Greg Abbott Issues Update on Texas THC Debate: 'Must Act Now'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott has vowed to "act now" to protect the state's children after vetoing legislation that would have banned cannabis-derived tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) products across Texas.
Abbott said Texas does not have time for a "protracted legal fight" that may have arisen from Texas Senate Bill 3 (S.B. 3), which he vetoed on Sunday.
Commenting on his decision, Abbott wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Tuesday: "To be clear, the Arkansas law differs from S.B. 3 in legally consequential ways. Unlike the Texas bill, Arkansas' law did not ban 'any amount' of a cannabinoid, it expressly permitted hemp farming consistent with federal law, and it carved out interstate transportation. Those are three legal concerns I raised about S.B. 3 that do not exist in the Arkansas law.
"Even though the Arkansas law was not plagued with the same legal defects as the Texas bill, it still was unenforced for two years and will be further tied up in court for years to come. I vetoed the Texas bill because we do not have time for a protracted legal fight - we must act now to keep Texas children safe. That process begins next month."
Greg Abbott speaking in the Texas State Capitol in Austin in April.
Greg Abbott speaking in the Texas State Capitol in Austin in April.
Brandon Bell/GETTY
This is a breaking story. More to follow.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Timelapse Shows Destruction in 12 Days of Israel-Iran War
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran brought strikes on multiple cities across both countries, marking an unprecedentedly large direct exchange between the longtime adversaries — in which the United States later joined to attack Iran's nuclear program. A timelapse map of targets struck shows how Israel's initial air attacks and Iran's retaliation with missiles played out. Why It Matters The 12-day war could reshape the Middle East with the killing of a swathe of top Iranian military officers and nuclear scientists as well as heavy damage to key sites of its nuclear program. Meanwhile, Israel sustained hits from Iranian missiles that showed its vulnerability despite is missile defenses. What To Know While both Israel and Iran claimed victory in the war, Iran has sustained heavier damage. On the first day of the attack alone, Israel deployed over 200 fighter jets and launched 330 munitions, the Israeli military said. Iran in total launched over 500 missiles on Israel, with nearly 90 percent of them intercepted, according to a count by the Institute of the Study of War (ISW). On Saturday, seven U.S. B-2 stealth bombers took off from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri and later dropped more than a dozen Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bombs on three Iranian nuclear facilities, in the largest B-2 mission in American history. Iran's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has refuted President Donald Trump's statements that the U.S. strikes on Iran had "completely and totally obliterated" its nuclear sites, saying it "failed in achieving its sinister goals." A preliminary U.S. intelligence assessment cited by American media indicated that the strikes on Iran likely delayed its nuclear program by only a few months. The White House dismissed the reports. What People Are Saying Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, as quoted by Tasnim News Agency: "If the Zionist regime does not violate the ceasefire, Iran will not do so." Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz on X: "I emphasized that Israel will respect the ceasefire — as long as the other side does." U.S. State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce told reporters Tuesday: "With any ceasefire dynamic, it's fragile. And in the meantime, of course, things did come together and there has been quiet in that region." What Happens Next The conflict was halted under a U.S. ceasefire but there is an ever present risk that war could resume if not in the immediate future then when Iran has rebuilt its capabilities.
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
How Young Men Feel About Potential US War With Iran
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. For many young American men, the idea of another war halfway around the globe doesn't spark the kind of clear-cut patriotism it once did. Unlike older generations that rallied around military action, polls show that younger voters are more apprehensive about supporting intervention abroad. A late-May survey by the Young Men Research Project (YMRP), conducted with YouGov among 1,079 American men aged 18 to 29, found a modest plus-12 margin supporting U.S.-backed regime change in Iran (39 percent support vs. 27 percent oppose), while 34 percent remained unsure. Notably, party differences were minimal: Democrats favored regime change by plus-20, Republicans by plus-18, and both groups showed comparable uncertainty. Support was strongest among young men who prize physical strength (plus-33 margin) and those identifying as Trump Republicans (plus-36 margin), each with about one-quarter uncertain. However, men advocating broader calls for increased masculinity were notably less enthusiastic, with a plus-16 margin. The survey was conducted before Israel's airstrikes and before serious U.S. discussions of involvement. Since then, President Donald Trump ordered airstrikes against three key Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend. In retaliation, Iran fired missiles at a U.S. military base in Qatar on Monday. A ceasefire was agreed to between Iran and Israel on Monday. But the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) has accused Iran of violating the ceasefire and said it will strike Tehran in retaliation. Iran's military has denied any such violation. President Donald Trump speaks from the East Room of the White House in Washington on June 21, 2025, after the U.S. military struck three Iranian nuclear and military sites, joining Israel's effort to decapitate the... President Donald Trump speaks from the East Room of the White House in Washington on June 21, 2025, after the U.S. military struck three Iranian nuclear and military sites, joining Israel's effort to decapitate the country's nuclear program. More Carlos Barria/AP Growing Reluctance Toward War Amid such an uncertain environment, further polling indicates growing hesitation among young Americans about military involvement in the Middle East. An Economist/YouGov survey from mid-June found only 16 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds supported U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict, with 53 percent opposed and 31 percent unsure, mirroring national attitudes. In the same poll, 59 percent of men said they oppose U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict, while only 19 percent supported U.S. action. Similarly, a J.L. Partners poll in mid-June reported that only 40 percent of men overall supported U.S. action in Iran, with 45 percent opposed. Support shrank to 28 percent among the youngest voters, while 45 percent disapproved. Among the youngest voters, support was even smaller. Only 28 percent said they supported U.S. airstrikes, while 45 percent said they disapprove. Such polls are in line with national surveys which suggest that Americans largely do not support U.S. military action in Iran. A YouGov/Economist survey, conducted from June 20 to 23, 2025, found that public opinion shifted sharply after Donald Trump announced that the U.S. had bombed Iranian nuclear facilities. Among all U.S. adults, just 29 percent said the U.S. should carry out such strikes, while 46 percent said it should not. The Washington Post found modestly higher support than YouGov did for the U.S. military bombing Iran. In the poll, 25 percent of adults supported "the U.S. military launching airstrikes against Iran over its nuclear program," while 45 percent were opposed. The poll also found that 82 percent of Americans were either "somewhat" or "very" concerned about getting involved in a full-scale war with Iran. Meanwhile, analysis by pollster G. Elliott Morris showed that just 21 percent of Americans said last week that they supported U.S. involvement in Iran, while 57 percent opposed. The Trump Factor But when broken down by party affiliation, poll results reveal a striking pattern. In the YouGov/Economist poll, support for U.S. military action in Iran among Democrats fell from 16 percent before Trump's announcement to just 5 percent after. Meanwhile, Republican support soared from 34 percent to 70 percent. Independents showed a smaller shift, with support rising from 11 percent to 26 percent. The J.L. Partners poll showed that support for U.S. military action against Iran is strongest among Trump's most devoted base. Two-thirds of self-identified "MAGA Republicans" (65 percent) back U.S. strikes, far surpassing support among "Traditional Republicans" (51 percent). Most Republican voters also view Israel's war with Iran as a shared American cause, with 63 percent saying "Israel's war is America's war"—a figure that rises to 67 percent among MAGA Republicans. On how long the conflict should last, 59 percent of MAGA Republicans say the U.S. should fight until Iran's nuclear program is destroyed, compared to 28 percent who prefer negotiations. Among all voters, however, a majority (53 percent) favored pausing attacks to pursue diplomacy, while only 30 percent want to continue military action. Generational Shift Away From War Polls also show that support for military intervention in Iran is lower than it was for previous interventions in the Middle East, analysis by Morris shows. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, military action in Afghanistan had near-universal approval. A staggering 88 percent of Americans supported the U.S. invasion in 2001, while just 10 percent opposed it. That support remained high in the lead-up to the Iraq War in 2003, with 71 percent backing the strikes and 27 percent against. By 2014, public enthusiasm had cooled significantly. When the U.S. launched operations against ISIS, support had dropped to 54 percent, with opposition rising to 41 percent. And compared to past conflicts, the American public—especially young people—are far more hesitant about war. During World War II, after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, Americans largely embraced military service and supported the war effort with strong patriotism. Gallup polls from the 1940s showed more than 90 percent support for U.S. involvement. However, attitudes changed dramatically during the Vietnam War. By the late 1960s and early 1970s, many Americans opposed the war, influenced by rising casualties and graphic media coverage. In 1970, Gallup found that about 60 percent of Americans supported the conflict. After Vietnam, American's views on war became more conditional, particularly among young people. The 1990-91 Gulf War initially received broad support. But skepticism returned with the protracted wars in Iraq and Afghanistan after 2001. Pew Research Center surveys from the mid-2000s showed declining support as those conflicts dragged on. In recent years, young Americans have grown increasingly reluctant to endorse military interventions. A 2021 Cato Institute survey found millennials and Gen Z are less supportive of war compared to older generations. Economic concerns and a preference for diplomacy over military force also factor into their attitudes. The YMRP survey results reinforce these complexities. Young men experiencing financial hardship showed much less support. Those reporting financial instability had just a +1 support margin, and those believing the economy was worsening actually opposed the policy by a small margin (-1), both with high uncertainty (41 percent). In contrast, financially stable young men supported the policy by +24, and those optimistic about the economy showed a +36 margin. Declining Support For Trump Among Young Men The changing mindset may also be contributing to Trump's falling approval among young voters. While young men helped fuel Trump's victory in 2024—with 53 percent of those aged 18 to 44 supporting him, up from 45 percent in 2020—recent polling suggests that support has eroded. Analysis by YouGov shows Trump's net approval among 18- to 29-year-olds has dropped from +5 at the start of his second term to -39—a 44-point swing. The decline is far steeper than in other age groups. Among voters aged 30 to 44, Trump's net approval now stands at -13, down from -6. Among those 45 to 64, it fell from +12 to -5. Among voters 65 and older, it has remained steady at -4.
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
GOP Rep.: The One Big Beautiful Bill Is A Green Light on Main Street
Advocates for ideas and draws conclusions based on the interpretation of facts and data. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. When I took over my family's car dealership more than 50 years ago, I, like every small business owner in this country, took a risk. I hired employees, stocked inventory I hoped would sell, and prayed every night I could make payroll, keep the lights on, and build something for my family. Running a business—especially a small one—is not for the faint of heart. It's long hours, tight margins, and piles of paperwork, but it's also deeply and truly American. It's about grit, responsibility, and the belief that if you work hard enough, you can create a better life. As chairman of the House Committee on Small Business, I bring that lived experience to Congress every day. An American flag waves in the wind at sunset. An American flag waves in the wind at years of inflation, high costs, and heavy-handed regulation, Main Street is ready for a comeback. The House-passed One Big Beautiful Bill is the spark we need. It's a bold, pro-growth tax and deregulation package that puts small businesses and American workers back at the center of our economy. At its heart is the expansion of the 199A small business tax deduction—a provision of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that has helped 26 million small businesses stay afloat. This bill raises the deduction from 20 percent to 23 percent and makes it permanent. A study by the National Federation of Independent Business found that making this deduction permanent would generate $750 billion in economic growth and create over 1 million new jobs on Main Street. For decades, we've watched jobs leave, factories close, and communities suffer because of Democrats' anti-American policies. The One Big Beautiful Bill flips the script. It rewards domestic production, encourages investment in American-made products, and puts a bullseye on the kind of tax code that made it easier to build in Shanghai than here in Fort Worth. When I visit manufacturers in my district, I hear the same thing: "Give us a fair shot." This bill does that. If you build here, hire here, and produce here, you will be rewarded. I also introduced the Made in America Manufacturing Finance Act, legislation that, combined with the One Big Beautiful Bill, will revitalize domestic manufacturing and restore economic strength in communities across the country. And we didn't stop there. We are restoring 100 percent expensing, reinstating immediate expensing for research and development, expanding the standard deduction, simplifying the tax code, cutting red tape, and delivering on President Donald Trump's promises that over 77 million Americans voted for: no tax on tips and no tax on overtime to put more money into the pockets of hardworking Americans. I've been in the car business long enough to know—when business owners have certainty and cash flow, they don't sit on it—they reinvest. That's how Main Street grows: smart policies that reward initiative. Make no mistake—this is the most pro-small business package Congress has seen in a generation, delivering lower taxes, greater certainty, and more freedom for small businesses to thrive. It's a declaration that we believe in the American Dream and in the people who roll up their sleeves, take risks, and build something real. The One Big Beautiful Bill locks in a new era of economic freedom. Failing to pass this vital legislation will result in the largest tax increase in history. This is not an option for small businesses that rely on the tax provisions from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. As chairman of the House Committee on Small Business, I'm committed to getting it across the finish line. America runs on risk and reward. You take a chance. You work hard. You earn your keep. And when you succeed, your community succeeds. That's the promise of this country, and that's the promise this bill delivers. When Main Street wins, America wins. Congressman Roger Williams represents the 25th Congressional District of Texas and currently serves as chairman of the House Committee on Small Business. In 2012, Williams was elected to Congress and has been the voice for Main Street America and families across the country, while running a family-owned car dealership and calf-cow operation. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
