![](\"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/1f517-1.png\")
<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
The Justice Department announced on Thursday that Attorney General Merrick Garland has formally initiated the process to reschedule marijuana\u2014releasing DOJ\u2019s proposed rule and a separate legal opinion that informed the decision but which also seemed to signal skepticism from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).<\/p>\n
Shortly after President Joe Biden announced that the administration is moving to reclassify cannabis as a Schedule III drug<\/a> under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), DOJ said Garland \u201chas submitted to the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking initiating a formal rulemaking process.\u201d<\/p>\n It included both the proposed rule that will be published in the Federal Register, kicking off a 60-day public comment period, as well as an Office of Legal Council (OLC) opinion that generally supported the rescheduling action from a legal perspective.<\/p>\n Much of the narrative included in both documents suggests that the Justice Department exercised its authority to make a scheduling determination despite DEA, which has historically been delegated rescheduling authority, seemingly pushing back on the criteria used to justify the modest reform. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not federally legalize it, but it would recognize that cannabis has some accepted medical value and a relatively low abuse potential.<\/p>\n The draft rule points out that, following a scientific review directed by Biden, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) concluded that a Schedule III reclassification was appropriate. However, \u201cDEA has not yet made a determination as to its views of the appropriate schedule for marijuana.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe CSA vests the Attorney General with the authority to schedule, reschedule, or decontrol drugs,\u201d it says. \u201cThe Attorney General has delegated that authority to the DEA Administrator, but also retains the authority to schedule drugs under the CSA in the first instance.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe HHS Assistant Secretary for Health has provided a recommendation for transferring marijuana to schedule III,\u201d it says. \u201cIn light of that recommendation, the Attorney General is exercising the Attorney General\u2019s authority under 21 U.S.C. 811(a) to initiate a rulemaking that proposes the placement of marijuana in schedule III.\u201d<\/p>\n Justice Department Submits Proposed Regulation to Reschedule Marijuana<\/p>\n Proposed Rule Seeks to Move Marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, Emphasizing its Currently Accepted Medical Use in Treatment in the United States<\/p>\n \u2014 U.S. Department of Justice (@TheJusticeDept) May 16, 2024<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n The rule goes through the eight-factor drug scheduling analysis, detailing HHS\u2019s findings on each of the criterion such as abuse potential, pharmacological effects, public health risks, dependence liability and more.<\/p>\n \u201cOverall, these data demonstrate that, although marijuana is associated with a high prevalence of abuse, the profile of and propensity for serious outcomes related to that abuse lead to a conclusion that marijuana is most appropriately controlled in schedule III under the CSA,\u201d it says.<\/p>\n \u201cAfter considering the foregoing facts and data and the recommendation of HHS, and after according binding weight to HHS\u2019s scientific and medical determinations, the Attorney General concludes that there is, at present, substantial evidence that marijuana does not warrant control under schedule I of the CSA.\u201d<\/p>\n Notably, the proposed rule clarifies that the rescheduling action \u201cwould not apply to synthetically derived THC, which is outside the CSA\u2019s definition of marijuana.\u201d Also, it explains that cannabis would continue to be subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), which means cannabis products would require Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in order to be lawfully introduced into interstate commerce.<\/p>\n FDA typically does not grant such approval to botanical substances; instead, it has so far only authorized the use of synthetic THC or CBD-derived medications as prescription drugs for certain conditions.<\/p>\n To that end, DOJ emphasized that marijuana would continue to be considered federally illegal, and cannabis-related activity would continue to be criminalized, even if it is rescheduled.<\/p>\n \u201cIf marijuana is transferred to schedule III, the regulatory controls applicable to schedule III controlled substances would apply, as appropriate, along with existing marijuana-specific requirements and any additional controls that might be implemented, including those that might be implemented to meet U.S. treaty obligations. The manufacture, distribution, dispensing, and possession of marijuana would also remain subject to applicable criminal prohibitions under the CSA.\u201d<\/p>\n At several points throughout the document, it notes that DEA believes \u201cadditional information\u201d that could be collected via public comment or a possible administrative hearing could influence the final scheduling decision. 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<\/a>, signed the draft rule.<\/p>\n It was previously reported that certain DEA officials have been \u201cat odds\u201d with the Biden administration over the rescheduling push<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cBased on the legal opinion of OLC and consideration of the scientific and medical evaluation and accompanying recommendation of HHS, the Attorney General is initiating a rulemaking that proposes the placement of marijuana in schedule III of the CSA,\u201d the proposed<\/a> rule says. \u201cDOJ is soliciting comments on this proposal.\u201d<\/p>\n A key component of the Justice Department\u2019s rationale for the rescheduling proposal came from a legal analysis from OLC, which considered questions about DEA\u2019s standards for assessing medical value, HHS\u2019s revised review process and potential implications of rescheduling on international treaty obligations, for example.<\/p>\n OLC concluded that \u201cDEA\u2019s current approach to determining whether a drug has a [currently accepted medical use (CAMU)] is impermissibly narrow, and that satisfying HHS\u2019s two-part inquiry is sufficient to establish that a drug has a CAMU even if the drug has not been approved by FDA and would not satisfy DEA\u2019s five-part test.\u201d<\/p>\n It also determined that HHS\u2019s rescheduling recommendation is binding on DEA\u2014but only until a formal rulemaking process is initiated. But even after that point, \u201cDEA must continue to accord HHS\u2019s scientific and medical determinations significant deference.\u201d<\/p>\n Finally, it concluded that neither the United Nations (UN) Single Convention treaty nor the CSA require DEA to keep marijuana in either Schedule I or Schedule II, as the agency has asserted in previous rejections of rescheduling petitions such as a 2016 denial.<\/p>\n \u201cBoth the Single Convention and the CSA allow DEA to satisfy the United States\u2019 international obligations by supplementing scheduling decisions with regulatory action, at least in circumstances where there is a modest gap between the Convention\u2019s requirements and the specific restrictions that follow from a drug\u2019s placement on a particular schedule,\u201d OLC said. \u201cAs a result, DEA may satisfy the United States\u2019 Single Convention obligations by placing marijuana in Schedule III while imposing additional restrictions pursuant to the CSA\u2019s regulatory authorities.\u201d<\/p>\n Certain conservative congressional lawmakers and prohibitionist groups have insisted that cannabis cannot be placed in Schedule III without violating international treaty obligations<\/a>.<\/p>\n The documents are being released about two weeks after the Justice Department confirmed that DEA was moving to reclassify cannabis<\/a>\u00a0as a Schedule III drug.<\/p>\n The public comment period that will soon open is expected to receive historic attention given widespread public support for broad legalization and competing perspectives about the appropriateness of a Schedule III designation.<\/p>\n 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\u2019s been legalized in some form in the vast majority of states.<\/p>\n On the other hand, activists have emphasized that rescheduling does not federally legalize marijuana or provide corrective relief to people who\u2019ve 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.<\/p>\n DEA Administrator Anne Milgram has also\u00a0acknowledged the possibility of an administrative hearing to gain further input<\/a>\u00a0on the decision before its finalized.<\/p>\n The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has also\u00a0weighed in on the rescheduling development, saying in a report<\/a>\u00a0that while it was \u201clikely\u201d that DEA would enact the policy change, that would not bring state markets into compliance with federal law. It added that\u00a0Congress still has the authority to address the federal-state cannabis policy gap \u201cbefore or after\u201d that reform is enacted.<\/p>\n To that end, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and colleagues have\u00a0reintroduced legislation to federally legalize cannabis<\/a>\u00a0and impose certain regulations. The bill\u2019s prospects are dubious in the current divided Congress, however.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, the top Democrat in the U.S. House said that the Biden administration\u2019s move to reschedule marijuana is a \u201cstep in the right direction,\u201d but it should be\u00a0followed up with congressional action such as passing the legalization bill<\/a>\u00a0Schumer filed.<\/p>\n In a recent interview with Fox News, former\u00a0DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson said it \u201cabsolutely looks like\u201d the agency will follow through<\/a>\u00a0with moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the CSA.<\/p>\n Biden has separately issued two rounds of mass pardons for people who\u2019ve committed federal marijuana possession offenses. Again, a Schedule III reclassification would not legalize cannabis or free people still incarcerated over cannabis.<\/p>\n It should also be noted that, during his run for the presidency,\u00a0Biden pledged to move cannabis to Schedule II<\/a>\u2014a stricter category compared to what\u2019s been proposed by his administration.<\/p>\n Federal Marijuana Prohibition Makes Youth Prevention Efforts \u2018More Difficult,\u2019 Top Anti-Drug Group Official Says<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n The post Attorney General Formally Moves To Reschedule Marijuana, But DEA Signals Resistance Despite DOJ Legal Review<\/a> appeared first on Marijuana Moment<\/a>.<\/p>\n
The Justice Department announced on Thursday that Attorney General Merrick Garland has formally initiated the process to reschedule marijuana\u2014releasing DOJ\u2019s proposed rule and a separate legal opinion that informed the decision but which also seemed to signal skepticism from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Shortly after President Joe Biden announcedContinue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":458,"featured_media":75360,"comment_status":"false","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[18,81],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75359"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/458"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=75359"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75359\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":75361,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75359\/revisions\/75361"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/75360"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75359"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75359"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75359"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
![\"🔗\"](\"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/1f517.png\")
: https:\/\/t.co\/LofmHcq8AD<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/Vn6hSzuNDR<\/a><\/p>\n\n
\n
\nRead More: Attorney General Formally Moves To Reschedule Marijuana, But DEA Signals Resistance Despite DOJ Legal Review<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"