:::::::USA Set to Reschedule Cannabis::::::: HHS Releases Recommendation Documents:::::::

[pipeline]

So the feds are alright with THC so long as its synthetic and derived from hemp?

The terpenes which occur naturally as part of the medical cannabis resin are necessary to make the effect of THC more positive with less side effects, and also helps improve the potency so a lower dose THC is required to achieve the desired effect.

 

[pipeline]

The issue of cannabis reform is turning into a political football. Federal legislators will continue to sit on it for 4 more years until the next election. DEA and federal agencies will drag out the process as long as possible which will, in part, be a political benefit to democrat controlled states.

Is this a form of punishment for republicans and republican controlled states? Does this harm those states who choose to wait for feds to make significant lawful reform first through a lawful process?

Nothing is going to change anytime soon, and if it does, only a few types of medical conditions will have clearance for medical use of cannabis according to the Federal Government similar to the way Kentucky is beginning medical use.

The process will be dragged out as long as possible so that the Federal Government isn't as likely to be held accountable for carrying out such a harmful failed policy of prohibition and refusing to change it. They have to make it look like they had a reason to hold off for so many years to make reforms.

They have already delayed this initial hearing another 3 months because of something as minor as asking for more information for the list of groups to testify in the hearing.

 

[Sweatloaf]

The issue of cannabis reform is turning into a political football. Federal legislators will continue to sit on it for 4 more years until the next election. DEA and federal agencies will drag out the process as long as possible which will, in part, be a political benefit to democrat controlled states.

Is this a form of punishment for republicans and republican controlled states? Does this harm those states who choose to wait for feds to make significant lawful reform first through a lawful process?

Nothing is going to change anytime soon, and if it does, only a few types of medical conditions will have clearance for medical use of cannabis according to the Federal Government similar to the way Kentucky is beginning medical use.

The process will be dragged out as long as possible so that the Federal Government isn't as likely to be held accountable for carrying out such a harmful failed policy of prohibition and refusing to change it. They have to make it look like they had a reason to hold off for so many years to make reforms.

They have already delayed this initial hearing another 3 months because of something as minor as asking for more information for the list of groups to testify in the hearing.

I think it's like political tennis. It's being lobbed back and forth in perpetual inaction. Realistically we could actually be sitting here ten years from now and have nothing really change much at all from today (fed level).

 

[pipeline]

I am thinking thats the way this may end up going. They may in the near future within a couple years likely allow medical use for a handfull of serious medical conditions. If thats the way it remains and prohibition for adult-use isn't lifted, it will be dangerous for a lot of people for risk of arrest or asset forfeiture.

Some states will follow choose to hold the line to follow whatever guidelines feds set as they go, but I would think they will have to do at least some level of loosening the consequences reform for adult use, I would think. Seems like an oppressive regime if they don't loosen the consequences because there are so many people from other states who may be in posession of cannabis traveling through or visiting the state.

 

[pipeline]

By only allowing a handful of medical conditions to access cannabis it will continue to put patients who use cannabis for other medical uses at risk of arrest.

There needs to be a constitutional amendment to repeal the prohibition like they did with alcohol.

 

[pipeline]

Researcher Asks Federal Court To Halt DEA Marijuana Rescheduling Hearings Over Allegations Of Illegal Proceedings And Agency Bias

A marijuana and psychedelics researcher has filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) violated multiple laws in setting a hearing to further consider the Biden administration’s cannabis rescheduling proposal—and he’s asking for an order halting the...

www.marijuanamoment.net

Researcher Asks Federal Court To Halt DEA Marijuana Rescheduling Hearings Over Allegations Of Illegal Proceedings And Agency Bias​

A marijuana and psychedelics researcher has filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) violated multiple laws in setting a hearing to further consider the Biden administration’s cannabis rescheduling proposal—and he’s asking for an order halting the proceedings until those issues are resolved.
In a complaint filed with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on Monday, Panacea Plant Sciences founder and CEO David Heldreth laid out several allegations against DEA that he says warrant judicial intervention in the agency’s plans to hold an administrative hearing on the Justice Department’s proposal to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
An initial hearing is currently scheduled for December 2, coming months after a public comment period closed. Panacea was among numerous organizations that requested to participate in the hearing, but it was not among the 25 witnesses selected by DEA Administrator Anne Milgram late last month.

Heldreth said in the court filing that the agency’s hearing should be stayed for four main reasons, including alleged violations of a Clinton-era executive order requiring federal bodies to consult with tribal entities on rulemaking decisions that impact them, as well as the Regulatory Flexibility Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Notably, he also argued that his and Panacea’s exclusion from the hearing appears to be retaliatory, calling it a “punishment for challenging DEA rule-making and other legal activities.”

That refers to Panacea’s separate efforts to block DEA from moving forward with its proposed ban on various psychedelic compounds. In 2022, for example, the company was among those in the scientific community that pushed back against the agency’s plans to prohibit two psychedelic compounds that they said hold significant therapeutic potential.
A DEA administrative judge also recently denied the agency’s request to block a series of witnesses from the psychedelics hearing, including Panacea, and evidentiary exhibits in a forthcoming hearing on its plans to ban the psychedelics—2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine (DOI) and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-chloroamphetamine (DOC).

“The DEA administrator has shown in previous DEA hearings that she oversteps legal boundaries and is now continuing that by punishing Panacea Plant Sciences and myself for resisting the DEA’s attempts to ban psychedelics,” Heldreth told Marijuana Moment on Friday. “Additionally, the DEA didn’t follow tribal consultation or small organization consultation regulations or laws. These violations require the rule to be withdrawn and redone correctly.”
“I think it’s perfect timing during Native American history month to be pushing a lawsuit to require the government to follow tribal consultation. Native American sovereignty must be upheld,” he added.
The legal complaint seeks an “injunction against defendants barring any further administrative proceedings or scheduling attempts on marijuana, and staying any hearings or deadlines in the administrative proceedings until this case is heard.”

While an initial hearing in the matter is still scheduled for next month, DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) John Mulrooney issued a preliminary order last week signaling that the information provided by the agency on those set to testify was insufficient and requesting additional details and potential availability for a formal hearing in January or February 2025.
DEA has already made clear that it feels additional information is needed on a number of topics related to the scientific review into marijuana that led to the reclassification recommendation. Some view the scheduling of the hearing as more evidence of DEA skepticism.

For what it’s worth, Vice President Kamala Harris, who lost her bid for the presidency on Tuesday, said recently that part of the reason for the delay in the administration’s marijuana rescheduling effort is federal bureaucracy that “slows things down,” including at DEA.
In March, Harris also expressed some frustration with the bureaucratic process of rescheduling marijuana, prior to DOJ’s formal recommendation, calling on DEA to expediently finish the job.
While the Biden-Harris administration facilitated the review that led to the DOJ rescheduling proposal, former President Donald Trump, who won the election on Tuesday, has also voiced support for the reform. And in a historic first for the U.S. both he and Harris are aligned in their support for cannabis legalization at some level.
Read the federal court filing on DEA’s marijuana rescheduling process below: