Texas Lawmakers File First Cannabis Bills of 2027, From Legalization to HB 330

Texas lawmakers began filing bills for the 2027 legislative session on Monday, November 9, and cannabis was in the first wave. By about 1:25 p.m. Central, Texas Legislature Online’s first-day filing lists showed 818 House bills and 216 Senate bills, plus dozens of resolutions. We searched every caption and read the bill texts that had been posted. Six bills deal directly with cannabis, and all six were filed by Democrats.

The Bills at a Glance

HB 330: Menstrual Cramps as a Qualifying Condition

HB 330 is the shortest bill on the list. It amends Section 169.003 of the Occupations Code, the list of diagnoses for which a registered physician may prescribe low-THC cannabis, by adding “a condition that causes menstrual cramps, including premenstrual dysphoric disorder or dysmenorrhea.” Dysmenorrhea is the medical term for painful periods. Premenstrual dysphoric disorder is a severe form of premenstrual syndrome that mainly affects mood.

Nothing else about the program would change. A patient would still need to be a permanent Texas resident, the prescribing doctor would still need to be registered with the program, and the doctor would still have to find that the risk is reasonable given the potential benefit. Products would stay “low-THC”: under the current definition, no more than 10 milligrams of THC per dose, and smoking is not allowed. The full list of current diagnoses is in our Texas qualifying conditions guide.

Some patients with severe period pain may already qualify. Since 2025, “a condition that causes chronic pain” has been on the list, but Texas defines chronic pain narrowly: pain that other treatment has not relieved, tied to a chronic disease process, that is continuous or recurring and severe for more than 90 days. Whether a given patient meets that test is the doctor’s call. Our reading is that HB 330 would remove the guesswork for menstrual pain by naming it outright, without the 90-day and failed-treatment conditions. Our chronic pain guide explains the existing route.

HB 362 and HB 369: The Texas Regulation of Cannabis Act

Reps. John Bucy III of Austin and Joe Moody of El Paso each filed a full adult-use legalization bill. We compared the two texts word for word, and apart from page formatting they are identical. Both are titled the “Texas Regulation of Cannabis Act” and would add a new Chapter 491 to the Health and Safety Code, along with a new cannabis tax in the Tax Code.

Several other provisions stand out in the text:

• Local control has limits. Cities and counties could set store hours, locations, business practices and the number of licenses, but could not ban or “unreasonably restrict” licensed businesses.
• Renters are protected. A landlord could not bar a tenant from possessing cannabis or consuming it by means other than smoking. Other property owners and businesses could still restrict it.
• Public use stays illegal. No consumption in vehicles on public roads, in public places unless a local government designates a 21-and-over area, or near schools and child-care facilities. Driving while intoxicated stays a crime, and home butane extraction is barred.
• Past records. A past conviction for marijuana possession, or for delivering marijuana to someone 18 or older, could not by itself disqualify a license applicant. We did not find any expunction or record-sealing provisions.
• Products. Regulators would set a maximum THC level per product and require opaque, child-resistant packaging that does not look like candy. Selling to anyone under 21 would be a crime.

Timing matters for anyone wondering when stores could open. Even if one of these bills passed in May and was signed, the text would not require licensing to start until November 2028. As we read it, the possession and home-grow protections would apply from September 1, 2027, because they sit in the chapter that takes effect that day. Our legalization path guide walks through each step a bill must clear.

SB 237: A Senate Legalization Bill, Text Pending

In the Senate, Carol Alvarado of Houston filed SB 237. Its caption describes regulating the cultivation, sale, testing, possession and use of cannabis, with occupational licenses and a new criminal offense. Unlike the House bills, the caption does not mention a tax or local regulation. The bill text had not been posted when we checked, so we cannot yet say how it differs. We will update this section when it is.

The Senate is where adult-use bills face the steepest climb. Republicans kept a 19-12 majority on November 3, and senators are weighing rule changes that could limit Lt. Gov.-elect Vikki Goodwin’s control of the floor, as we reported last week. Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa’s most specific public position has been support for a public vote on THC, as covered in our look at her stance.

HB 507: Drug-Test Protections for Public Workers

Bucy’s second cannabis bill covers employees and independent contractors of state agencies and political subdivisions, such as cities, counties and school districts. Under the bill text, those employers could not:

• require a drug test that screens for cannabinoids as a condition of employment or contract, or require a negative result;
• prohibit a worker from obtaining a low-THC cannabis prescription, using low-THC cannabis under the Compassionate Use Program or using a consumable hemp product; or
• question an employee about low-THC cannabis or hemp use. They would also have to follow state and federal medical privacy laws.

Peace officers and workers who fall under federal Department of Transportation drug-testing rules are exempt. A worker could sue for damages, injunctions and attorney’s fees without first exhausting administrative remedies, and the bill waives sovereign and governmental immunity for those claims. It would apply only to policies and tests on or after September 1, 2027, and it does not cover private employers. The text does not separately address on-duty impairment. For how other states handle cannabis and testing, see our employment drug-testing explainer.

HB 667: Concentrates Out of the Felony Group

Under current law, the Health and Safety Code’s definition of marijuana excludes resin extracted from the plant. That pushes concentrates such as hash, wax and THC oil into Penalty Group 2, where possessing less than one gram is a state jail felony, counted by total weight including any fillers, per Section 481.116. Moody’s HB 667 would fold “marihuana concentrate” into the marijuana definition and give it its own weight tiers, measured by the weight of the concentrate alone.

The bill sets parallel tiers for delivery, makes giving away 1.5 grams of concentrate or less without payment a Class B misdemeanor and directs the Department of Public Safety to write rules for measuring concentrate in mixed products such as edibles. Penalties for marijuana flower would not change. As far as we can tell, delta-8, delta-10 and synthetic THC would remain in Penalty Group 2, because the bill changes only the marijuana definition.

What Was Not Filed Yet

Two things were missing from the first-day lists we searched. No bill to ban, tax or otherwise regulate hemp-derived THC products had been filed, even though hemp was the fight of the 2025 session, as our election results report describes. And no joint resolution proposing a statewide cannabis vote had been filed, which is the route a ballot question would need. Either could arrive any day before the March 12 deadline. In the meantime, the current hemp rules are summarized in our guide to what is legal after December 11.

What Happens Next

Committee assignments and hearing schedules decide which of these bills get a public airing, and hearings are open to testimony. Our 2027 session guide explains how to follow a bill. To find and contact your own state representative and senator, use the Texas Cannabis Action Center.