Medical Marijuana Patients Get Their Day In Federal Court

By Steve Elliott
Monday, July 30, 2012



Eastern District of California Blog


D.C. Circuit to Hear Oral Arguments this October in Lawsuit Challenging Marijuana's Federal Classification


Late last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed to hear oral arguments in Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration, a lawsuit challenging the federal government's classification of marijuana as a dangerous drug with no medical value. Ten years after the Coalition for Rescheduling Cannabis (CRC) filed its petition, the courts will finally review the scientific evidence regarding the therapeutic value of marijuana. The D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments on October 16 at 9:30am.

"Medical marijuana patients are finally getting their day in court," said Joe Elford, chief counsel with Americans for Safe Access, a medical marijuana advocacy group. "This is a rare opportunity for patients to confront politically motivated decision-making with scientific evidence of marijuana's medical efficacy. What's at stake in this case is nothing less than our country's scientific integrity and the imminent needs of millions of patients."

ASA filed its lawsuit in January, challenging the July 2011 Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) denial of the CRC petition, which was filed in 2002. The DEA is the final arbiter on petitions to reclassify controlled substances, but other agencies are also involved in the review process. Patient advocates claim that marijuana is treated unlike any other controlled substance in that rescheduling petitions are encumbered by politics and therapeutic research is subjected to a unique and overly rigorous approval process.


ASA

Joe Elford, Americans for Safe Access: "Medical marijuana patients are finally getting their day in court"

The announcement of oral arguments comes just weeks after a study was published in The Open Neurology Journal by Dr. Igor Grant, one of the leading U.S. medical marijuana researchers, claiming that marijuana's Schedule I classification is "not tenable." Dr. Grant and his fellow researchers concluded it was "not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking."

The study urged additional research, and stated that marijuana's federal classification and its political controversy are "obstacles to medical progress in this area." Marijuana's classification as a Schedule I substance (along with heroin and methamphetamine) is based on the federal government's position that it has "no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States."

For more than a year, the Obama Justice Department has been escalating its attacks in medical marijuana states, including dozens of new federal indictments and prosecutions. Though U.S. Attorneys often claim that the accused have violated state law in some way, defendants are prevented from using any medical evidence or a state law defense in federal court. If the rescheduling lawsuit is successful and marijuana is reclassified, federal defendants will then gain the basis for a medical necessity defense.

The ASA appeal brief asserts that the federal government has acted arbitrarily and capriciously in its efforts to deny marijuana to millions of patients throughout the U.S. ASA argues in its brief that the DEA has no "license to apply different criteria to marijuana than to other drugs, ignore critical scientific data, misrepresent social science research, or rely upon unsubstantiated assumptions, as the DEA has done in this case."

ASA is urging the court to "require the DEA to analyze the scientific data evenhandedly," and order "a hearing and findings based on the scientific record." The panel of judges assigned to hear oral arguments includes Circuit Judges Henderson and Garland, and Senior Circuit Judge Edwards.

Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have adopted medical marijuana laws that not only recognize the medical efficacy of marijuana, but also provide safe and legal access to it. Since the CRC petition was filed in 2002, an even greater number of studies have been published that show the medical benefits of marijuana for illnesses such as neuropathic pain, multiple sclerosis, and Alzheimer's.

Last year, the National Cancer Institute, a division of the federal Department of Health and Human Services, added cannabis to its list of Complementary Alternative Medicines, pointing out that it's been therapeutically used for millennia.




More Information

D.C. Circuit announcement of oral arguments [PDF]

ASA appeal brief [PDF]


DEA denial of CRC petition [PDF]

CRC rescheduling petition



tokeofthetown

Medical Marijuana Rescheduling Lawsuit Moving

by Phillip Smith,
July 30, 2012,


A decade after the Coalition for Rescheduling Cannabis (CRC) filed its petition seeking to have marijuana moved from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, the federal courts will finally review the scientific evidence regarding the therapeutic efficacy of marijuana. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals announced late last week that it will hear oral arguments in October in a lawsuit filed by Americans for Safe Access (ASA) to force the government to act.

The lawsuit, Americans for Safe Access vs. DEA, was filed in January after the DEA denied the CRC's rescheduling petition the previous July. The DEA took nine years to decide to do nothing about rescheduling marijuana.

Under the Controlled Substances Act, Schedule I is reserved for drugs that "have a high potential for abuse, have no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and there is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision."

Patient advocates charge the DEA and other federal agencies have ignored an increasing mountain of evidence on marijuana's therapeutic efficacy and that marijuana is "currently accepted [for] medical use in treatment" in 17 states and the District of Columbia. They also charge that the rescheduling process for marijuana has been "encumbered by politics" and that federal agencies are throwing roadblocks in the way of scientific research on medical marijuana.

"Medical marijuana patients are finally getting their day in court," said ASA chief counsel Joe Elford. "This is a rare opportunity for patients to confront politically motivated decision-making with scientific evidence of marijuana's medical efficacy. What's at stake in this case is nothing less than our country's scientific integrity and the imminent needs of millions of patients."

Oral arguments will take place Tuesday, October 16, at 9:30am at the E. Barrett Prettyman US Courthouse in downtown Washington.


stopthedrugwar

Marijuana Doesn't Belong On Schedule I [Infographic]

By Steve Elliott
Wednesday, August 1, 2012



Via: Rehab International



The federal classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug doesn't just defy all scientific evidence; it isn't just another way logic and reason are sacrificed on the altar of the War On Drugs.

Marijuana's erroneous and nonsensical classification as a Schedule I substance is emblematic of all that is insane with marijuana policy in the United States. It is one big reason American drug policy serves as a worldwide laughingstock of ineffectiveness and futility.

Why on earth are we still laboring under a system which equates cannabis with heroin, and considers pot to be more dangerous than cocaine or meth?




tokeofthetown

Because we have a Federal govt. sold to the highest bidder and and long as big pharm. big beer, and big budget police can buy votes it will be real hard to change.

Medical Marijuana Case On Therapeutic Value, Rescheduling To Be Heard In Federal Court


The Huffington Post
By Nick Wing Posted: 08/01/2012 12:15 pm Updated: 08/01/2012 12:26 pm


Medical marijuana advocates will get their day in court later this year, when they argue the therapeutic value of cannabis.

The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed late last week to hear oral arguments in Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration, a case that could have major implications for the rescheduling of marijuana out of Schedule I, a category that also includes heroin and LSD. Schedule I drugs are described as substances that have “a high potential for abuse, have no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and there is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.” Rescheduling can take place either by congressional vote, or through independent action by the executive branch in the presence of new research.

Marijuana policy reformers initially petitioned the DEA in 2002, arguing that the current classification of marijuana was improper. In 2011, the DEA finally denied their request, prompting Americans for Safe Access to file a lawsuit earlier this year. Advocates are excited about the opportunity to present scientific evidence before federal court, and especially optimistic considering the recent release of a report that claims, in the clearest terms yet, that there are medical benefits to marijuana.

From the Americans for Safe Access press release:

The announcement of oral arguments comes just weeks after a study was published in The Open Neurology Journal by Dr. Igor Grant one of the leading U.S. medical marijuana researchers, claiming that marijuana's Schedule I classification is "not tenable." Dr. Grant and his fellow researchers concluded it was "not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking." The study urged additional research, and stated that marijuana's federal classification and its political controversy are "obstacles to medical progress in this area." Marijuana's classification as a Schedule I substance (along with heroin) is based on the federal government's position that it has "no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States."

Joe Elford, Chief Counsel with Americans for Safe Access, says the court's decision is long-awaited.

"Medical marijuana patients are finally getting their day in court,” he said. “This is a rare opportunity for patients to confront politically motivated decision-making with scientific evidence of marijuana’s medical efficacy ... What’s at stake in this case is nothing less than our country’s scientific integrity and the imminent needs of millions of patients.”

While marijuana is currently accepted for medical use in 17 states and the District of Columbia, the Obama administration and DEA have been unmistakably hard-nosed in their approach to the substance.

During congressional testimony earlier this year, DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart refused to say whether crack or heroin posed bigger health risks than marijuana.

The administration has meanwhile continued an aggressive crackdown on marijuana dispensaries in California.

Oral arguments in Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration are set to begin on Oct. 16.




huffingtonpost