 |
| Tennessee’s long history of prohibition reveals a pattern of control—from alcohol and tobacco to cannabis—where state power and industry interests shape who wins and who loses. |
The Tennessee Prohibition Playbook: From Alcohol to Tobacco to Cannabis—History Repeating Itself
How Tennessee's Pattern of Control Reveals What's Really Behind Cannabis Policy
- Introduction
- Act I: The Original Prohibition (1838-1933)
- Interlude: The Cigarette Ban (1897-1915)
- Act II: The Modern Tobacco Control Era (1994-Present)
- Act III: The Cannabis Prohibition (1937-Present)
- The Hemp Chapter: Prohibition by Regulation (2018-2026)
- The Winners and Losers: A Historical Pattern
- The Control Mechanism: State Monopoly
- The Racial Dimension: Prohibition as Social Control
- The Economic Reality: Tennessee's Choice
- What History Predicts: The Inevitable Reversal
- The Tennessee Prohibition Playbook: Summary
- Breaking the Pattern
- Conclusion
Introduction
On January 26, 1838, Tennessee became the first state in the United States to pass a prohibition law, making it a misdemeanor to sell alcoholic beverages in taverns and stores. Nearly 188 years later, on January 1, 2026, Tennessee transferred regulatory control of hemp-derived cannabinoid products to the Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission, effectively ending the state's brief experiment with a liberalized hemp market.
Between these two dates lies a consistent pattern: Tennessee doesn't just regulate intoxicating substances—it prohibits, controls, and monetizes them through government-sanctioned monopolies and restrictive frameworks that benefit specific industries while criminalizing consumers and small businesses.
This isn't coincidence. It's a playbook Tennessee has run for nearly two centuries, from alcohol to tobacco to cannabis. Understanding this pattern reveals what's really driving current cannabis policy—and what history suggests will happen next.
Act I: The Original Prohibition (1838-1933)
Tennessee Leads the Nation in Banning Alcohol
When Tennessee passed the nation's first prohibition law in 1838, it wasn't about public health or morality—at least not entirely. The 1838 "Quart Law" came after an 1831 licensing system had caused the number of saloons to increase fivefold in just seven years.
The issue dominated Tennessee politics. As the Tennessee Encyclopedia notes, the question became "dry vs. wet," or prohibition vs. anti-prohibition, a political divide that would shape state politics for over a century.
The justification then sounds familiar now:
- Protecting children and families
- Reducing crime and disorder
- Promoting economic productivity
- Preventing moral decay
A 1837 Joint Committee report to the General Assembly stated:
"Many tippling houses have been fitted up in a style so handsome, as to have become places of fashionable resort... Such a state of things could not have happened, if tippling houses had not been legalized. It is the law which makes these haunts comfortable, alluring, and respectable."
Replace "tippling houses" with "THCa dispensaries" and you could be reading a 2025 Tennessee legislative justification for the hemp crackdown.
The Escalation: From Local to Statewide
Tennessee didn't stop with the 1838 law. Over the next 70 years, prohibition expanded systematically:
- 1887: Four-Mile Law banned alcohol sales within four miles of any school, effectively outlawing sales in rural areas.
- 1909: Two prohibition bills passed (over Governor Patterson's veto):
- Banned sale of liquor within four miles of any school
- Prohibited manufacture of intoxicating beverages statewide
Though "only loosely enforced," the framework was in place.
- 1917: The Bone-Dry Bill banned transportation, possession, or receipt of alcohol—total prohibition.
- 1919: Tennessee ratified the 18th Amendment on January 13, 1919, seven months before national prohibition took effect.
What Actually Happened
The same things that happen with any prohibition:
Unintended Consequences:
- Rise of bootlegging and organized crime
- Widespread corruption of law enforcement
- Selective enforcement targeting marginalized communities
- Economic hardship for legal distillers and farmers
- Creation of dangerous unregulated products
Who Benefited:
- Criminal enterprises controlling the black market
- Corrupt officials taking bribes
- Temperance organizations gaining political power
- Competing industries (soft drinks, other beverages)
Who Lost:
- Legitimate distillers and their employees
- Farmers growing grain for spirits
- Communities dependent on distilling economy
- Consumers forced into black market
- People incarcerated for victimless crimes
The Arrest Data
Nashville arrest records from August 1916 to January 1917—a five-month period—show 5,871 total arrests. Of these, roughly 1,688 (28%) involved either "tippling" or "drunk and disorderly."
Sound familiar? In 2024, Tennessee arrested more than 11,000 people for marijuana possession despite having legal hemp products available. The pattern is identical.
The Slow Reversal
National prohibition ended in 1933 with the 21st Amendment. But Tennessee didn't embrace alcohol freedom.
- Jack Daniel's Distillery didn't reopen until 1940
- Full distillery operations weren't legalized in many counties until 1958
- 41 more counties added in 2009
- Many counties remain dry today
Interlude: The Cigarette Ban (1897-1915)
Tennessee's Forgotten Total Ban
Before national alcohol prohibition, Tennessee banned another substance entirely: cigarettes.
In 1897, Tennessee passed a law making it illegal "for any person, firm, or corporation to sell, offer to sell, or to bring into the state for the purpose of selling, giving away, or otherwise disposing of, any cigarettes, cigarette paper, or substitute for the same."
The Justification:
According to the Tennessee Supreme Court's ruling upholding the ban:
"Cigarettes are 'wholly noxious and deleterious to health.' Their use is 'always harmful.' They possess 'no virtue, but are inherently bad, bad only.'"
The court cited cigarettes' effects on:
- Brain development and function
- Links to alcoholism
- Infant mortality
- Criminal behavior
- Moral degradation
The Pattern Repeats:
When tobacco dealer William B. Austin violated the law and was arrested, he appealed to the Tennessee Supreme Court. The court upheld the ban, finding cigarettes inherently harmful with no redeeming value.
Other states followed Tennessee's lead:
- Iowa banned cigarettes
- Indiana banned cigarettes
- Michigan banned cigarettes containing "any ingredient deleterious to health"
The cigarette prohibition lasted until 1915, when economic and political pressure forced its repeal.
Act II: The Modern Tobacco Control Era (1994-Present)
From Prohibition to Preemption
After repealing cigarette prohibition, Tennessee adopted a different approach: state-level preemption preventing local regulation.
Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1551 declares:
"The general assembly intends by this part and other provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated to occupy and preempt the entire field of legislation concerning the regulation of tobacco products."
"Any law or regulation of tobacco products enacted or promulgated after March 15, 1994, by any agency or political subdivision of the state or any agency thereof is void."
This is regulatory control disguised as freedom. The state doesn't ban tobacco—it just ensures only the state can regulate it, preventing cities and counties from imposing stricter local standards.
The Non-Smoker Protection Act (2007)
By 2007, Tennessee—"long labeled a 'traditional tobacco' state with roots heavily tied to the tobacco industry"—finally passed comprehensive workplace smoking bans.
But notice the pattern: Tennessee moved from total prohibition (cigarette ban) to state preemption (blocking local control) to limited regulation (smoking bans in specific locations).
At each stage, the state maintains maximum control while claiming to serve public health.
The Economic Reality
Tennessee receives over $400 million annually from tobacco settlement payments and tobacco taxes.
How much does Tennessee invest in tobacco prevention and cessation?
- 2019: $0 (0% of CDC recommendations)
- 2021: $0 (0% of CDC recommendations)
- 2023: $2 million (2.6% of CDC recommendations)
Tennessee collects hundreds of millions from tobacco while spending virtually nothing on prevention. The state is financially dependent on tobacco consumption—just as law enforcement became dependent on asset forfeiture from drug prohibition.
Act III: The Cannabis Prohibition (1937-Present)
Federal Prohibition, Tennessee Enforcement
Tennessee didn't originate cannabis prohibition—that was federal, starting with the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act. But Tennessee has enforced it more zealously than most states.
Current Tennessee Cannabis Law:
Marijuana possession in any amount is a Class A misdemeanor:
- Up to 1 year in jail
- Up to $2,500 fine
- Criminal record affecting employment, housing, education
More than half an ounce becomes a felony:
- 1-6 years in prison
- Up to $5,000 fine
2024 Enforcement:
- 11,000+ marijuana possession arrests
- 37% of all drug arrests were for marijuana
- Black Tennesseans arrested at 3.2 times the rate of white residents despite similar usage rates
Tennessee is using the criminal justice system to arrest over 11,000 people annually for a substance that is legal in 38 states for medical use and 24 states for recreational use.
The Hemp Chapter: Prohibition by Regulation (2018-2026)
The Brief Opening (2018-2025)
The 2018 Farm Bill federally legalized hemp, creating a brief window of opportunity. Tennessee's Department of Agriculture initially regulated a growing hemp market including CBD and, controversially, THCa products.
For a few years, Tennessee had something resembling a free market in cannabinoid products. Small businesses flourished. Farmers planted hemp. Consumers had legal access to cannabis alternatives.
It couldn't last.
The Takeover (2025-2026)
House Bill 1376 (2025) transferred hemp regulation from the Department of Agriculture to the Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission, effective January 1, 2026.
The Real Story:
This wasn't about public safety or protecting children. This was about:
- The alcohol wholesaler lobby successfully moving hemp regulation to the TABC
- Mandatory three-tier distribution requiring producers to sell through wholesalers
- $750,000 minimum for wholesaler licenses (ensuring only existing alcohol distributors qualify)
- Elimination of THCa products through new total THC calculations
- TABC budget expansion and new regulatory authority
- Online sales ban reducing competition
- Age-restricted retail locations only (eliminating grocery stores, convenience stores)
As the U.S. Hemp Roundtable noted, Tennessee provided "the alcohol industry a monopoly on beverages containing cannabinoids while cutting opportunities for farmers and small businesses."
The Familiar Pattern
Look at what Tennessee did:
1838 Alcohol: Ban sales → moral panic → temperance movement → total prohibition → controlled reopening → state monopoly on distribution
1897 Cigarettes: Total ban → moral panic → Supreme Court upholds → economic pressure forces repeal → state preemption prevents local control
2026 Hemp: Market emerges → moral panic over THCa → transfer to alcohol regulators → mandatory wholesaler system → de facto prohibition of intoxicating products
The playbook:
- Allow brief period of freedom
- Create or amplify public concern
- Transfer control to state agency with industry ties
- Implement regulations that benefit incumbents
- Eliminate or severely restrict the market
- Maintain state monopoly on what remains
The Winners and Losers: A Historical Pattern
Who Benefits from Tennessee's Prohibition Model?
Then (Alcohol):
- Temperance organizations (political power)
- Competing beverage industries
- Bootleggers and organized crime
- Corrupt officials taking bribes
- Private prisons (later, as prohibition evolved)
Now (Cannabis/Hemp):
- Private prison industry (CoreCivic: $2.7M lobbying, $1M contributions)
- Alcohol wholesalers (secured hemp monopoly)
- TABC (budget expansion, new authority)
- Law enforcement (asset forfeiture: $16M annually)
- Pharmaceutical companies (no cannabis competition)
Who Loses from Tennessee's Prohibition Model?
Then (Alcohol):
- Legitimate distillers and farmers
- Workers in the alcohol industry
- Consumers forced into black market
- Communities dependent on distilling economy
- People incarcerated for victimless crimes
Now (Cannabis/Hemp):
- Hemp farmers (lost market for THCa crops)
- Small cannabinoid businesses (can't afford $750K wholesaler license)
- Consumers (limited access, higher prices, criminal risk)
- Patients who could benefit from medical cannabis
- Communities impacted by disproportionate enforcement
- People incarcerated for possession (11,000+ arrests annually)
The pattern is identical. Prohibition enriches connected industries and government agencies while harming farmers, entrepreneurs, consumers, and marginalized communities.
The Control Mechanism: State Monopoly
Tennessee's Three-Tier Model
Tennessee uses the same regulatory framework for both alcohol and now hemp: the three-tier system.
How it works:
- Tier 1 - Producers: Make the product (distilleries, hemp growers)
- Tier 2 - Wholesalers: Required middlemen who distribute
- Tier 3 - Retailers: Sell to consumers
Why it exists:
- Originally justified as preventing organized crime post-prohibition
- Actually creates government-sanctioned monopolies
- Wholesalers become gatekeepers controlling market access
- Small producers can't reach consumers directly
- Competition is limited by design
Who it benefits:
- Wholesalers who get guaranteed profit margins
- Large producers who can afford to work with wholesalers
- State regulators who control licensing
Who it harms:
- Small producers who lose direct market access
- Consumers who pay higher prices
- Innovation and competition
Tennessee just applied this exact model—created for alcohol after prohibition ended—to hemp products. The alcohol industry didn't just influence hemp regulation; they took it over completely.
The Racial Dimension: Prohibition's Unspoken Constant
A Historical Throughline
Every major prohibition effort in American history has carried a racial or class-based enforcement bias. Tennessee is no exception.
Alcohol Prohibition:
- Enforced most aggressively against immigrants and the poor
- Selective enforcement in urban ethnic neighborhoods
- Wealthier citizens continued drinking privately
- Police discretion used unevenly
Cannabis Prohibition:
- Disproportionate arrests of Black Tennesseans despite similar usage rates
- Urban enforcement prioritized over rural possession
- Higher likelihood of arrest, charges, and sentencing enhancements
- Lasting criminal records for minor possession
This disparity is not accidental. Prohibition laws expand discretionary power, and discretionary power is historically exercised unevenly.
The Numbers Don't Lie
Black Tennesseans are arrested for marijuana possession at nearly three times the rate of white Tennesseans, despite comparable rates of use.
Those arrests carry lifelong consequences:
- Employment barriers
- Housing instability
- Loss of educational opportunities
- Family disruption
- Political disenfranchisement
Meanwhile, neighboring legal states generate tax revenue, fund schools, and expunge past convictions—while Tennessee continues to criminalize.
The Economic Reality: What Tennessee Is Actually Doing
Spending Money to Lose Money
Tennessee spends tens of millions of dollars annually enforcing cannabis prohibition.
This includes:
- Law enforcement time
- Court costs
- Public defender services
- Jail and prison costs
- Probation and parole supervision
At the same time, Tennessee refuses hundreds of millions of dollars in potential revenue from:
- Excise taxes
- Sales taxes
- Licensing fees
- Tourism spillover
- Agricultural development
This is not fiscal conservatism. It is ideological rigidity backed by entrenched interests.
The Border Effect
Tennesseans are already participating in legal cannabis markets—just not in Tennessee.
- Illinois collects taxes from Tennessee residents
- Missouri collects taxes from Tennessee residents
- Virginia is positioning itself to collect taxes from Tennessee residents
The state pays for enforcement while exporting revenue.
This is the economic equivalent of subsidizing your neighbor's business while bankrupting your own.
What History Predicts Happens Next
The Prohibition Cycle
History shows prohibition follows a predictable arc:
- Moral panic drives legislation
- Black markets emerge
- Enforcement costs rise
- Public support erodes
- Economic pressure builds
- Reform becomes inevitable
Alcohol followed this arc. Cigarettes followed this arc. Cannabis will follow this arc.
The only question is how much damage Tennessee will do before accepting reality.
Late Adoption Costs More
States that legalize late face:
- Loss of first-mover advantage
- Out-of-state corporate dominance
- Fewer local operators
- Reduced long-term revenue
- Harder social equity repair
By waiting, Tennessee ensures that when legalization eventually happens, the market will not belong to Tennesseans.
Breaking the Pattern
What a Rational Policy Would Look Like
A rational cannabis policy would:
- Legalize adult-use cannabis
- Regulate through a dedicated cannabis agency
- Allow direct-to-consumer sales
- Support small farmers and local businesses
- Expunge past possession convictions
- Reinvest revenue into communities harmed by prohibition
Instead, Tennessee chose consolidation, control, and criminalization.
The Choice in Front of Tennessee
Tennessee can:
- Repeat its prohibition history yet again
- Or learn from it
Every previous prohibition ended the same way: repeal, regret, and reform.
Cannabis will be no different.
Conclusion: Following the Money
When you follow the money in Tennessee's cannabis prohibition, a clear picture emerges.
This is not about morality. This is not about public safety. This is not about protecting children.
It is about:
- Protecting entrenched industries
- Maintaining regulatory monopolies
- Preserving enforcement budgets
- Controlling market access
Prohibition has never been about stopping consumption.
It has always been about controlling who profits—and who pays.
Tennessee is not unique in this history.
It is simply repeating it.
Sources & Related Reading
- Tennessee Code Annotated – Alcohol & Hemp Regulation
- U.S. Hemp Roundtable Policy Statements
- Tennessee Bureau of Investigation Crime Reports
- ACLU Marijuana Arrest Reports
- CoreCivic Lobbying Disclosures
- National Conference of State Legislatures – Cannabis Policy
This article is part of an ongoing series examining cannabis policy, prohibition economics, and regulatory power structures in Tennessee.
Sources & Related Reading
- Tennessee Code Annotated – Alcohol, Tobacco, Hemp & Cannabis Regulation
- U.S. Hemp Roundtable – Federal & State Hemp Policy Analysis
- Tennessee Bureau of Investigation – Crime & Arrest Reports
- ACLU – Marijuana Arrest Disparity & Enforcement Reports
- FollowTheMoney.org – Political Contributions & Lobbying Disclosures
- National Conference of State Legislatures – Cannabis Policy Overview
This article is part of an ongoing series examining cannabis policy, prohibition economics, and regulatory power structures in Tennessee.
Related Sources & Historical References
- Tennessee Encyclopedia – Prohibition in Tennessee (1838–1933)
- Tennessee Encyclopedia – Liquor Laws and Local Control
- Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1551 – State Preemption of Tobacco Regulation
- Tennessee Bureau of Investigation – Crime & Drug Arrest Statistics
- ACLU – Marijuana Arrest Disparities & Racial Impact Reports
- U.S. Hemp Roundtable – Tennessee Hemp Legislation & Policy Analysis
- National Conference of State Legislatures – Cannabis Legalization Overview
- FollowTheMoney.org – Political Contributions & Industry Influence Tracking
- Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill) – Federal Hemp Legalization
These sources provide historical, legal, and economic context for Tennessee’s recurring approach to prohibition, regulation, and state-controlled markets.
Comments
Post a Comment