Law Alabama

[Baron23]

Long wait drags on for patients in Alabama as Medical Cannabis hits snags ​

Cristi Cain still remembers the sense of hope she felt two years ago when she and her son Hardy watched Gov Kay Ivey sign the bill that legalized medical cannabis in Alabama.​

“I felt like we had the momentum and had some sense of urgency,” Cain said. “That the people of Alabama needed this. That the children of Alabama needed this.”


But now the effort is mired in lawsuits, the head of the Alabama commission says it’s still not clear when the first dispensary might open and litigation could drag on for years. Meanwhile, six months after Ivey signed that bill, Mississippi approved medical marijuana and has already opened dispensaries.


When Alabama passed the law in 2021, Cain hoped her son, who has a chromosome abnormality and epilepsy, would soon get access to medical cannabis to treat his seizures and bouts of uncontrollable vomiting.


“We knew after that that it would be a bit of a journey to get it all implemented,” Cain said. “Obviously it takes time. But you know, it’s been two years since the bill was signed into law. In those two years, Hardy has probably had six, no less than six to eight hospitalizations for another issue called cyclical vomiting syndrome.”


Cain had been involved with the push for medical cannabis in Alabama since the state first started studying it in 2019. Over the years, she became one of the most vocal advocates in Alabama. And she has grown increasingly frustrated.


Her son was 8 years old when she testified in front of a legislative committee and 10 when the law passed. Hardy has used CBD Oil with some success. This summer, he turned 12.


The process to award licenses to grow, transport and dispense medical marijuana in Alabama has been fraught. The Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission first announced licenses on June 10, but quickly withdrew those after it found problems with the scoring of applications. The head of the commission resigned in early August in response to a lawsuit.


On Aug. 10, members of the commission again announced that licenses had been awarded to 24 companies and could be issued by the end of the month. Some of the companies that did not receive approvals filed a lawsuit and a judge last week issued a temporary hold on all licenses.


It’s been very difficult for Cain and other families in similar situations, she said. Her son has multiple medical needs, including frequent seizures. Doctors used traditional pharmaceuticals to reduce the severity, but Cain said the drugs left her son dazed and unresponsive.


“He had lost his emotion,” Cain said. “He had no joy. He didn’t cry. It was really heartbreaking.”


Cain sought out cannabis-based CBD oil, which is legal for patients in Alabama with qualifying conditions under Leni’s Law. And it helped, she said. Her son’s seizures got shorter, and his personality came back. But the attacks still came frequently, and Cain hoped medical cannabis might offer more relief for Hardy.


The passage of the state’s Medical Cannabis law happened on Hardy’s birthday in 2021 and felt like a gift, his mom said. Even back then, some who had pushed for the law murmured that implementation could take two or three years, she said.


Still, Cain felt the state would move more quickly thanks to the urgency of supporters and the proliferation of medical cannabis programs across the country and in nearby states. Patients in Mississippi and Florida can legally purchase medical marijuana.


Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves signed medical cannabis into law on Feb. 2, 2022, more than six months after Ivey’s signing ceremony. The state’s first dispensaries opened in January 2023.


Rex Vaughn, chairman of the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission, said Alabama has more rules for producers and dispensaries than Mississippi.


“I think we’re going to have a much more stringent industry,” Vaughn said. “Adhering to the law and our process. I hope it goes well for Mississippi, but I don’t think they have as tight of guardrails on their industry as what Alabama will have.”


Vaughn said while the commission has recently been dealing with litigation from people in the medical cannabis industry, the members have always been focused on the well-being of Alabama patients.


“Every commission member is committed and focused on making decisions that will enable those entities involved in the production of cannabis to consistently bring a quality product to the marketplace,” Vaughn said. “Those individuals who are eagerly anticipating an opportunity to have access to medicinal cannabis have waited long enough.”


Vaughn said it’s still difficult to predict when the first dispensaries will open in Alabama. Litigation could continue for the next several years, even after the industry is up and running, he said.


According to the lawsuit filed by medical cannabis company Alabama Always, the application process was needlessly complex and riddled with technical problems.


The commission outsourced the evaluation process to the University of South Alabama and then enlisted the accounting firm KPMG to audit those scores. The lawsuit alleges that members of the commission should have used their own judgment to award licenses instead of relying upon outside groups.


“The Commissioners and their staff never visited any site to assess the applicant’s ability to cultivate, process and bring product to market in a timeline consistent with the intent behind the Act,” the lawsuit said.


Cain said she hoped Alabama regulators and businesses would try to prioritize patients as they worked out the kinks of the licensing system. Instead, the process has devolved into a nightmare, she said.


“Obviously it’s a new industry for the state so there is money to be made,” Cain said. “At the end of the day, it’s about life. It’s not about money. It’s about seeing my little boy thrive in a world where he might not otherwise.”


A hearing is scheduled next week to determine whether members of the committee violated the Alabama Open Meetings Act. If the judge sides with the commission, the state could move forward with issuing licenses. However, new legal challenges could emerge.


Officials have said dispensaries could open by the end of this year or early next year. Cain said in the meantime, she will do her best to care for her child while trying to keep state regulators focused on the needs of patients and families.


“I don’t want a pity party,” Cain said. “I just want help for my child, and I don’t want to go out of state to get it. We aren’t the first state to legalize medical marijuana. Why aren’t we asking other states for help?”

 

[Baron23]

Ah yes, once again a glaring example of our governments at work...sigh.

Cannabis chaos: Incompetence, legal battles stall Alabama medical aid ​

The Medical Cannabis Act is not just a bureaucratic blunder, it’s a tragedy for those the act intended to help.​

Alabama’s foray into medical cannabis has morphed into an epic of mismanagement and legal turmoil. The saga of the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission is riddled with legal battles, stirred by a flawed licensing process that spotlights the commission’s questionable competence and integrity.


This scenario raises the inevitable question: how did those lacking expertise in medical cannabis get to draft rules that hold such significant sway?


At a Cumberland Law School conference on Sept. 8, 2023, AMCC’s outside counsel, William Webster, admitted the staff’s lack of expertise in medical cannabis regulation: “Nobody in Alabama really had expertise in developing medical cannabis,” he said, alarming given their role in crafting the 48-page application scoring instructions.


Webster, a deacon and Bible class teacher with a practice in insurance defense, confessed his inexperience with cannabis: “I had no experience in medical marijuana and had never seen anyone smoking one.” This highlights a disconnect between the regulators and the industry.


Other staff members, including Daniel Autrey, assistant director, Brittany Peters, and Justin Aday, general counsel, also lack the necessary experience. Alabama spent about $1 million on Webster’s firm for legal counsel. The overarching question is why, or how, the commission staff drafted the highly detailed evaluation scoring instructions when, by Webster’s own admission, there was no one on the commission, or indeed in the state of Alabama, who possessed the expertise necessary to evaluate cannabis license applications.


In mid-January 2022, Webster said that he and a contingent of Alabama officials traveled to Florida on a fact-finding mission. Why is unclear, since Florida had botched its efforts in enacting medical cannabis that had cost the Sunshine State $60 million in litigation and took nearly a decade to unravel its early mistakes.


A text message from Jan. 19, 2022, reviewed by APR, reveals that the Alabama delegation to Florida included key figures from the Department of Agriculture and AMCC, along with Webster. The Florida team they met included Chris Ferguson, director of medical marijuana use at the Florida Department of Health, among others. Within a short period after, the AMCC released the scoring instructions. Ferguson was hired by Verano, one of the leading cannabis suppliers in the United States. Notably, Verano ranked first in the initial round of AMCC’s medical cannabis license evaluations.


In fact, Ferguson was in attendance at the June 10 AMCC hearing, where AMCC awarded Verano its integrator’s license, and at the Aug. 12 meeting. On both occasions, he was seen visiting with AMCC staff. A person close to AMCC suggests that the staff’s friendliness toward Ferguson stemmed from his assistance in drafting the AMCC rules for evaluating cannabis licenses. If true, this revelation opens an entirely new line of questioning.


On Oct. 13, 2022, AMCC Chair Dr. Steven Stokes proposed partnering with the University of South Alabama for evaluation, a motion that was approved. During his CLE presentation, Webster claimed that the purpose of hiring South Alabama was to allow the university to assemble a team of experts and academics to provide expertise in evaluating the applications. But the scoring instructions were released on Oct. 24, before South Alabama was even engaged. Again, the question is clear: If the commission lacked the expertise to evaluate the medical cannabis license applications, and South Alabama was engaged to help assemble the requisite expertise, why did the commission release the scoring guide before South Alabama was engaged?


This question is amplified by evidence that, despite claims that the scoring process was managed by South Alabama, the commission’s staff actually controlled the hiring and assignment of scorers. While the university was tasked with hiring evaluators, AMCC staff retained approval power. Peters confirmed via email that final evaluator decisions were made by AMCC, not the university. The university itself confirmed that, while South Alabama vetted the scorers, the AMCC had final authority not only for hiring them but also for deciding which applications they should be assigned to grade.


The scoring scheme had glaring issues, notably not assessing readiness for cultivation within 60 days.


At a hearing, AMCC Counsel Mark Wilkerson claimed the scoring system’s flaws were inconsequential: “If there are problems with the scoring, it doesn’t matter,” Wilkerson said. “If the scoring’s wrong, it doesn’t matter. If the scoring’s bad, it doesn’t matter. Because the Commission can take into account whatever weight they want to put onto the ‘scoring.'”


If scoring doesn’t matter, why keep it?


AMCC admitted significant flaws in its original scoring but plans to use it in re-evaluating applicants. The Commission twice awarded licenses, only to declare a do-over after legal challenges highlighted major problems.


At another hearing, Judge Anderson, near the end of the proceedings, weighed in on the spectacle, telling the attorneys gathered that it was his understanding that Mississippi was six months behind Alabama in passing a medical cannabis law and is on the verge of starting to fill prescriptions.


“We can’t even say, ‘Thank God for Mississippi,’ in this case,” Anderson said with a smile.


In a series of significant developments spanning from January 2022 to the summer of 2023, several key events unfolded, influencing the outcome of the AMCC scoring process.


The timeline began in January 2022, when Webster and a delegation from Alabama traveled to Florida for a crucial meeting with Chris Ferguson. This encounter marked the beginning of a series of events that would significantly impact the AMCC’s future operations.


Between January and October 2022, Chris Ferguson was reportedly involved in assisting with the drafting of the AMCC rules. Although the specifics of this involvement remain unclear, Ferguson’s input during this period is believed to have played a pivotal role in shaping the regulatory framework of the AMCC.


In October 2022, the AMCC staff released the scoring instructions, a key document that outlined the criteria and methodology for evaluating participants. This release marked a critical step in the AMCC’s operational timeline, setting the stage for the subsequent evaluation process.


On Nov. 1, 2022, the AMCC made a strategic decision by hiring South Alabama. The details surrounding this hire and its implications for the AMCC’s operations have not been fully disclosed.


In late 2022, specifically between November and December, Chris Ferguson started working for Verano. This transition was notable, given Ferguson’s earlier involvement as director of medical marijuana use at the Florida Department of Health and allegedly helping to draft the AMCC rules.


The culmination of these events was observed in the summer of 2023 when Verano achieved the top score in the AMCC scoring process.


Taken together, a pattern appears to emerge, one that raises serious questions and deepens the suspect complexities hidden behind a bureaucratic process of incompetence and shadows.


The Medical Cannabis Act passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Kay Ivey is not just a tangled mess or bureaucratic blunder; it’s a tragedy for those the Medical Cannabis Act intended to help — real people with real problems, now trapped in a web of incompetence and arrogance.


It’s perhaps high time Gov. Kay Ivey intervenes to restore order in the AMCC, lest this chaos spiral further out of control.

 

[Baron23]

Medical Marijuana hearings to start Monday ​

Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission Set to Move Forward with Licensing Process After Settlement.​

On Monday, the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission (AMCC) is expected to vote to ratify an agreement with plaintiffs’ attorneys to allow the AMCC to move forward with its timeline to make new cannabis license awards in December.


Chey Garrigan is the founder and President of the Alabama Cannabis Industry Association (ACIA).


“We are excited about the news that a settlement may have been reached in the ongoing litigation,” Garrigan told Alabama Today. “Our focus has always been on alleviating the suffering of the people of Alabama with conditions that are treatable by medical cannabis.”


Attorneys for the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission (AMCC) have reached a settlement with plaintiffs that would allow the AMCC to begin hearing presentations from applicants starting Monday.


Two major sticking points were addressed in the recent closed-door negotiations between all the attorneys.


The first issue was the ten-megabyte limit on marijuana application size. The AMCC provided flexibility to help applicants work around the limit – but that information was not distributed, so some applicants submitted applications that were far smaller than what they would have preferred – or did not apply at all because they could not figure out how to downsize their application to ten megabytes without leaving out vital information. In the agreement, there is no limit on the application sizes.


The second is the scoring. Independent application evaluators hired by the University of South Alabama graded the applications, assigning them a numerical score and ranking them from first to worst based on the scoring. Those highest-scoring applicants received the awards in the first round of license awards. Failed applicants criticized the accuracy of those scores. The Commissioners, in the agreement, have been ordered not to consider those scores when they consider the applications when they vote on who gets the awards.


In exchange for agreeing to those two final points, the lawsuits will be dismissed, and the Commission can move forward with the application presentations. The previous two rounds of applicant awards have all been vacated by the AMCC.


Assuming that all goes well with the first part of the meeting, the Commission ratifies the agreement, and no new restraining order is in place, the Commission will then hear presentations from applicants for licenses to cultivate, process, transport, dispense, and operate as the official cannabis laboratory that week.


On Monday, the Commission is expected to hear presentations from cultivator and state testing laboratory applicants. On Tuesday, the Commission will hear presentations from the secure transporter and processor applicants. On Wednesday, the Commission will listen to presentations from the dispensary Applicants.


According to our current understanding of the process, the Commission will meet on December 1 to make those awards.


Next week, the Commission will meet to consider applications from the thirty applicants vying for the integrated facility license. The integrator license allows a business entity to grow, process, transport, and dispense medical cannabis. The Commission can give a maximum of five integrated licenses – thirty applications for vertically integrated licenses were turned in.


The Commission will meet on December 12 to award licenses to the integrators.


Each applicant will be given about 45 minutes to present to the Commission, and the presentation can include videos. Licenses, if all goes well, could be issued before Christmas.


“We wish luck to all of the applicants and look forward to working with the new licensees,” Garrigan said.


AMCC Executive Director John McMillan has said that he hopes that Alabamians will be able to purchase Alabama-grown medical cannabis products as early as March.


“Our first priority needs to be serving those Alabamians diagnosed with a legitimate medical need,” Garrigan said.

 

[Baron23]

Well, better late than never, eh?

Alabama's Third Attempt To Set Up Its Medical Cannabis Industry ​

20 Licenses Granted For Now.​

Alabama's cannabis regulator granted 20 licenses recently for the production and distribution of medical marijuana, reported the Alabama Reflector. This is the third attempt on the part of the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission to kickstart the new industry.


The two failed attempts in June and August were followed by a months-long legal saga that resulted in the AMCC resolving a majority of the issues raised by license applicants following a day of closed-door negotiations prompted by Montgomery Circuit Court Judge James Anderson.


The November settlement put an end to numerous legal actions against the regulatory body brought by medical cannabis operators Alabama Always LLC, Medella LLC, and Chicago cannabis giant Verano Holdings Corp. Under that deal, the commission nullified controversial scores from third-party evaluators previously used to rank business license applicants on Monday, Nov. 27, effectively resetting the process of awarding business licenses.

Third Time’s The Charm​

Friday’s awards announcement came after three days of presentations from applicants – also one of the key provisions from the settlement.


“The week we had had a good process — it’s worked well,” Rex Vaughn, chair of the AMCC said. “The presenters brought things to the forefront that maybe we didn’t see otherwise, that you can’t really see in a paper application.”


The commission granted licenses for cannabis cultivators, processors, dispensaries, secure transporters, and testing labs.

MMJ Licenses That Got The Green Light From AMCC​

Cultivators

• CRC of Alabama, a registered office in Troy;
• Greenway Botanicals, a registered office in Anniston;
• Gulf Shore Remedies, Fairhope in Baldwin County;
• Native Black Cultivation, Bessemer;
• Creek Leaf Wellness, Birmingham;
• Twisted Herb Cultivation, Greenville; and
• I AM FARMS, Knoxville

Processors

• Organic Harvest Lab, Bessemer;
• Coosa Medical Manufacturing, Centreville;
• 1819 Labs, Dothan; and
• Jasper Development Group Inc., Jasper in Walker County.

Dispensary

• CCS of Alabama, address on business records is listed at the Birmingham law firm of Maynard;
• GP6 Wellness, Birmingham;
• Capitol Medical, Auburn; and
• RJK Holdings AL, is listed on business records as located in an office building near the State House in Montgomery.

Secure Transport

• Alabama Secure Transport, Montgomery;
• Tyler Van Lines, Troy;
• PICK UP MY THINGS, Dothan; and
• International Communication, Birmingham.

Testing Lab

• Certus Laboratories, Grand Bay in Mobile County.

What’s Next​

The businesses applying for the most coveted permits – the integrated facility licenses, which allow for vertical integration - are expected to submit their applications to the commission this week, with the awarding of licenses anticipated to take place on Tuesday, Dec. 12.

 

[Baron23]

They are fucking it up yet once again....this is like deja vu all over again. Wow, every time I think I have plumbed the depths of my contempt for government incompetence, they give me new ammo. What a bunch of clowns

Medical Marijuana dispensary licenses blocked in Alabama amid dispute over selection process​

Alabama Judge Temporarily Blocks Medical Marijuana Dispensary Licenses Amid Legal Battle.​

A judge temporarily blocked Alabama from issuing licenses to medical marijuana dispensaries amid an ongoing legal battle over how the state selected the winning companies.


Montgomery Circuit Judge James Anderson issued a temporary restraining order late Thursday to stop the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission from issuing licenses to the four dispensaries. The licenses will be on hold while he hears a challenge to the selection process.


The court order is the latest development in an ongoing legal battle that has plagued the start of Alabama’s medical marijuana program. Alabama lawmakers voted to allow medical marijuana in the state in 2021. Commission officials are aiming to make the products available in 2024 after a series of delays.


The ruling affects only the dispensaries. Brittany Peters, a spokeswoman for the commission, said Friday that the commission has issued licenses to other companies that were selected to cultivate, transport, and test marijuana.


The commission next month is set to issue the coveted “integrated” licenses for multifunctional companies that grow, transport and sell medical marijuana. Anderson has not yet ruled on a request to block the issuance of the integrated licenses.


Yellowhammer Medical Dispensaries had sought the pause on the dispensary licenses. Yellowhammer was selected in the commission’s first two attempts to award the licenses this summer, but the commission rescinded the awards amid disputes about the selection process. Yellowhammer was not selected in the latest round.


Patrick Dungan, a lawyer representing Yellowhammer, said the company is pleased to see the court intervene.


Dungan said Yellowhammer had unsuccessfully urged the commission to allow two dispensary licenses to go forward and withhold a decision on the final two. He said the company is “only looking for a fair opportunity to be heard on how we were denied a license after achieving the second-highest score and being awarded a license twice.”


Anderson said he is sympathetic to concerns about delaying the availability of medical marijuana but said a pause on the licenses is merited.

 

[Baron23]

Alabama cannabis program is just a gift that keeps on giving...like a really bad case of venereal disease. Wow.

A conspiracy with Medical Cannabis licenses?​

Recent court filings in the ongoing lawsuits over Alabama’s medical cannabis licensing hint at a conspiracy.​

wo medical cannabis companies that have filed suit against the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission appear to believe that the AMCC commissioners and/or staff conspired with one or more applicant companies to improperly influence the licensing process, according to a legal filing submitted in the case on Tuesday.


The filing, which was submitted by Insa Alabama and Alabama Always in their joint lawsuit against the AMCC, lays out numerous questions the companies want the AMCC to answer and lists documents and materials that it wants the AMCC to produce.


That production would come in response to an order issued by Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge James Anderson, who ruled last week that the licensing process for integrated facilities should be stalled again and that the plaintiff companies had a right to depose six individuals and make numerous requests for documents and submit several interrogatories that must be answered.


The AMCC has requested that Anderson revisit that decision, arguing that the order doesn’t align with the legal process for open meetings claims. Anderson on Tuesday also set a hearing date to address the AMCC’s claims – which included a threat to appeal the judge’s decision – for Thursday morning.


As part of Tuesday’s filing, Insa and Alabama Always, in the first question to the AMCC, ask that it admit that AMCC commissioners, employees or agents engaged in conversations external to the formal meetings with applicants or their representatives related to the applicants or the scoring/voting/ranking process. In the next question, the plaintiffs ask that AMCC admit that staff members encouraged one or more commissioners to vote for specific applicants.


Those questions fall in line with suspicions that attorneys for the plaintiff companies have hinted at for months now in interviews and court filings and hearings. Those suspicions center on a rigged process that has been purposefully plagued with issues, because it was being improperly manipulated behind the scenes.


While such allegations are typically chalked up to conspiracy theories, the volume of weird incidents, strange mistakes, inexplicable decisions and violations of laws and regulations have given weight to the charges.


Those unending miscues have also left some AMCC commissioners at their wits end. According to two sources close to the Commission, as staff and attorneys scrambled this week to push back against Anderson’s orders for depositions and discovery, some commissioners wanted instead to let the legal process play out and have the questions answered.


“They’re tired of being part of a process in which their integrity is being questioned, and they believe that if there’s nothing to hide then there’s no reason those depositions shouldn’t take place,” one source said.


The sources said at least three commissioners are pushing back against the legal action, and that they took specific exception to the threat made in a filing Monday to appeal to a higher court Anderson’s discovery order.


The request for documents filed on Tuesday lists a trove of records, including all communications between commissioners and staff and any third party related to the scoring/ranking process.


The court has set a deadline of Jan. 19 for all materials to be turned over and all depositions to be completed. In the meantime, the licensing process for medical marijuana in the state is again at a standstill.

 

[Baron23]

More on Alabama's astounding ability to utterly fuck up this program rollout.

‘It doesn’t smell right’: Alabama’s Medical Marijuana debacle continues

After awarding licenses for the third time, regulators are facing another string of lawsuits.​

Alabama’s medical marijuana program has been put on hold yet again by the courts — the latest in a string of delays for a program that originally hoped to launch sales by the end of last year.


And the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission’s attempts to overcome delays due to litigation have seemingly made things worse.


Over the last seven months, the agency has twice awarded licenses — only to rescind them after getting sued by losing applicants. Then in December, they allocated licenses for a third time. That spurred even more litigation.


The end result: It’s still unclear when patients may be able to enroll in the medical program nearly three years after lawmakers passed legislation establishing it.


Alabama is “a complete standout,” said Brian Vicente, a Colorado-based attorney working with veteran Black Alabama horticulturalist Oliver Washington IV, whose company Southeast Cannabis Company was awarded a license in the first two rounds but not the third.


“Normally states have fairly well-thought-out programs that they will then defend and implement,” Vicente said. “Here, they implemented a well-thought-out program but didn’t defend it.”


Alabama made waves when it passed a medical marijuana legalization bill through the Legislature in 2021 — a rarity in a Republican-dominated state.


The legalization law set up a program with limited licenses and a merit-based scoring process. Similar programs in other states have proven vulnerable to delays and legal challenges from companies that lost out on licenses.


Alabama tried to avoid that fate by requiring that licenses be awarded through a “blind” scoring process using an “impartial numerical process.”


“When Alabama first legalized medical marijuana, it was exciting to see a new red state in the South,” said Jesse Alderman, co-chair of Foley Hoag’s cannabis practice, whose team has worked on two Alabama cannabis applications. “At this point, how could you say anything [about the program] other than disaffection and disenchantment?”


Southeast Cannabis Company filed a lawsuit against the agency this month in hopes of getting the AMCC to issue the license Washington was originally awarded back in June, joining 10 other cannabis companies challenging the third licensing round in state court. Southeast Cannabis Company paid a $50,000 license fee to the Commission at the time and still hasn’t received its license.


“It just doesn’t smell right,” said Patrick Dungan, another attorney for Washington.


Dungan argues that the process used by commissioners in the third licensing round yielded “inconsistent results” and “completely arbitrary” rankings.


“You can’t decide now that the game’s over that you want to change the rules [and] flip the scoreboard to 0-0 and replay the fourth quarter with new rules,” Dungan said.


The 10 other companies suing over the third round of licensing also take issue with what they say is the arbitrary nature of the latest allocations. They point out that the first two rounds of licensing decisions relied on third-party, blind scorers from the University of Southern Alabama. That was intended to guard against misconduct and even corruption that has happened with similar programs in other jurisdictions.


But facing litigation and delays after the second round of licensing, the Commission agreed to a settlement in November that threw out the scores from the first two rounds, and passed emergency rules to guide its third round of licensing. The emergency rules allowed each applicant to make a presentation before regulators — a process Dugan described as a “dog and pony show.”


A spokesperson for the AMCC declined to comment on pending litigation.


The court has granted temporary restraining orders, preventing the Commission from issuing licenses for dispensaries and vertically integrated cannabis businesses.


The Commission is now pushing back in court on the temporary restraining order and asking the court to deny the plaintiffs’ motion for a more permanent preliminary injunction.


On Saturday, the court delayed a hearing on the preliminary injunction from Jan. 24 to Feb. 28.


It’s unclear what the timeline will be for all this litigation and when regulators will be able to move forward with issuing medical cannabis licenses. It all depends on the outcome of the Feb. 28 hearing, said Dungan. But he also expects whatever decision the court makes to be appealed.


Since only dispensaries and vertically integrated cannabis businesses are suing over the third round, it could create another bewildering problem for the fledgling market: producers making cannabis products with no retailers to actually get them out to patients.