Kratom manufacturer sues Ohio government in the Ohio Supreme Court
An Oklahoma-based manufacturer of kratom beverages that are being sold in Ohio filed a complaint in the Ohio Supreme Court, asking the state’s highest court of the state to force the Ohio Board of Pharmacy to release public records connected to the Buckeye State’s ban on the substance.
Botanic Tonics accused the board of acting in bad faith by allegedly using unpublished guidance to avoid accountability for its decisions to regulate kratom, according to Gongwer Ohio.
The board temporarily banned most kratom products on Dec. 12, 2025, after a request by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine. In the complaint, the company highlighted four public records requests it submitted to the board, seeking details on the board’s internal deliberations, the scientific basis for its actions regarding kratom products, communications and documents related to DeWine’s executive order, the rulemaking process, the board’s guidance, and board members’ calendars and meeting records, the news source reported.
The move follows a showdown between state lawmakers and the pharmacy board over the regulations on kratom.
The Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review solidified the temporary restriction by approving a permanent rule in May that classifies synthetic kratom as a controlled substance, according to the news source.
Some state lawmakers, however, criticized the board, saying at a June JCARR meeting that its members overstepped their authority. Co-chairman and state Rep. Jamie Callender, R-Concord, said the committee might consider invalidating the synthetic kratom rule, per Gongwer Ohio.
While Ohio hemp farmers prepare for the 2026 planting season without knowing what to expect in the future from the lawmakers, Franklin County Common Pleas Court judges helped those who both sell and consume kratom by issuing a permanent injunction preventing the board from enforcing the synthetic kratom rule against natural kratom leaf products that contain only trace levels of mitragynine-related alkaloids and extending a temporary restraining order that blocks the board from classifying plant-based kratom products as controlled substances, the news source reported.
Botanic Tonics cited these rulings in its complaint, according to Gongwer Ohio.
The board was also allegedly delaying its responses to the company’s requests, with one of Botanic Tonics’ requests submitted in December 2025 taking three months to receive a reply. In the response to the December 2025 request, the board said it didn’t have any responsive documents for three of the four items and claimed an attorney-client privilege on the last requested item.
The Oklahoma company also alleged that it took the board three months to respond to the company’s February 2026 follow-up request, resulting in the board providing only 42 documents. The company also filed two requests in May, but it didn’t receive any records from the board.
