Law The Cannabis Chronicles - Misc Cannabis News

[Baron23]

This article is, IMO, a Biden campaign advert and is not at all actual news or analysis.

"“Any drug that is between Schedule 2 and Schedule 5 can be prescribed when appropriate by a licensed provider who has a (Drug Enforcement Administration) registration, like I do. For a full Schedule 1, there is no approved medical use. So this change would allow providers, clinicians across the country to be able to prescribe marijuana as a schedule 3 drug,” said Dr. Gupta."

Here is the BS.....nobody with a medical license is going to "prescribe" an once of good weed for you and no pharmacies are going to be stocking MJ flower. And its still going to be illegal to grow or possess MJ outside of a prescription and its still going to be illegal to sell MJ outside of being a DEA/FDA controlled pharmacy.

If you can't tell the reason behind the sudden interest of the Biden admin on MJ issues then I have a bridge to sell you.

White House's drug czar on the benefits of shifting Marijuana to a Schedule 3 drug​

National Drug Control Policy Director Discusses Marijuana Reclassification Efforts.​

Dr. Rahul Gupta, director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, talks about the changes in marijuana science over the past half-century.


The Department of Justice recently announced that the next step for rescheduling marijuana has taken place.


Marijuana has historically been classified as a Schedule 1 drug — those with no medical use and a high potential for abuse.


The Biden administration is working to move marijuana to a Schedule 3 drug, those that have a medical use and moderate to low potential for abuse.


WGCU's Cary Barbor spoke to Dr. Rahul Gupta, director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, to get more detail on this change.


“Schedule 1, where marijuana currently resides, is one that is defined by having no medical benefit and high risk for addiction. It is in the company of drugs like heroin, LSD and ecstasy,” said Dr. Gupta.


“It's been quite a bit of science that has developed over the last few years, certainly since more than a half-century ago when those placements happened, that show us that this may not be where it belongs. So the move to Schedule 3, where there are recognizable medical benefits to a substance, is one that is a recommendation based on science and evidence.


"It does make sense to make sure that we're pursuing science and evidence when it comes to medications and use those medications for Americans with chronic illnesses, chronic pain, diseases like cancer. It also allows us to expand on the research and development both for users as well as for new drugs potential in the future for other ailments. And then finally, too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana over the past more than a half-century. And that's why, back in 2022, President Biden had requested that Department of Justice and Health and Human Services services conduct this review.”


Dr. Gupta went on to explain that Biden has pardoned some people who were in prison on federal marijuana-related charges. A pardon for state charges locally would only be possible if Florida changes its laws.


If marijuana is moved from Schedule 1 to Schedule 3, it can be prescribed by a licensed provider.


“Any drug that is between Schedule 2 and Schedule 5 can be prescribed when appropriate by a licensed provider who has a (Drug Enforcement Administration) registration, like I do. For a full Schedule 1, there is no approved medical use. So this change would allow providers, clinicians across the country to be able to prescribe marijuana as a schedule 3 drug,” said Dr. Gupta.


Gupta goes on to say that research has shown that there are proper medical uses of marijuana.


“One of the things that we have to focus is the science. But today, the science takes us in a direction that there are some medical uses of marijuana. We must allow Americans to take advantage of that, for example, those who are suffering from chronic pain, other chronic illnesses, cancer, this may be something of a better option for them,” he said.


“At the same time, we must understand that for children whose brains are still developing, up to the age of 22 to 25, it's important that any illicit substance, whether it be marijuana or others, not interfere in the development of the brain. So prevention for young people of any drugs is still important and key.


"But at the same time, allowing us to be able to have appropriate science-based categorization of drugs that can help Americans is important. Of course, the increasing concentrations of THC and others are something that concerns all of us. And one way to address that is by having it as Schedule 3.”


Categorizing marijuana as a Schedule 3 drug, he says, will allow for more research.


A 60-day public comment period will begin soon, after which the Department of Justice will make a final scheduling determination.

 

[Baron23]

Biden Drug Czar Says Marijuana Rescheduling Is ‘Based On Science And Evidence’ But Misstates Impact On Prescription Access

The Biden administration’s drug czar said this week that the Justice Department’s recommendation to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) is one “based on science and evidence,” adding that the change will ease research restrictions around the use of cannabis to treat “chronic illnesses, chronic pain and diseases like cancer.” But he appears to have oversimplified what the change will mean for legal prescription access to medical marijuana.


“It’s been quite a bit of science that has developed over the last few years, certainly since more than a half century ago when those placements happened, that show us that this may not be where it belongs,” Rahul Gupta, the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), said in comments to WGCU, referring to cannabis’s current Schedule I status.


“So the move to Schedule III, where there are recognizable medical benefits to a substance, is one that is a recommendation based on science and evidence,” he added. “It does make sense to make sure that we’re pursuing science and evidence when it comes to medications and use those medications for Americans with chronic illnesses, chronic pain, diseases like cancer.”


It appears the drug czar may have oversimplified the process of accessing medical marijuana once the rescheduling move takes place, however, suggesting that the change itself could make cannabis federally legally available to patients.


“Any drug that is between Schedule II and Schedule V can be prescribed when appropriate by a licensed provider who has a DEA registration, like I do,” Gupta told WGCU. “For a full Schedule I, there is no approved medical use. So this change would allow providers, clinicians across the country to be able to prescribe marijuana as a Schedule III drug.”







A report published by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) earlier this month disagrees. It says further action from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would be needed before marijuana products become available by prescription.


“If marijuana were moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, it could in theory be dispensed and used by prescription for medical purposes,” the report from congressional researchers says. “However, prescription drugs must be approved by FDA. Although FDA has approved some drugs derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug.”


CRS has also noted that rescheduling would not legalize cannabis or bring state-regulated markets—including medical marijuana systems—“into compliance” with federal law.


Broadly, Gupta in the recent interview positioned Schedule III as a middle ground between making marijuana legally available to medical patients while preventing drug use by young people.


“Today, the science takes us in a direction that there are some medical uses of marijuana. We must allow Americans to take advantage of that, for example, those who are suffering from chronic pain, other chronic illnesses, cancer, this may be something of a better option for them,” he said. “At the same time, we must understand that for children whose brains are still developing, up to the age of 22 to 25, it’s important that any illicit substance, whether it be marijuana or others, not interfere in the development of the brain.”


“Prevention for young people of any drugs is still important and key,” he continued. “But at the same time, allowing us to be able to have appropriate science-based categorization of drugs that can help Americans is important. Of course, the increasing concentrations of THC and others are something that concerns all of us. And one way to address that is by having it as Schedule III.”


Gupta also said that “too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana over the past more than a half century.”


“That’s why, back in 2022, President Biden had requested that Department of Justice and Health and Human Services services conduct this review,” he said.


Biden administration officials have been touting the president’s actions on cannabis since 2022, including rounds of pardons he’s granted to people with past drug-related federal convictions. Vice President Kamala Harris last month, for example, reiterated at an event last month she doesn’t believe “people should have to go to jail for smoking weed.”


“We have issued—as an administration with President Biden’s leadership—more pardons and commutations than any recent administration at this point in their term,” she said. “For example, on marijuana: We have pardoned all people for federal convictions for simple marijuana possession.”


Advocates have been encouraged to see the administration continue to grant and promote clemency for people criminalized over drugs, but they’ve also emphasized that thousands of people remain incarcerated over federal marijuana offenses.


In March, 36 members of Congress implored Biden to grant clemency to all Americans currently in federal prison over non-violent cannabis convictions by commuting their sentences, pointing out that the pardons he’s issued to date for simple possession cases did not release a single person from incarceration.


A former drug czar who served under President Barack Obama recently took a sharply different position on marijuana rescheduling than Gupta. Former ONDCP Director Gil Kerlikowske recently said that cannabis is “not medicine” and that rescheduling was “all Big Cannabis.”


“This isn’t people my age that are just old hippies that want to open up a pot shop somewhere” Kerlikowske said on the podcast of former U.S. Rep. Mary Bono (R). “This is a huge business like Big Tobacco. Absolutely.”


Meanwhile, the proposed rule to federally reschedule marijuana was officially posted last week, kicking off a public comment period that’s expected to elicit a major response from supporters and opponents of cannabis reform.


Marijuana reform advocates and stakeholders have made clear that they intend to leverage the opportunity, with some planning to support the reclassification while others intend to call for descheduling cannabis altogether. Prohibitionists are expected to oppose the incremental policy change and seek to keep marijuana in Schedule I, and there’s also a looming threat of litigation.


While DOJ will take all public comments submitted by July 22 into consideration as it weighs the reform, it said in the notice that one of the topics its especially interested in hearing about is the “unique economic impacts” of the rescheduling proposal given that state-level legalization has created a “multibillion dollar industry” that stands to benefit from possible federal tax relief under the reform.


When Biden announced the administration’s rescheduling action last week, he described it as consistent with his belief that nobody should be jailed over cannabis possession. As a statutory matter, that wouldn’t necessarily apply with simple rescheduling because it’d remain federally illegal. But the White House has not publicly commented on the economic impacts of the incremental reform.


On Capitol Hill, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and colleagues have reintroduced legislation to federally legalize cannabis and impose certain regulations. The bill’s prospects are dubious in the current divided Congress, however.


Meanwhile, the top Democrat in the U.S. House said that the Biden administration’s move to reschedule marijuana is a “step in the right direction,” but it should be followed up with congressional action such as passing the legalization bill Schumer filed.


In a recent interview with Fox News, former DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson said it “absolutely looks like” the agency will follow through with moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the CSA.


Biden has separately issued two rounds of mass pardons for people who’ve committed federal marijuana possession offenses. Again, a Schedule III reclassification would not legalize cannabis or free people still incarcerated over cannabis.


During his run for the presidency, Biden pledged to move cannabis to Schedule II—a stricter category compared to what’s been proposed by his administration

 

[Baron23]

Feds Begin Accepting Marijuana Rescheduling Comments, With Key Reform Groups Previewing How They Plan To Influence The Process​

The Biden administration’s proposed rule to federally reschedule marijuana has officially been posted, kicking off a public comment period that’s expected to elicit a major response from supporters and opponents of cannabis reform alike.


About a week after President Joe Biden and the Justice Department both confirmed that they are seeking to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the rule was published in the Federal Register on Tuesday.


That initiates a 60-day public comment period, after which point there may be an administrative hearing to receive additional input before the rule is potentially finalized.


Marijuana reform advocates and stakeholders have made clear that they intend to leverage the opportunity, with some planning to support the reclassification while others intend to call for descheduling cannabis altogether. Prohibitionists are expected to oppose the incremental policy change and seek to keep marijuana in Schedule I, and there’s also a looming threat of litigation.


While DOJ will take all public comments submitted by July 22 into consideration as it weighs the reform, it said in the notice that one of the topics its especially interested in hearing about is the “unique economic impacts” of the rescheduling proposal given that state-level legalization has created a “multibillion dollar industry” that stands to benefit from possible federal tax relief under the reform.


DOJ said “marijuana is subject to a number of State laws that have allowed a multibillion dollar industry to develop,” and the department “acknowledges that there may be large impacts related to Federal taxes and research and development investment for the pharmaceutical industry, among other things.”


More broadly, the Federal Register notice says that “DOJ is seeking comment on the practical consequences of rescheduling marijuana into schedule III under the relevant statutory frameworks.”


When Biden announced the administration’s rescheduling action last week, he described it as consistent with his belief that nobody should be jailed over cannabis possession. As a statutory matter, that wouldn’t necessarily apply with simple rescheduling because it’d remain federally illegal. But the White House has not publicly commented on the economic impacts of the incremental reform.


On the one hand, many advocates have welcomed the rescheduling determination, given that it represents the first time in over 50 years that the federal government has recognized the medical value and relatively low abuse potential of a plant that’s been legalized in some form in the vast majority of states.


On the other hand, activists have emphasized that rescheduling does not federally legalize marijuana or provide corrective relief to people who’ve been criminalized over it. And, of course, prohibitionists have urged DEA to keep marijuana in Schedule I and are expected to litigate if the agency moves forward with the incremental reform.


Key cannabis reform groups previewed their comment strategy to Marijuana Moment.


NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano said his organization “is in a unique position to mobilize interested parties to provide their perspectives throughout the public comment period.”


“In particular, I think it is important that the voices of both physicians and patients are heard and considered, as the Justice Department clearly weighed the widespread acceptance of medical cannabis among those in the medical community and among those residing in medical use states in making their decision to reclassify,” he said.


“In addition, NORML will be submitting our own comprehensive comments substantiating the evidentiary record that cannabis possesses accepted medical utility and comparatively low dependence liability,” Armentano said. “We will also be addressing a number of the issues raised by opponents, as well as the DEA, with respect to cannabis’ impact on public health and making it clear that such concerns do not warrant continuing to classify cannabis as a Schedule I substance.”


“While NORML ultimately favors descheduling rather than rescheduling, we also understand that reclassification is associated both symbolic and tangible benefits to the cannabis community, both in the short-term and in the long-term,” he said.


Cat Packer, director of drug markets and legal regulation at the Drug Policy Alliance, told Marijuana Moment that “it’s critically important that individuals and communities adversely and disproportionately impacted by cannabis criminalization and those that support federal marijuana decriminalization, make their voices heard in the public comment process.”


“While rescheduling would continue federal marijuana criminalization, this public comment period provides an unprecedented opportunity for the public to demonstrate to federal leaders that rescheduling is not enough and to reiterate the public’s support for reforms beyond rescheduling, including legalization,” she said.


“Even cannabis industry participants, who would benefit from Schedule III’s tax relief, have an opportunity to leverage this public comment process to bring attention to the harms of federal criminalization, those impacted and to advocate for reforms that would acknowledge, end and address the harms of criminalization and shift the federal government towards a federal framework that better promotes public health, public safety, equity and the will of the American people,” Packer said.


Organizations that represent the interests of the marijuana industry are also planning to make their voices heard in the comment process.


David Culver, senior vice president of public affairs, for the U.S. Cannabis Council, told Marijuana Moment that the group will be submitting a comment on the proposed rule “shortly.”


“We plan to survey the far-reaching benefits of moving cannabis to Schedule III and highlight the rigor behind the scientific and legal analyses underpinning the shift,” he said. “And we’ll take the opportunity to thank President Biden and his administration for implementing the most significant cannabis reform in American history.”


Adam Goers, co-chair of the Coalition for Cannabis Scheduling Reform, said that the rescheduling proposal “is built upon a foundation of unassailable scientific evidence,” adding that his organization will “use the public comment period to expand upon the overwhelming scientific case for Schedule III.”


Prohibitionist organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) told its supporters in a recent email blast that it is “working with an esteemed law firm specializing in administrative law to craft the strongest challenge possible.”


“Together, we are working on our comment and content strategy which we will then ask you to help us with,” the group said. “This is a long game and we will have one shot to present our best arguments. It is better to put forth the strongest possible comment than to submit something quickly, so we do not anticipate having final guidance for you by Tuesday. But we are working overtime to equip you as soon as possible and hope to have it soon after the 60-day period begins.”


SAM previously launched a fundraising effort in support of its plans to challenge the cannabis rescheduling move, including through potential litigation.


DEA Administrator Anne Milgram has acknowledged the possibility of an administrative hearing to gain further input on the decision before its finalized. Requests that a public hearing be held must be submitted by June 20.


The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has also weighed in on the rescheduling development, saying in a report that while it was “likely” that DEA would enact the policy change, that would not bring state markets into compliance with federal law. It added that Congress still has the authority to address the federal-state cannabis policy gap “before or after” that reform is enacted.


To that end, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and colleagues have reintroduced legislation to federally legalize cannabis and impose certain regulations. The bill’s prospects are dubious in the current divided Congress, however.


Meanwhile, the top Democrat in the U.S. House said that the Biden administration’s move to reschedule marijuana is a “step in the right direction,” but it should be followed up with congressional action such as passing the legalization bill Schumer filed.


In a recent interview with Fox News, former DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson said it “absolutely looks like” the agency will follow through with moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the CSA.


Biden has separately issued two rounds of mass pardons for people who’ve committed federal marijuana possession offenses. Again, a Schedule III reclassification would not legalize cannabis or free people still incarcerated over cannabis.


It should also be noted that, during his run for the presidency, Biden pledged to move cannabis to Schedule II—a stricter category compared to what’s been proposed by his administration.

 

[Baron23]

Biden Decries a 'Failed Approach to Marijuana' but Sticks With It​

Posted May 22, 2024 on Reason

Rescheduling does not resolve the conflict between federal pot prohibition and state rejection of that policy.​

For half a century, critics have argued that marijuana does not belong in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, a category that is supposedly reserved for drugs with a high potential for abuse and no accepted medical applications that cannot be used safely even under a doctor's supervision. Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) finally agreed, implicitly admitting that the federal government has been lying about marijuana for decades.


"This is monumental," President Joe Biden declared. That is true insofar as monuments look impressive but otherwise do not accomplish much.


Biden is trying to motivate younger voters whose turnout could be crucial to his reelection. But those voters overwhelmingly favor marijuana legalization, and the DOJ proposal falls far short of accomplishing that.


The proposed rule, which will be subject to 60 days of public comment before it is finalized, would move marijuana to Schedule III, which includes prescription drugs such as ketamine, Tylenol with codeine, and anabolic steroids. But that does not mean marijuana will be legally available as a medicine, which would require regulatory approval of specific cannabis-based products.


Trump hush money trial enters new phase after defense rests without testimony from former president.


With marijuana in Schedule III, state-licensed cannabis suppliers will remain criminal enterprises under federal law, albeit subject to less severe penalties. Although an annually renewed congressional spending rider bars the DOJ from interfering with state medical marijuana programs, prosecutorial discretion is the only protection for businesses that serve recreational consumers.


The federally illegal status of state-approved marijuana businesses discourages financial institutions from serving them, since doing so could invite potentially devastating criminal, civil, and regulatory consequences. Moving marijuana to Schedule III will not solve that problem either.


Biden portrays rescheduling as "an important move toward reversing longstanding inequities" caused by the federal government's "failed approach to marijuana." But it will not "decriminalize the use of marijuana," as he promised to do during his 2020 presidential campaign: Simple possession, even for medical purposes, will remain a federal offense punishable by a minimum $1,000 fine and up to a year in jail.


Although Biden decries the "needless barriers to housing, employment, and educational opportunities" created by marijuana convictions, rescheduling will not eliminate those. Nor do his pardons for people convicted of simple marijuana possession under federal law: Although Biden claims he is "expunging thousands of convictions," that is not true, because presidential pardons do not expunge criminal records.


Rescheduling, even combined with clemency, also does not lift the various legal disabilities associated with marijuana convictions, cannabis consumption, or participation in the cannabis industry. Those include loss of Second Amendment rights (a policy that Biden defends) and ineligibility for admission, legal residence, and citizenship under immigration law.


What does rescheduling accomplish? In practical terms, the two main benefits of moving marijuana to Schedule III are fewer regulatory barriers to medical research and a financial boon to state-licensed cannabis suppliers, who will no longer be barred from deducting standard business expenses when they file their federal tax returns.


That is not nothing. Abandoning the pretense that marijuana meets the criteria for Schedule I also represents progress of a sort.


That reversal, however, comes at a time when 38 states have legalized medical use of marijuana, two dozen have taken the further step of legalizing recreational use, and seven out of 10 Americans oppose pot prohibition. In this context, admitting what most of us already knew is a pitifully inadequate concession.


Rescheduling and clemency fail to address today's central cannabis issue: the conflict between a federal government that is maintaining a scientifically dubious, morally bankrupt policy and states that have decisively rejected it. And Biden, despite his pose as a longtime drug warrior who has seen the error of his ways, is a big part of that problem.


The president, citing old-timey "gateway drug" concerns, has steadfastly resisted attempts to resolve this conflict by repealing the federal ban on marijuana. Even while condemning the injustice inflicted by a "failed approach to marijuana," he is sticking with it.

 

[Baron23]

DEA Publishes Proposed Rules To Reschedule Marijuana​

Posted May 22, 2024 on Forbes

The path toward the federal rescheduling of marijuana takes a step forward with the DEA's publication of proposed rules open to comments.​

The Drug Enforcement Administration published yesterday proposed rules in the U.S. Federal Register to reschedule marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act.


This represents a further concrete step forward in changing U.S. marijuana policy, easing industry regulations, and marking the most significant change in national marijuana legislation since 1970.


This proposal initiates a 62-day public comment period, a necessary step in the formal federal rulemaking process.


The DEA, a component of the Department of Justice, will accept public comments until July 22, as stated in Tuesday’s notice, and will consider requests for a public hearing before an administrative law judge until June 20.


If DEA Administrator Anne Milgram decides to hold a hearing, further notice will be published in the Federal Register. However, the DEA's notice doesn't specify how long the agency will review the public comments before finalizing a rule.


The process to reschedule marijuana began in October 2022 when President Joe Biden issued an executive order directing agencies to "expeditiously review" the policy of classifying marijuana.


In August 2023, after reviewing information including data from states with legal cannabis programs, the Department of Health and Human Services determined that "marijuana has a currently accepted use" and recommended reclassifying it as a Schedule 3 drug. In that process, the HHS considered eight factors, including the drug's actual or relative potential for abuse, scientific evidence and its current scientific knowledge, marijuana's history and current pattern of abuse, the scope, duration, and significance of abuse; potential risk there is to the public health, potential addiction, and whether marijuana is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled.


This category includes drugs like anabolic steroids, ketamine, and testosterone, which are legally available and can be obtained through prescription.


In this context, the DEA's notice highlighted that if marijuana is reclassified to Schedule III, the regulatory controls for Schedule III substances, along with existing marijuana-specific requirements and any additional controls to meet U.S. treaty obligations, would apply as appropriate. The manufacture, distribution, dispensing, and possession of marijuana would still be subject to the criminal prohibitions of the CSA. Drugs containing substances defined as "marijuana" under the CSA would also remain subject to the prohibitions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service, and you acknowledge our Privacy Statement. Forbes is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.


The big change for the cannabis industry would be that marijuana listed in Schedule III of the CSA wouldn't be subject to Internal Revenue Service Code Section 280E, which is currently preventing marijuana businesses from taking certain deductions on their federal tax returns.


It's worth highlighting that the rescheduling of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III wouldn't legalize marijuana for adult use. To achieve this, marijuana should be descheduled from the CSA.


The publication of the notice proposing rules for the rescheduling of marijuana follows the DEA's reported plan on April 30 to reclassify marijuana, recognizing its medical uses and acknowledging it has less potential for abuse than some of the nation’s most dangerous drugs and President Biden's official announcement to ease marijuana regulations.


Biden described this move as "monumental," marking a significant step "towards reversing longstanding inequities."

 

[momofthegoons]

Last week, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) finally agreed, implicitly admitting that the federal government has been lying about marijuana for decades.


"This is monumental," President Joe Biden declared.

Sigh...... Biden, the anti-drug warrior and author of the 1994 crime bill regarding 'drugs,' says it's 'monumental' that they have admitted they've been lying? Seriously? With no culpability on his part?

I'm going to leave it at that so that I don't break my own rules......

 

[Baron23]

Sigh...... Biden, the anti-drug warrior and author of the 1994 crime bill regarding 'drugs,' says it's 'monumental' that they have admitted they've been lying? Seriously? With no culpability on his part?

I'm going to leave it at that so that I don't break my own rules......

You got it in one, Mom.

 

[Baron23]

And why are they (the DEA) being asked and not told? Nobody voted for them....they are, in this instance, the epitome of the bureaucratic deep state.

Top Biden Health Official Hints At DEA Resistance To Marijuana Rescheduling Move​

President Joe Biden’s health secretary is suggesting that federal drug enforcement officials are not necessarily on board with the administration’s plan to reschedule marijuana.

Asked about the status of the proposed move of cannabis to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act at a recent event in Sacramento, U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra said his agency “took action” based on available science and evidence, saying that the ball is now in the Department of Justice’s court.

He dodged a follow-up question, however, about rumored pushback against the reform by Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) officials.
Only 1 in 10 Americans Say Marijuana Should Be Illegal.

“We did our job,” Becerra said of the recommendation in an interview with KQED’s Scott Schafer at the CalMatters Ideas Festival on Thursday, adding that DEA “now has the final call to make that happen.”


“Is there resistance in DEA?” Schafer inquired.



“Talk to DEA,” answered Becerra, repeating: “We did our job.”


“I’m gonna take that as a yes,” Schafer replied.


“Our scientists reviewed the evidence,” Becerra responded. “FDA bases its action on the science and the evidence before us. We took action.”


During the interview, Schafer also asked Becerra whether he has “any concerns, as the father of three daughters—three children—you know, about the use of marijuana?”


“I have concerns when they get out and drive a car, or they go out at night and they’re over 21. I have lots of concerns,” Becerra said. “Thank God they’ve got great heads on their shoulders. And on something like cannabis, I think they would continue to have great heads on their shoulders.”


“Look, if my daughters could go out and buy a pint of whiskey or a menthol cigarette—we know what we’re up against,” he continued. “And let’s be real: You can’t incarcerate your way to a solution here. You can regulate it. And if you regulate it the right way, which we’re supposed to do for alcohol and cigarettes and all the rest, then we can manage it. But we have to make a decision.”


“More than half of the states have made a decision that they’d rather regulate this than criminalize it,” Becerra added of medical marijuana. “The U.S. FDA, the scientists, have spoken and said we should deschedule from Schedule I to Schedule III on cannabis.”


Becerra’s handling of the question about “resistance” at DEA comes amid ongoing speculation over the internal politics within the administration on marijuana rescheduling.


Indications that DEA might not be on board came alongside the rescheduling move itself, with the proposed rule in the Federal Register noting several times that the agency believes “additional information” needs to be collected via public comment or a possible administrative hearing could influence the final scheduling decision.



“DEA has not yet made a determination as to its views of the appropriate schedule for marijuana,” the document said.


Adding to questions about a possible disconnect between DOJ and DEA over the proposal is the fact that the attorney general, rather than the DEA administrator, signed the draft rule.


Even before the formal announcement, it had been reported that certain DEA officials had been “at odds” with the Biden administration over the rescheduling push.



A DEA official was also absent last week from a scheduled appearance to discuss marijuana policy and regulatory oversight issues for cannabinoid research.


The moderator of that panel said the DEA representative cancelled at the last moment. DEA did, however, issue a message to attendees that the agency’s “goal is to support researchers as they navigate this registration process” to study Schedule I drugs like cannabis, “and outreach is a key component of their model to provide that support,” according to the moderator.


The proposed rule to federally reschedule marijuana was officially posted last month, kicking off a public comment period that’s expected to elicit a major response from supporters and opponents of cannabis reform.


Marijuana reform advocates and stakeholders have made clear that they intend to leverage the opportunity, with some planning to support the reclassification and others intending to call for descheduling cannabis altogether. Prohibitionists are expected to oppose the incremental policy change and seek to keep marijuana in Schedule I, and there’s also a looming threat of litigation.



While DOJ will take all public comments submitted by July 22 into consideration as it weighs the reform, it said in the notice that one of the topics its especially interested in hearing about is the “unique economic impacts” of the rescheduling proposal given that state-level legalization has created a “multibillion dollar industry” that stands to benefit from possible federal tax relief under the reform.


On Capitol Hill, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and colleagues have reintroduced legislation to federally legalize cannabis and impose certain regulations. The bill’s prospects are dubious in the current divided Congress, however.



Meanwhile, the top Democrat in the U.S. House said that the Biden administration’s move to reschedule marijuana is a “step in the right direction,” but it should be followed up with congressional action such as passing the legalization bill Schumer filed.


In a recent interview with Fox News, former DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson said it “absolutely looks like” the agency will follow through with moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the CSA.


Biden has separately issued two rounds of mass pardons for people who’ve committed federal marijuana possession offenses. Again, a Schedule III reclassification would not legalize cannabis or free people still incarcerated over cannabis.


During his run for the presidency, Biden pledged to move cannabis to Schedule II—a stricter category compared to what’s been proposed by his administration.

 

[Baron23]

" approved a large-scale defense bill that includes a section to prevent military branches from testing recruits for marijuana as a condition of enlistment has been left intact, despite opposition from the White House."

​

U.S. House Votes To Ban Military From Testing Recruits For Marijuana As A Condition Of Enrollment​

The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a large-scale defense bill that includes a section to prevent military branches from testing recruits for marijuana as a condition of enlistment has been left intact, despite opposition from the White House.


While the House Rules Committee on Tuesday blocked a number of pro- and anti-cannabis amendments from floor consideration, the full chamber’s approval of the underlying bill means the military marijuana screening section, as well as psychedelics report language, is advancing.


The House passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) in a 217-199 vote on Friday.


Because the Rules Committee declined to make in order an amendment that would have eliminated the cannabis testing provision, this language remains intact in the approved legislation:


SEC. 532 PROHIBITION ON CANNABIS TESTING FOR ENLISTMENT OR COMMISSION IN CERTAIN ARMED FORCES.


Subject to subsection (a) of section 504 of chapter 31 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of the military department concerned may not require an individual to submit to a test for cannabis as a condition of enlistment of such individual as a member, or the commission of such individual as an officer, of an Armed Force.


The section mirrors a proposed amendment to DOD appropriations legislation last year that was led by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL).


Ahead of the markup on Tuesday, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) put out a statement of administration policy that opposed the NDAA language, asserting that cannabis use is a “military readiness and safety concern.”


“Because Joe Biden was running out of ways to turn off young voters, he decided to oppose any cannabis reform that didn’t enrich big pharma,” Gaetz told Marijuana Moment on Tuesday after the OMB document was posted.


DOD told lawmakers last year that marijuana’s active ingredient delta-9 THC is the most common substance that appears on positive drug tests for active duty military service members. And several military branches have taken steps to loosen cannabis-related restrictions, including issuing waivers for recruits who test positive their first time.


The Rules Committee on Tuesday also rejected proposed amendments to prevent security clearance denials based on past marijuana use and codify that military servicemembers can’t be penalized for using or possessing federally legal hemp products and allow veterans to access state medical marijuana programs and eliminate a VA directive barring the department’s doctors from issuing cannabis recommendations.


While the panel didn’t allow the VA-specific amendment to advance as part of the NDAA, the reform was approved by the House last week as part of appropriations legislation covering Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies (MilConVA).


Meanwhile, the House-approved NDAA report contains several other marijuana-related directives that were included in the proposal as approved by the House Armed Services Committee.


One from Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) added report language for the NDAA that would require DOD to issue a report on how many service members have been discharged due to marijuana.


The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the House Committee on Armed Services and the Senate Committee on Armed Services on the number of servicemembers discharged from service on the sole basis of marijuana use not later than December 1, 2024. The report shall include the total number of servicemembers discharged over the previous ten years, the number discharged by year, and the state or location these service members resided at the time of discharge.


An additional amendment from Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV) that was adopted by the panel would require a DOD briefing on sentencing for cannabis-related offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.


Briefing on Sentencing of Cannabis-Related Offenses Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice In 2019, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reported that some disparities exist in different stages of the military justice process, including at courts-martial. The committee acknowledges and commends the Department for its numerous initiatives to address identified disparities and to reform the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including by implementing sentencing parameters pursuant to section 539E(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022. The committee further recognizes that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has agreed with the Department of Health and Human Services’ recommendation to reschedule Cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act.


To better understand potential disparities in sentencing outcomes for cannabis-related offenses, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military services, to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than January 31, 2025, on the following:


1) the number of convictions, broken down by service, for cannabis use for the last four fiscal years, disaggregated by time in service, rank/grade, sex, race, and ethnicity;


2) the number of convictions, broken down by service, for cannabis possession for the last four fiscal years, disaggregated by time in service, rank/grade, sex, race, and ethnicity;


3) the number of convictions, broken down by service, for cannabis use and possession, for the last four fiscal years, disaggregated by time in service, rank/grade, sex, race, and ethnicity; and


4) for each of the categories listed above, an assessment of whether any disparities exist based on time in service, rank/grade, sex, race, or ethnicity in the reviewed sentencing of servicemembers, broken down by service.


Mace has also touted a separate amendment that she said “supports states’ rights by incorporating findings from 38 state marijuana programs into research.”


The committee notes that to date, 38 states have implemented state regulatory programs for marijuana and therefore retain a level of knowledge and lessons learned regarding regulations and trends among producers, products, and consumer habits. The committee believes that the Department of Defense program established under Section 723 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) to study the effectiveness of psychedelic substances and plant-based therapies, including marijuana, in treating post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injuries should incorporate findings and data collected by State-approved marijuana regulatory programs. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the House Committee on Armed Services not later than January 31, 2025, on the extent to which the Department is coordinating with States which have regulatory programs for marijuana and incorporating related findings and data collected by State-approved marijuana regulatory programs.


The legislation also includes report language to follow up on provisions in the most recently enacted NDAA that provide funding for DOD-led clinical trials on the therapeutic potential of psychedelics for active duty military service members.


The report language says the committee “wants to ensure the establishment of the program is progressing without impediment,” and calls on DOD to provide Congress with a status update report by January 31, 2025.


Section 723 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Public Law 118-31) established a Department of Defense program to study the effectiveness of psychedelic substances and plant-based therapies in treating post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injuries. The committee wants to ensure the establishment of the program is progressing without impediments. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services no later than January 31, 2025, on the following with regards to the progress of the program:


(1) the Department’s process for funding eligible entities;


(2) the Secretary’s selection for lead administrator to carry out the program;


(3) a list and description of the eligible entities that have been selected for the program;


(4) how the Department notified and selected servicemembers to participate in the program;


(5) how many servicemembers have requested participation in the program;


(6) how many servicemembers have been selected for participation in the program;


(7) any issues the Department is encountering establishing the program;


(8) any anticipated delays to implementing the program; and


(9) any other information the Secretary deems relevant.


Rep. Morgan Luttrell (R-TX), a former Navy SEAL with personal experience with psychedelics treatment who championed the underlying amendment, told Marijuana Moment earlier this year that he planned to separately meet with military leadership to collaborate on how to effectively administer the program.


The Senate Armed Services Committee is considering its version of NDAA this week but hasn’t made the text of its proposal publicly available.


Meanwhile, the House Appropriations Committee on Thursday voted to strip marijuana banking protections from a large-scale spending bill.