Skip to content
Drug Policy Watch
LatestTracking drug policy in all 50 states and Congress, updated every morning.See all ›
State Watch · North Carolina Live tracking · 2025 to 26 session

HB 328: How one bill number became three different bills

House Bill 328 passed the House 112 to 0 as a school-grounds vaping ban. The Senate replaced it with a hemp licensing regime. A conference committee then replaced that, and the text now one vote from the Governor is a third bill again. It is not an isolated glitch: our sweep of every 2025 to 26 bill with a real edition trail found the same move six times.

Where this stands, updated August 5, 2026

It was not voted down. Hundreds of hemp advocates filled the legislative building on August 4, and the vote was delayed, despite law enforcement leaders backing the bill.

What is pending is not the Senate’s version. The House refused to concur in the Senate rewrite on April 21, 2026, by 95 to 18. A conference committee then produced a different substitute, H328-PCCS30639-CE-1. The Senate adopted it 37 to 6 on July 2, and the House re-referred it to its Rules committee on July 30, which is the last action on the record. That conference substitute, not the licensing chapter described below, is the text one vote from the Governor. We pulled and read it on August 5; what it actually contains is set out here.

Every claim below is read from the bill text, roll call transcripts, and North Carolina General Statutes at ncleg.gov, not from memory or a press release. Where something has not been independently verified twice, we say so.

The pattern

A bill number is not a promise about the bill

A North Carolina bill can be filed on one subject, pass one chamber, and arrive at the other chamber’s committee looking like a different bill entirely, same number, same sponsors, same votes already banked. We call this a shell bill substitution. To find out how common it is, we read every edition of every 2025 to 26 bill with a multi-edition trail, plus one bill held over from the prior session.

6 of 9
multi-edition bills changed subject entirely
46
bill editions read in full to test it
Both
chambers do it, not just one

The House rewrote S59, S328, and S528. The Senate rewrote H562, H563, and H328. Three bills with real trails, S429, H329, and H126, kept their original subject throughout. Full bill list and ncleg.gov links in Sources.

We described this earlier as something the Senate does to House hemp bills. That framing was too narrow, and we are withdrawing it here rather than quietly editing it out.

Case study

HB 328, five editions

Filed as a narrow school-grounds ban. Passed the House unanimously. Then a Senate committee substitute replaced it with a whole new regulatory chapter. Click through the trail.

Verified against five bill editions and four roll call transcripts at ncleg.gov, August 1, 2026. This is a statement about the documented legislative history of one bill. No motive is asserted.

What edition 4 added that wasn’t in the bill the House passed

A whole new Chapter 18D of the General Statutes, sitting immediately beside Chapter 18B, the Alcoholic Beverage Control law: regulation, licensing, and enforcement.
Enforcement assigned to the ALE Division, Alcohol Law Enforcement, inside the Department of Public Safety.
Kratom added as a Schedule VI controlled substance, amending G.S. 90-94.
Amendments to the criminal court costs statute (G.S. 7A-304(a)) and alcohol enforcement officer jurisdiction (G.S. 18B-500(b)).
What is actually pending

The conference committee replaced it again

Everything above describes edition 4, the Senate committee substitute. That is the version most coverage is still describing, and it is not the version awaiting a vote. On April 21, 2026 the House refused to concur in it, 95 to 18. A conference committee produced a new substitute, H328-PCCS30639-CE-1, thirteen pages, which the Senate adopted 37 to 6 on July 2.

We pulled that conference substitute and read it in full on August 5, 2026. Chapter 18D is not in it. There is no G.S. 18D-102, no G.S. 18D-102.5, no Class A1 offense, no ALE Division enforcement, and no licensing chapter. The regulatory regime that made this bill notable did not survive conference.

What the conference substitute does contain

Conforms North Carolina’s hemp definition to the new federal one, citing Public Law 119-37, Division B, Section 781, which replaces the delta-9 THC threshold with a total-THC standard effective November 12, 2026.
A new G.S. 14-313.1: it is unlawful for anyone under 21 to possess a hemp-derived consumable, and unlawful for any person to knowingly sell or deliver one to someone under 21. Any violation is a Class 2 misdemeanor. Sellers also face civil penalties.
A new G.S. 14-401.28 on kratom: bans possession of synthetic kratom by any person of any age, sale or delivery of kratom to anyone under 21, and possession by anyone under 21. Any violation is a Class 2 misdemeanor.
Amendments to the Controlled Substances Act at G.S. 90-87 through 90-94.1, and xylazine added as a Schedule III controlled substance.

The under-21 possession offense survived. The uncapped, no-age-floor Class A1 offense did not. The remaining offense that reaches any person of any age is possession of synthetic kratom, and it is a Class 2 misdemeanor, not a Class A1.

Note the date. The federal definition this substitute conforms to takes effect November 12, 2026, and the House vote was delayed to November. We have not seen either chamber connect the two on the record, so we are not asserting that they are the same deadline, only that they are the same month.

Read from H328-PCCS30639-CE-1 as posted at ncleg.gov, retrieved August 5, 2026. A conference report can be amended or replaced before a vote, and this page will change if it is.

The precedent

HB 563 ran the same play first, and died from it

The prior session’s bill, nine editions, grew from 42,734 to 218,955 characters. It shows the same inversion HB 328 shows: the House passed a version with no criminal exposure for anyone under 21, and the Senate added one.

v0 to v1, filed v2 to v4, House v5 to v8, Senate
42,734 chars, kratom framed as commercialization
Passed the House 110 to 0 with no under-21 offense
Doubled to 218,955 chars; under-21 offense, excise tax, and medical cannabis language all added

The House refused to concur with the Senate’s changes and ruled them material on June 25, 2024. HB 563 died there. HB 328 reached the same point on April 21, 2026, when the House refused to concur by 95 to 18. Unlike HB 563 it did not die there. A conference committee wrote a third version, and that is what is waiting on the House floor now.

What the new offenses actually charge

Worse than a beer

This is the Senate version, edition 4, the one the House refused to concur in. Statutes pulled and cross-read from two independent sources each. Compare what a 19- or 20-year-old already risks under existing law with what that version would have added. The last row did not survive conference; the rest did, under different section numbers.

19-20 year old possesses a malt beverage or wine (G.S. 18B-302)
Class 3 misdemeanor
$200 max fineG.S. 18B-302(b),(i)
Under-21 possesses a hemp-derived consumable, including non-intoxicating CBD (NEW G.S. 18D-102 / 14-313.1)
Class 2 misdemeanor
$1,000 max fineNEW G.S. 18D-102(b)
Under-21 possesses kratom (NEW G.S. 14-401.28)
Class 2 misdemeanor
$1,000 + lab cost max fineNEW G.S. 14-401.28(b),(c)
Any person, any age, possesses a “prohibited” hemp-derived consumable (NEW G.S. 18D-102.5). Not in the conference substitute.
Class A1 misdemeanor
Uncapped max fineNEW G.S. 18D-102.5, no age tier

A 19-year-old holding a beer: Class 3 misdemeanor, $200 max. The same 19-year-old holding a non-intoxicating CBD gummy under the new statute: Class 2 misdemeanor, $1,000 max. Higher class, five times the fine.

This comparison holds for 19- and 20-year-olds specifically, because G.S. 18B-302(i) names those ages. It does not establish what an unclassified misdemeanor defaults to for anyone younger; that statute has not been pulled.

The gap with no floor

New G.S. 18D-102 gives anyone under 21 a lighter Class 2 misdemeanor than a Class 1 for someone 21 or older, a deliberate youth mitigation. The very next section, G.S. 18D-102.5, has none: it reads simply that “any person” who possesses a prohibited hemp-derived consumable is guilty of a Class A1 misdemeanor, the highest misdemeanor class in North Carolina, up to 150 days and an uncapped fine. On the statute’s face, the youth mitigation next door does not reach it.

This is a finding about the Senate version, and that version is no longer the one pending. Neither section appears in the conference substitute. We are leaving the analysis up because it is what the Senate actually wrote and what the House refused to concur in, and because a conference report can be rejected and an earlier text revived. But nobody should read this section as a description of the bill now awaiting a vote. For that, see what is actually pending.

The wider set

Ten bills that touch both minors and industry

We built this set from the NCGA keyword index on August 1, 2026: bills tagged MINORS and at least one of tobacco, hemp, alcohol, gaming, lottery, controlled substances, or marijuana. A keyword is not a verdict. Shown below are ten of them, triaged. Two are budgets or technical-correction acts that carry every keyword because they touch every agency in the state.

Lane counts are an upper bound; the ncleg keyword ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, for instance, is also attached to bills on impaired driving and hazing that have nothing to do with the industry.

A separate thread

Sports wagering failed by 15, then passed by 25

SB 688 failed the House 44 to 59 in 2022. HB 347, a different bill on the same subject, passed 69 to 44 in 2023. A 40-vote swing sounds like a wave of changed minds. The roll calls say otherwise.

26 of 40
votes of swing from roster turnover or absence, not a changed vote
19
members who did vote differently: 13 switched No to Aye, 6 switched Aye to No

Most of the swing is roster change, not changed minds. That is the honest headline, and it kills the simple story. The two bills are different questions at different procedural stages, so “switched” here means voted differently on the two bills, not proof anyone reversed a position on an identical proposition.

How we know this, and what we don’t know yet

A lane tag is a keyword, not a judgment. The ncleg keyword ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES sits on bills about impaired driving and hazing too. Every lane count here is an upper bound.
Budgets contaminate every cross-industry count. A budget touches alcohol, tobacco, and gambling because it is a budget. We flag and exclude those we can identify by title pattern; that classifier is ours, not authoritative.
Sponsorship is not a policy position. A prime-sponsor line on an appropriations act is a leadership role, not a vote on any single industry inside it.
The 2025 to 26 session is live. Its bill count and outcomes are not comparable to a completed session, and this page will change as bills move.
About the author

Reported and built by the Drug Policy Watch North Carolina desk from the public bill record at ncleg.gov. Drug Policy Watch is an independent, reader-funded tracker of cannabis, hemp, and psychedelic policy, federal action and all fifty states. Work with us.

Primary sources

License. This article is (c) Drug Policy Watch and licensed CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 for reporting and public summaries.

Corrections. Corrected August 5, 2026, hours after publication. This piece first ran describing the Senate committee substitute as the pending bill, and its headline called HB 328 a hemp licensing law. A same-day check of the ncleg.gov docket showed the House had refused to concur in that version on April 21, 2026, and that a conference committee substitute the Senate adopted on July 2 is the text actually awaiting a House vote. We pulled and read that substitute, corrected the headline, the summary and the status, and added a section setting out what it contains. The analysis of the Senate version is left in place and labelled as history rather than deleted. This is journalism and analysis, not legal advice, and no motive is asserted for any legislator named here. We correct errors in the open: see our corrections policy and log. Spotted an error in this piece? Tell us.