work with other psychotropics, particularly the Harvard Psilocybin Study.[20] [21]

Also in 1969, Leary ran for Governor of California against the incumbent Ronald Reagan. John Lennon penned "Come Together" for Leary's campaign.[22] Source: Docuhistorias

### Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act - 1970
The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act (CDAPCA) was enacted in 1970 "to amend the Public Health Service Act and other laws to provide increased research into, and prevention of, drug abuse and drug dependence; to provide for treatment and rehabilitation of drug abusers and drug dependent persons; and to strengthen existing law enforcement authority in the field of drug abuse."[23]

Title II of the CDAPCA is known as the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Up until this point, most drugs were lumped into one or more categories without much thought. It is the CSA which first separated drugs into different categories - or Schedules - based on their alleged danger vs. potential for beneficial medical use.

Cannabis was placed in Schedule I of V. According to the original law, the findings required for Schedule I are:

A. "The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

B. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

C. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision."

Cannabis is listed on Schedule I both by name ("Marihuana") and chemical compound ("Tetrahydrocannabinols"). Up until this point, Cannabis was generally lumped in with opium and coca-derived products; however, according to this new scheduling, these drugs were allowed in the Schedule II category.[24]

Of the 11 potentially dangerous drugs listed in the Pure Food and Drug Act back in 1906, only Heroin and Cannabis were deemed as Schedule I. The rest of those drugs either had some form that was listed in a less severe schedule (including cocaine, opium, and morphine), or they were not on the list at all. It is worth noting that the Attorney General has the power to increase or reduce the Schedule of a drug as new information comes to light.

### Drug Enforcement Administration - 1973
Created through an Executive Order by President Nixon, the DEA replaced the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. Nixon wanted to "establish a single unified command to combat 'an all-out global war on the drug menace.'"[25]

### Comprehensive Crime Control Act - 1984
The Comprehensive Crime Control Act was a wide sweeping piece of legislation that included a steep increase in fines for a variety of quantities of Cannabis.[26]

### U.S. v. Oakland Cannabis Buyer's Club - 2001
In 1998, the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, an organization formed to safely provide medical cannabis to very ill patients, was sued by the U.S. government; in effect, this suit claimed that Proposition 215, which had legalized medical Cannabis two years earlier, was in violation of the CDAPCA. The U.S. won this case, claiming that "There is no medical necessity exception to the Controlled Substances Act's prohibitions on manufacturing and distributing marijuana."[27]

### Gonzales v. Raich - 2005
This case was brought to the Supreme Court by a medical patient in California who had their Cannabis seized by the DEA. The outcome of the case asserted that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution - which states the U.S. has power "to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes" - allows the federal government to continue to criminalize Cannabis, even when patients are following the proper state laws of medical consumption.[28]

### Conclusion
The criminalization of drugs in the U.S. - specifically Cannabis - has been a meandering quest for public safety, fraught with misinformation and ingrained prejudices. It is perhaps best summed up with this quote below by Alexander Pope:

<callout>"A little learning is a dangerous thing; 
 drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: 
 there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, 
 and drinking largely sobers us again."</callout>

__Works Cited__

[1] Szasz, Thomas. Our Right to Drugs: The Case for a Free Market. Syracuse, 1996.

[2] Gieringer, Dale H. The Origins of Cannabis Prohibition in California. http://canorml.org/background/Origins_MJ_Proh_2012.pdf (24 October 2016)

[3] National Archives. Records of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Record Group 170: 1915–45, 1969–80. https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/170.html (24 October 2016).

[4] Gieringer, Dale H. The Origins of Cannabis Prohibition in California. http://canorml.org/background/Origins_MJ_Proh_2012.pdf (24 October 2016)

[5] Congress.gov. Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpreted. https://www.congress.gov/constitution-annotated/ (24 October 2016).

[6] National Archives. Records of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Record Group 170: 1915–45, 1969–80. https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/170.html (24 October 2016).

[7] Sixty-Seventh Congress of the United States. Session II. Chapters 201–201. 1922. http://legisworks.org/congress/67/publaw-227.pdf

[8] Gieringer, Dale H. The Origins of Cannabis Prohibition in California. http://canorml.org/background/Origins_MJ_Proh_2012.pdf (24 October 2016)

[9] National Archives. Records of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Record Group 170: 1915–45, 1969–80. https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/170.html (24 October 2016).

[10]Fearns, Sean. Transcript of "Standing in the Shadows: the Legacy of Harry J. Anslinger". DEA Lecture Series. October 15, 2014. https://www.deamuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/101514-DEAMuseum-LecturesSeries-StandingintheShadows-transcript.pdf (25 October 2016).

[11] Statement of Harry J. Anslinger, Commissioner of Narcotics, Bureau of Narcotics, Department of the Treasury. 1936. http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/anslng1.htm (25 October 2016).

[12] Bonnie, Richard J., and Charles H. Whitebread, II. The Forbidden Fruit and the Tree of Knowledge: an Inquiry into the Legal History of American Marijuana Prohibition. Virgina Law Review 56.6: 971–1203 (1970). https://www.votehemp.com/PDF/The_Forbidden_Fruit_and_The_Tree_of_Knowledge.pdf (24 October 2016)

[13] Congress.gov. Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpreted. https://www.congress.gov/constitution-annotated/ (24 October 2016).

[14] IMDb. Reefer Madness. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0028346/ (24 October 2016)

[15] Solomon, David. The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937. Schaffer Library of Drug Policy. http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/mjtaxact.htm (24 October 2016)

[16] Rothwell, Virgina L. Boggs Act. Encyclopedia of Drug Policy. http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/drugpolicy/n42.xml (24 October 2016)

[17] Cameron, Jennifer M., and Ronna J. Dillinger. Narcotic Control Act. Encyclopedia of Drug Policy. http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/drugpolicy/n238.xml (24 October 2016)

[18] National Archives. Records of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Record Group 170: 1915–45, 1969–80. https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/170.html (24 October 2016).

[19] National Archives. Records of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Record Group 170: 1915–45, 1969–80. https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/170.html (24 October 2016).

[20] ACLU. Leary v. United States. ACLU Pros & Cons. http://aclu.procon.org/view.background-resource.php?resourceID=003427 (24 October 2016).

[21] Sigel, Efrem. Psilocybin, Senate Race Highlight Harvard Year. The Harvard Crimson. July 9, 1963. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1963/7/9/psilocybin-senate-race-highlight-harvard-year/ (24 October 2016)

[22] The Beatles Bible. Come Together. https://www.beatlesbible.com/songs/come-together/ (25 October 2016)

[23] Public Law 91–513. The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. October 27, 1970. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-84/pdf/STATUTE-84-Pg1236.pdf (24 October 2016)

[24] Public Law 91–513. The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. October 27, 1970. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-84/pdf/STATUTE-84-Pg1236.pdf (24 October 2016)

[25] Drug Enforcement Administration. DEA History. https://www.dea.gov/about/history.shtml (24 October 2016).

[26] Public Law 98–473. Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1894. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-98/pdf/STATUTE-98-Pg1837.pdf (24 October 2016).

[27] United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyer's Cooperative. 2001. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-151.ZS.html (25 October 2016).

[28] Body Politic: The Supreme Court and abortion law. Gonzalez v. Raich. Oyez - IIT Chicago Kent College of Law. https://www.oyez.org/cases/2004/03-1454 (25 October 2016)

History of Cannabis criminalization in America

Read more about the history of cannabis criminalization in the United States from the 1900s until the present

The Cannabis 411: A Brief History of Cannabis Criminalization in the U.S.

cannabis consumption lounge at Northern Nights Tree Lounge

At the Northern Nights music festival, Meadow powered sales in the historic Tree Lounge, a pop-up dispensary and consumption lounge under the trees in the heart of the Emerald Triangle. This outdoor festival weekend was a highlight of summer 2019 for the Meadow team members who were lucky enough to call this "work":

<figure>
<video-player url="https://vimeo.com/514140463"></video-player>
<figcaption>Watch this highlight reel of this unique cannabis lounge and campout music festival experience in Northern California along the Eel River.</figcaption>
</figure>

### The Cannabis Retail Experience
Booths circled the perimeter of the Tree Lounge, which gave customers an opportunity to connect face to face with representatives of the participating brands. This gave festival-goers an opportunity to learn more about the cannabis products by speaking with growers and manufacturers and brand reps.

From their own iPad, rand employees sent orders to the central pop-up dispensary in an onsite barn, powered by San Francisco dispensary, [The Green Door](https://www.greendoorsf.com/ "The Green Door cannabis dispensary"), with support from licensed distributor Filigreen. After customers paid for and received their items at the barn, they could then enjoy them in the outdoor consumption lounge before returning to the multiple music stages or jumping on a floatie on the Eel River.

<figure>
![Buddy Buddy Cannabis](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/63qJ6skaVSrUeuE5bgCs4S/a3e6421ed1288edbb660515879581eeb/Buddy_Buddy_Cannabis.png)
<figcaption>"I've tried at least 4-5 different softwares in the cannabis industry, and this is definitely the most user friendly." - Beka, Buddy Buddy brand rep</figcaption>
</figure>

<callout>Want to be part of our California cannabis events community?
  <a href="#community-email-list">Join Meadow's Community Email List</a></callout>

![Northern Nights music festival](//images.ctfassets.net/6kwu1u6s8j23/2ufnkkseDzFuEc82c6hkNj/1e55e48324c1c0c898929a92765bb6c7/Northern_Nights_music_festival.png)

### Interested in Selling Cannabis Directly From Your Event Booth in California?
Meadow offers compliant point of sale software and iPad or Elo-based hardware packages at licensed California [cannabis events](https://getmeadow.com/community-and-events "cannabis events") across the state. Contact events@getmeadow.com to learn more about our cannabis sales event rentals and our hands-on support.

Northern Nights cannabis consumption lounge

Watch highlights from this unique cannabis lounge and campout music festival experience

Posts tagged “Cannabis Events and Culture”

What's It Like to Judge The Emerald Cup Contest

The Cannabis 411: A Brief History of Cannabis Criminalization in the U.S.

Northern Nights Cannabis Tree Lounge, Powered by Meadow

Product

Company

Social

Support