"Legal Mavericks Unleashed: The Texas Cannabis Revolution" Susan Burns, a cannabis lawyer, interviews Andrea Steel, an attorney with Frost Brown Todd from Texas. Andrea is recognized as one of the premier attorneys in the cannabis space, having worked on landmark cases. Andrea shares her journey into cannabis law, starting her practice just as Texas was launching its program. Intrigued by the legal nuances of state-level cannabis legalization violating federal law, she was also driven by personal experiences, having overcome adversities as an at-risk youth and believing in the medicinal benefits of cannabis.
"Legal Mavericks Unleashed: The Texas Cannabis Revolution"
Susan Burns, a cannabis lawyer, interviews Andrea Steel, an attorney with Frost Brown Todd from Texas. Andrea is recognized as one of the premier attorneys in the cannabis space, having worked on landmark cases. Andrea shares her journey into cannabis law, starting her practice just as Texas was launching its program. Intrigued by the legal nuances of state-level cannabis legalization violating federal law, she was also driven by personal experiences, having overcome adversities as an at-risk youth and believing in the medicinal benefits of cannabis.
Andrea discusses her transition into cannabis law, including the pivotal moment when she informed her former firm about launching a cannabis practice. She became the leader of the cannabis group, emphasizing the importance of not asking for permission, especially as a woman in a conservative industry.
The conversation then delves into Andrea's experiences with hemp law, particularly in Texas. Andrea sheds light on a significant case involving Delta-8 THC, a compound found in hemp, and the legal challenges faced. The discussion touches on the intricacies of hemp regulations, the definition of hemp, and the impact of federal and state rules on the industry.
The podcast episode provides valuable insights into the evolving landscape of cannabis law, the challenges faced by attorneys in this field, and the intersection of legal, regulatory, and personal perspectives. Andrea's passion for the industry and her commitment to advocating for fair and clear regulations shine through in the conversation.
https://frostbrowntodd.com/people/andrea-hope-j-steel/
Susan (00:01.088)
host Susan Burns as a cannabis lawyer by profession. Nothing delights me more than showcasing bodacious women in cannabis. Today I'm super excited we're talking with Andrea Steele and Andrea is an attorney with Frost Brown Todd hailing from the great state of Texas. And what's
is really piquing my interest in talking with Andrea is she is one of the, in my opinion, one of the premier attorneys in the cannabis space and has worked on some, some landmark cases. And so welcome Andrea.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (00:44.494)
Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here. Thank you for inviting me, Susan. And I love this podcast and what you do with it. And I appreciate the invitation. So thank you.
Susan (00:52.856)
No, you're so welcome. So Andrea, you're a lawyer and you're in Texas. And how did you start being a cannabis lawyer? I know you're a well-known cannabis lawyer. So how did you start in the cannabis industry?
Andrea Steel, Esq. (01:10.598)
Thank you. So I kind of work backwards. I launched my practice about five years ago, right when the farm bill passed and Texas was launching its program. And I had been thinking about launching a cannabis practice for about four years prior to that. What happened was when Colorado and Washington legalized, I just became very, very intrigued with this whole idea that a state could completely violate federal law and it was allowed. But like it wasn't allowed, but it was allowed.
That just intrigued me to no end. I didn't know that was possible, that it was something that could be done, and then more states started doing it. And then like medical was spreading and then adult use was spreading. And I just, I knew that there was a big thing happening and it was really interesting from a legal perspective, just because of the legal nuances. So that was the legal aspect of it. But prior to that in my former, my formative years, I was an at-risk youth and I got into a lot of trouble as a teenager and...
suffered from a lot of adversities that I was able to get through. And so my understanding of cannabis really is that it is medicinal and that there are beneficial uses for it for consumers and that it really can help with issues like PTSD and trauma, anxiety, those kinds of things. And so I just think that I have a personal connection with the plant and then my legal practice just like went out the...
I don't know how, as soon as I realized this could be a practice area and I could do it, and then I started looking around to see who else in Texas did it, and there was hardly any. At that time, it was just Lisa, just Lisa Pittman. And so, you know, I met with her. There's a whole, it was a long drawn out process. Before I actually launched my practice, I spent some time studying so that when I announced, so to speak, that I was a cannabis lawyer, I actually.
had some background and knowledge and experience of what I was talking about. I didn't want to just say, oh, I do this and I had no clue. So I spent a good amount of time studying before I even announced to anybody. And then, yeah, yeah. But I wanna tell the story real quick about it because the firm that I work with, I used to work for 12 years where I launched the cannabis practice and I was the leader of the cannabis group at that firm and there was about 20 attorneys in my group.
Susan (03:09.068)
Good for you. Unlike some, unlike some in our profession, right? But, but it's interesting. Go ahead.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (03:28.074)
When I, by history, my legal practice is affordable housing development. I represent developers that build multifamily housing, um, using like low income housing, tax credits and other governmental subsidies. So I do a lot of debt and equity negotiations, whatever. But, um, when I realized that this was a practice area that I could get into, and I started to get into it. Um, I was, uh, I think I was an associate at the time. So I don't know if I was like, yeah, I think I'm still an associate maybe. Um, maybe not, but I walked into my boss's office.
And I didn't ask permission. I said, I'm launching a cannabis practice and this is what I'm doing and this is why I'm doing it. And I just wanna make sure that there's no issues with it. And I was actually prepared to kind of walk away if they were gonna tell me no. And I didn't, I thought they were gonna tell me no, but they came back a week later, they said, you're the head of the cannabis group now, go do what you wanna do. And so that really just kind of unleashed me and what I really, yeah, it was great. And
Susan (04:21.888)
That's great. We have that support.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (04:26.806)
But the whole, you know, don't ask permission thing, as a woman especially, was a big thing for me. It was a big thing.
Susan (04:34.772)
It is a huge thing. So what inspired you? I mean, where did you get the guts or the chutzpah to do that, to approach it that way?
Andrea Steel, Esq. (04:42.078)
It took time. It took time, time and planning. So I mean, I had a whole list of bullet points written out before I walked into his office. I had already like I had a website already up that just wasn't linked to us. I think it's the firm website. You know, there was I just I had things planning out and I just knew that if I didn't take the step, you know, one step, you don't go, you have to you have to take the step. Whatever it is, you have to put one in front of the other and go. And I knew.
that if I didn't hurry up, I felt like I was going to miss the window of opportunity. That's clearly not the case. It's still happening and still will be for some time. But at that time, I just felt like I couldn't waste any more time. And Texas was about to open up its medical applications and the compassionate use program. So I knew that was happening. And it was that time. It was time for that.
Susan (05:33.132)
Good for you. Well, I'm happy you did it. And I'm happy they supported you. Well, because it's interesting. And a couple of things you said as a lawyer, to me, I've been in practice for 40 years. This is the most fascinating area of the law ever. I mean, it is so complicated. And as you said, just the fact that
Andrea Steel, Esq. (05:37.695)
Yeah, me too.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (05:53.43)
Yeah. And it's really complicated.
Susan (06:00.768)
The federal government has one set of laws and then the states can say, Oh, well, here's what we're doing. You know.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (06:07.85)
And then, yeah, and every state has its own package and then its own patchwork and then you enter hemp into it. And so not only do we have, it's so convoluted and complicated, but it's fascinating. So we have federal illegality of marijuana, above 0.3% Delta-9 THC, but federal legality of hemp. And some of these products really are very similar to one another and have very similar.
I know effects on the user to sometimes. So, you know, seeing that and then seeing it kind of reverse and how the medical and adult use market in marijuana, that's trajectory for that, and then kind of watching it come backwards from hemp where you start with federal legalization and you start to rein in where with marijuana, it was like, you start to loosen up. So this convergence of the two of them is fascinating.
Susan (06:56.612)
It is fascinating. It's kind of mind boggling too. So talk to us, Andrea, about what you just mentioned. And that is hemp being federally legal, marijuana being federally illegal, states expanding the legality of adult use marijuana, or as they like to call it cannabis, which hemp is cannabis. But anyway, the adult states expanding adult use, but at the same time
hemp, which is lower in its THC component. So putting more restrictions on hemp, which is less psychoactive in theory, depending. But in terms of dosages that are permitted and things like that. So talk to us about that. And I also want to hear about you.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (07:41.814)
In theory.
Susan (07:53.252)
In Texas, in the beginning, you were involved in a case that was cutting edge in the hemp space. So just talk to us a little bit about all that. I know it's a lot. Just start with something and pull a thread. Let's go.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (08:10.818)
about kind of like the hemp evolution, so to speak, from when I entered the industry. I know there was absolutely history before 2018, but one of the interesting things, because I didn't come from the marijuana side when hemp was legalized, I came from like a fresh set of eyes seeing solely what the law was for hemp. So I actually started studying cannabis, but because Texas legalized hemp, my practice began in hemp. But again, like you said, it's all cannabis, so there's a lot of similarities. But...
Susan (08:13.953)
Okay.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (08:41.342)
When Hemp came about and I was able to get into that practice, I just had fresh eyes, like I said. So I'm reading the actual laws and the rules, every word of them as they're coming out. So as they're being, you know, the farm bill, I read that, you know, from the beginning of the section of the Hemp to the end, and then that last part at the bottom with the control substance act. And then the rules that came out, the interim rules, the proposed rules in Texas, the final rules from the USDA, and just reading all of that.
And Delta-8 started to kind of increase in its interest, right? Consumers started to become more interested in Delta-8. And there's a lot of questions. Is this legal? Is this not legal? And this was probably in early 2020. And in August, I think, of 2020, the DEA dropped that interim final rule that made this mention that all synthetic THC is illegal no matter what the percentage is, right? And so that line in there kind of
quickly made a lot of people in the hemp industry believe that was the DEA saying that hemp was illegal if there was like, if the Delta 8 was illegal because they claimed that it was synthetic or they alleged that Delta 8 was synthetic. And my view on that from the beginning was, you know, multiple, number one, Delta 8 is not synthetic because it comes from the cannabis plant. And when you talk about synthetics, at least with how the DEA has handled synthetics in the past with opioids, they have synthetics which don't originate from a plant.
They have the semi-synthetics which originate from the plant and then are converted or somehow, you know, converted into medicine and then the natural ones which just are extracted. And so seeing that, and I also, I didn't mention before I became an attorney, I was a probation and parole officer in both Washington, DC and then when I moved to Texas down here in Harris County. And so as, you know, in the law enforcement side and the correction side, and that's my background educationally was criminal justice. I,
I'm very familiar with the war on drugs and how the drug schedules have kind of come about and how things have shifted. So I remember in 2012, and that time when spice and K2 were really popular. And so I remember when that happened, and I remember when it unhappened, not unhappened, but I remember when it became really big and then the analog act came, and not the analog act came, but they started using the analog act to apply it to these true synthetic cannabinoids that don't originate from a plant. So this
Susan (10:58.232)
But talk, break down the analog act, because I don't think a lot of people know about the analog act.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (11:04.018)
Okay, so, and I'm just doing off the cuff because I don't have anything in front of me with like the language, but essentially the analog act is like any substance that is structurally similar or greater, is similar in structure and has similar or greater effects in like on the body, pharmacokinetic effects and, but anyway, if it's like, if it's the same as a schedule one or a schedule two drug, then it will be treated as a schedule one drug.
And so the analog act is a doozy. I mean, because it's so vague and unclear and you don't know what is substantially similar. What, you know, how do I know that? And if it looks substantially similar in the molecular structure, does that mean it's substantially similar in the pharmacokinetic effects? Like there's just a lot that goes with it. And the analog act is just a mess. I'm actually reading a really good book right now about it. And I totally recommend it for anybody that's interested in the analog act. It's called Bizarro. Let me find the guy's name because it is fascinating book. And he talks about,
Analog act and how the DEA applied it during the 2012 and those years of like the logjam Bus when all of those synthetic cannabinoids started to really become illegal and he started getting out of the convenience stores in the Smoke shops and people were being charged and prosecuted and convicted under so anyways, this book is called bizarro and it is by
Susan (12:25.472)
B-I-Z-A-R-R-O.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (12:28.7)
Yes.
Jordan Rubin, Jordan Rubin, and it's called Bizarro. It's fascinating. So anyways, when, so I was kind of putting all of these things together, you know, Delta A, I don't think it is synthetic under the way that the DEA has, you know, has characterized synthetic drugs. And then I, you know, reading through what the DEA said, they said, we're not making any changes. We are simply conforming to what the farm bill, you know, basically mandated us to do.
Susan (12:35.049)
The Sorrow by Jordan Rubin.
Susan (12:48.728)
That's it.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (13:01.974)
modifying our schedules only to be basically aligned with the law because they were out of line. Their rules didn't match the federal law, so they had to modify them to match them. Then when they did that, like I said, there was a whole thing in the industry like, oh, Delta Aids illegal, Delta Aids illegal. I didn't think it was. I remember just diving into this and spending so much time reading and looking up cases and researching.
And at the time, Lisa and I worked together and I was texting Lisa all weekend. I was like, I don't think this is right. I think that it's legal. I think, and she was like, I was like, I want to write about it. Go ahead, do it. So I wrote an article and she edited and revised and worked on it together. And that article came out and it almost went viral. It's probably one of the best. I think that article got more attention on my firm's website than even the homepage. Like it was wild. It got spread everywhere because it was in a.
Susan (13:36.126)
Oh.
Susan (13:53.976)
Good for you.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (13:55.358)
It was an attorney perspective and most of the attorneys were being very conservative and saying, no, this is, it's not in the spirit of the law. And I'm like, the spirit of the law doesn't come into play unless the language is unclear. The language is very clear here. It is very clear. And it's so clear that it had to have been contemplated because you point 3% they pick a number, they specify which can have annoying and they make it clear that all the other ones are not, you know, included in this. And.
I don't think it really has anything to do with spirit of the law because Congress has had what five years now, they haven't changed it. So if it was that big of a concern, then I think things would have happened like with the synthetic cannabinoids that were causing people to actually write because those synthetic cannabinoids were causing deaths, they were causing psychosis, they were causing people to be violently assaulted against other people. And those cannabinoids are not like the ones in a plant. Those cannabinoids, the synthetic ones, they're not.
Susan (14:38.22)
It would have happened fast. Yeah.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (14:52.514)
they bind like much more readily to your CB receptors, where cannabis kind of like fits, some different strains might hit it a little different ways or whatever, but the synthetic cannabinoids bind a lot tighter and so their effects are much more potent, much more dangerous than cannabis. Then if you think about the 250 page document that just came out last week from HHS about potentially rescheduling, and they talk about how the harm from cannabis
especially compared to other things that are legal or that are scheduled at a lower scheduling, the harm is not there like it is with those other things. And so, and there is medicinal purposes and benefits from it. And so, to hear all these things just kind of coming together, I'm jumping all over the place because there's just so much happening in the cannabis world right now.
Susan (15:28.952)
Thank you.
Susan (15:43.809)
Well, it's hard to stay in one lane here because there is a lot that comes into, and people just go, well, is hemp legal or is this legal? And it's like, well, you know.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (15:55.89)
Right. And that's what a lot of my clients, the questions were, is this legal? Can I do this? How do I do this? Like, and so, you know, going through all of those things, but when that, when that rule drops in the interim, the DEA, the interim final rule, um, I still continue to take the position that this was in line and compliant with the law, um, as it was written. And all of a sudden, actually in response to that DEA rule. So I'm going to get into the Texas lawsuit now.
In response to that DEA interim final rule, Texas objected to making those changes in its schedule of controlled substances. And the law in Texas is that if the federal government changes its schedule, Texas will follow suit automatically within 30 days to match the federal schedule unless the state objects or the executive director, the health department here, objects. And he did.
Susan (16:45.26)
And is there a basis for them to be able to object or can they just object because it's a great cloudy day or?
Andrea Steel, Esq. (16:55.43)
I don't have the statute right in front of me, so I don't remember specifically what it says, but they had reasoning. But their reasoning said that they didn't want to make the changes that the rule said because they felt that there were other cannabinoids that shouldn't be exempted. And the Department of State Health Services in Texas, their position was that
Susan (16:58.296)
Mm-hmm.
Susan (17:02.668)
Okay.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (17:22.53)
they can not change their schedules and therefore Delta 8 and any other substance above, any substance that was not Delta 9 below, at or below 0.3% was illegal, which kind of flipped the definition on its head because the definition of hemp under federal law is anything that's not 0.3%, you know, 0.3% Delta 9 is legal, over that is legal, as long as it's not the Delta 9. But in Texas, they kind of reversed it by a rule that they didn't,
anybody didn't publish it. So right. So they rejected, they objected to the DEA's changes. So then no changes made, but then they later published a set of a schedule of controlled substances that had changes to the definitions of, um, tetrahedric and epinol and marijuana extract. And those changes were never published for, um, comment and review, you know, notes in the comment period for the public that never happened. It just was a change to the rules. And so that was the basis of the lawsuit in Texas.
Susan (17:54.068)
Oh, no rulemaking.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (18:20.998)
And when we, what happened was like several months later, I think the DEA rule dropped in August and then, I think it was October of the following year, October of 2021, is that right? It might be. That, it may have been actually October of 2020 now that I think about it. But on the website, on the state's, you know, Department of Health website, they just put up this notice that all Delta Aids is illegal.
no matter what, no matter how much was in it. And that just on its face doesn't, it's not possible because hemp naturally contains, it's gonna naturally contain some small amount, right? Because from my understanding, it's just like it naturally degrades into Delta A. That's the thing that happens naturally in the plant. So then that effectively made, the way they changed the rule effectively made all hemp illegal because it's going to contain, the plant is naturally going to contain.
Susan (18:58.576)
that contains Delta-Ade.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (19:18.834)
other THC's and other cannabinoids besides Delta 9. So we sued at the time, I still do have a client, Hometown Hero, and they were, you know, in our distributing, hemp and hemp throughout cannabinoids throughout the country. And so they wanted to sue. And, you know, I had been representing them for years at that point and still called them, hey, what can we do? And we got on it. And it was, I really do believe it's a very, very strong case because it's,
It's just government process. They did not follow the process. And I, you know, so of course I'm on the case. I'm a little biased about it. And I feel like it's really strong, but I do like things.
Susan (19:57.62)
I'm not on the case and I've read this. I've read the pleadings and the opinions and I think you're right. I'm in your camp.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (20:05.93)
I wrote those things. So, good welcome. A good welcome, but yeah, so that lawsuit really, like being Texas and being such a big state, you know, in comparison, like California, cannabis is legal in California, cannabis is being legalized in New York, but cannabis is nowhere close to getting adult use in Texas. We have a very, very restrictive medical program. So for us in the state of Texas, a very, very conservative state, too, we got an injunction, that lawsuit got an injunction.
Susan (20:07.376)
No.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (20:34.394)
We got an injunction against the state of Texas. They cannot enforce that rule. And so now, you know, we follow the federal definition of how.
Susan (20:39.788)
Well, just so for people that aren't that are listening, that aren't involved heavily in the legal process, what that means is because of the legal intervention, um, my Andrea's client, the, the court said to the state, you can enforce this rule. So they, they couldn't do what they were trying to do.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (20:57.998)
correct.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (21:01.754)
Mm-hmm. And that the state appealed and we went on the appeal. They, I think, appealed. There was a lot of back and forth because as soon as they, as soon as they appeal, it automatically stays the injunction. It's too technically complicated to kind of like talk it out on the web on the podcast. But it was a lot of back and forth early on. But then we secured the injunction and it was it was in there for a while. It's still a temporary injunction, but we haven't gone to trial. And so.
We had an appellate hearing just a couple months ago and the oral arguments for the appellate hearing, we won at the appellate court and then the state again is appealed. And so they're appealing to the Supreme Court and it's, you know, we'll see what happens. But again, this is an issue that is not about cannabis, it's about process. And so if you don't enforce process in this instance,
you know, you open up a really slippery slope for when, when do you also not have to enforce process and what if it's a, what if it's a, a rule or something that, you know, I'm just going to be a generally presumption right here, but conservatives often are less enthusiastic about cannabis. So what if we had a rule that was really supported by conservatives and then they can't really, you know, they have to roll if it goes through notice and comment, you know, you want to set precedent like that. So I think that
We do have a strong case, but we will see how it plays out. But being Texas, that had a huge impact on the rest of the country because Texas is so conservative and it's such a big state. And so because it has that type of a position in the country and in the world, a lot of eyes are on that case. And then after that, several other cases have been challenged, another case in most of the states.
Susan (22:26.405)
We will see. Yeah.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (22:49.982)
except until recently, but many of the states were winning. There's a couple of lawsuits they haven't won in various states. Yeah, so.
Susan (22:57.132)
But I would say the majority of instances, at least based on my review, the majority of instances in which state legislation is enacted to restrict hemp unconstitutionally, unreasonably, I would say that the hemp industry is, is winning.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (23:18.022)
Oh, absolutely. I mean, the hemp industry has been winning. And I mean, like not just on the legal perspective, but in the market. And it has upset a lot of people on the on the marijuana side of care, on the marijuana side of cannabis, because, you know, if you think about it. On the marijuana side of cannabis, they've been spending a long time trying to get this legal through, you know, whatever means necessary and have acquiesced to very, very restrictive, unreasonable regulations and really high taxes that make it like a very unfair.
It's really profitable, but only for some people. And for most people, it is not. And.
Susan (23:53.344)
For a big business, you have to have scale. In what I've seen, I'm not an economist, but it looks to me like you have to have scale. And a lot of businesses are failing because they don't have.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (23:56.112)
Right.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (24:03.031)
Right.
Mm-hmm. So the hemp side, because of the federal legality, and now we have these court cases and these challenges to keep it legal if it meets the definition, there's a lot of people on the marijuana side that initially were trashing the hemp industry and now are starting to move over into it because they realize that it allows them to get their market share back.
Rather than trying to fight the mark and in the hemp space, you don't have those super high taxes You don't have those ridiculous regulations now. There is some balance that needs to be struck at some point just strictly for consumer safety but You know, I just at some point especially with this potential rescheduling I think all of these things are going to converge and we will have one cannabis industry But how that when that happens and how long it takes to become stabilized is gonna be you know, anybody's guess
Susan (25:05.208)
We have.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (25:05.638)
But I do see it happening at one point, yeah.
Susan (25:08.204)
That would be nice if everybody could hold hands and clean kumbaya at some point, you know?
Andrea Steel, Esq. (25:14.442)
I think it depends. People have different reasons for being in the industry. And if you're in the industry for money, the only thing you wanna do is make sure you protect that money and protect those assets and continue to grow it. And so that's what those companies are doing. And those companies are partnering up with anti-marijuana companies to come against the hemp industry instead of hemp and marijuana coming together and pushing back against the ridiculous regulations. So at some point it's all gonna give
farm bill, which is supposed to be a 2023 farm bill. It's potentially 2024, maybe 2025, right? So it's a status quo for now. And again, it's another fascinating piece of cannabis history. And just watching it's like, to be a part of this as it's happening is just really amazing.
Susan (25:52.155)
Yeah.
Susan (26:06.068)
It's fun to be have a front row seat and to be on stage sometimes.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (26:11.985)
Yeah, but I always, you can tell I get excited about this. I'm talking about it. When I talk like this to people who aren't in the cannabis industry, their eyes like glaze over and they're just like, I don't, what is she talking about? Why is she talking about this so much?
Susan (26:24.119)
Yeah, I'm glad she's happy. What's she on? Speaking of the, well, it also, to me, the industry is so fascinating because always a new issue pops up. Like lately it's the hemp flower issue. Have you been involved in that?
Andrea Steel, Esq. (26:30.379)
but
Andrea Steel, Esq. (26:41.798)
Oh, THCA flower. Oh yeah. THCA flower. I'm not gonna say everything I think about it on this public webcast, but.
Susan (26:46.633)
What's your take on that? And where do you think that goes?
Andrea Steel, Esq. (26:58.098)
I really appreciate the creativity of the people in the hemp industry, and I value the progress that it is forcing on the cannabis industry. And so I think that all of the negatives about Delta-8 and other hemp-derived cannabinoids and hemp-derived Delta-9, the frustration about it is often spoken in a way that's misplaced, right?
Oh, this is horrible. This is bad for you. But really, it's rooted in consumer safety. And if you fix the consumer safety issues, then I think you have a much better chance of camaraderie across the industry. And. You know, it's going to take time, but it'll get there at some point, I believe. But yeah.
Susan (27:53.424)
always something and I'm with you. The creativity is the other part of about this area practice that intrigues me is the creativity of the clients. So and so the resilience and creativity is amazing to me. It's just a pleasure to work with them. Yeah.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (27:54.919)
always something. Oh!
Andrea Steel, Esq. (28:02.603)
Mm-hmm. I love, yes!
Andrea Steel, Esq. (28:09.242)
I love it too. I get called by a client and they present a plan to me and they're like, can I do this? And I look at it and I'm like, okay, I think we can do this. Let's move something around here. Let's change something about this. But yeah, I think we can. And it's enjoyable. It's a fun practice that's very challenging. Sometimes it's really exhausting, especially trying to keep up with all the laws because they are constantly changing in all of the states. It is hard to keep up with everything, but it's so.
Susan (28:31.31)
It is.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (28:38.066)
It's so interesting. I think it's, yeah, I have some passion about it if you can't tell. But yeah.
Susan (28:40.701)
Yeah.
Susan (28:46.306)
Well, and Andrea, I'll go ahead. Did you want to say something?
Andrea Steel, Esq. (28:50.398)
I realized I didn't finish the THCA flour. So I just, I think it's fascinating that THCA flour is out here in the market in states where marijuana is illegal, in states where medical marijuana is illegal. And that is allowing people to get access. And I think that access and that normalization, especially the cannabis and beverages or hemp derived cannabis beverages, which I think is really big up there in Minnesota where you are. So...
or one of the places where you're licensing, but that's going to help normalize and reduce the stigma by having it out there for the mass public to be able to consume if they choose to. What we really need to push is more education because a lot of people don't know what they're taking, what's in these products, how they impact you. And I think the biggest issue again, with like the hemorrhagic cannabinoids and ones that may have the ability to cause the consumer to be impaired, if the...
consumer doesn't know that that's going to happen, that's where the problem comes in. Like nobody wants to surprise God high and they don't like being high or, you know, impaired in some aspect or have something happening in their body that they weren't expecting. And it's even more serious when it happens with a child. Right? And so I get the need or the desire to have a public safety regulatory scheme with respect to anything that a person consumes.
Susan (30:05.249)
Yes.
Susan (30:15.458)
Yes.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (30:15.874)
And we've got issues in this country with all kinds of things that we're allowed to consume that are horrible for our health but are on grocery store shelves, so You know, it's just very interesting to think about how cannabis is treated and how it's viewed and how that is shifting how it's shifted over the years how it continues to shift so uh, I Still didn't answer your question about THC a flower
Susan (30:36.544)
Yeah. In Minnesota, but in Minnesota, that the hemp derived, uh, in fused beverages became ubiquitous. I mean, they were in grocery stores everywhere. I mean, the co-ops everywhere. Now it's they, now that the marijuana industry is, it's legalized and now, so now there's more restrictions on hemp, which is interesting. It's a whole nother story. It's not the podcast about me and my views on Minnesota love. But I mean, it's
Andrea Steel, Esq. (30:50.294)
That's...
Andrea Steel, Esq. (30:58.126)
and I'll see you next time.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (31:02.946)
There you go. Ha ha ha.
Susan (31:05.16)
It is ubiquitous and it does normalize it. And also with that, people can become more educated because it's not this hush-hush thing, that's kept behind the, in the closet. So I think there's a lot of good happening as you've pointed out. So in the legal profession, there's a saying in Latin and it's racis eloquitor, which is this thing speaks for itself. I think listeners,
Andrea Steel, Esq. (31:15.884)
Right.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (31:24.8)
I think so too.
Susan (31:34.464)
can distinguish and determine what your bodaciousness is. But what do you think about that? What is your most bodacious thing? The aspect about you that's bodacious.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (31:40.15)
Hehehehe
Andrea Steel, Esq. (31:49.07)
I think it's a combination of my personality, my personal experiences in trauma and history as a teenager, my criminal justice and law enforcement and corrections background and my legal background and my passion for the plant. When you combine all of those things together, I feel like when I'm working with my clients, I'm like, we're a team and I wanna see them succeed and I wanna do whatever I can to help them reach their goals. And because I feel like that about my clients and the things that they're doing,
I keep my ear to the ground. If things are happening that I can impact them, I reach out and like, hey, this is going on. I think you need to pay attention. And that's something I think is the extra mile what I've seen with other attorneys who just kind of wait, but I want my clients to be prepared. So I try to keep in touch with them and be on their team. You can find me on email, asteel at fbt.com. That's A-S-T-E-E-L.
Susan (32:35.852)
And where can people find you?
Andrea Steel, Esq. (32:48.69)
F as in frost B as in brown T as in Todd calm you can also Reach me on LinkedIn Andrea steel and my cell phone number is two eight one seven five Three eight five zero and I work with cannabis hemp and marijuana clients all over the country and I'm based in Houston, Texas
Susan (33:08.791)
There you have it. Thank you so much, Andrea.
Andrea Steel, Esq. (33:11.938)
Thank you so much, Susan, for having me. This is great, I appreciate you.
Susan (33:15.297)
been a pleasure.