The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) issued an advisory on Tuesday to notify the public about an initial hearing on the Biden administration\u2019s marijuana rescheduling proposal that\u2019s scheduled for next week.<\/p>\n
The preliminary hearing on Monday, December 2 \u201cwill serve as a procedural day to address legal and logistical issues and discuss future dates for the evidentiary hearing on the merits,\u201d DEA said. \u201cNo witness testimony will be offered or received at this time.\u201d<\/p>\n
While only designated participants and credentialed media will be able to attend the hearing in person, DEA provided a link to a streaming page so anyone can follow the proceedings remotely.<\/p>\n
The agency also included background information on the proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). And it separately made a legal docket publicly accessible<\/a> on an administrative law judge (ALJ) page so people can view key filings in the rescheduling case.<\/p>\n If the rule is finalized, \u201cthe 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,\u201d DEA said<\/a> in the new notice about the upcoming hearing.<\/p>\n \u201cIf marijuana is transferred into Schedule III, the manufacture, distribution, dispensing, and possession of marijuana would remain subject to the applicable criminal prohibitions of the CSA,\u201d DEA said. \u201cAny drugs containing a substance within the CSA\u2019s definition of \u2018marijuana\u2019 would also remain subject to the applicable prohibitions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.\u201d<\/p>\n The rescheduling proceedings have generated significant public interest. While moving marijuana to Schedule III wouldn\u2019t federally legalize it, the reform would free up licensed cannabis businesses to take federal tax deductions and remove certain research barriers.<\/p>\n But while DEA is designated as the \u201cproponent\u201d of the proposed rule, there\u2019s been skepticism about where the agency\u2019s leadership actually stands on the issue and whether it may insert bias into the hearing process.<\/p>\n Part of the reason for that skepticism is because Attorney General Merrick Garland\u2014and not DEA Administrator Anne Milgram\u2014signed the proposed rule, breaking with precedent. The drug agency also said repeatedly throughout the notice of proposed rulemaking that it needed additional information before reaching a conclusion about whether a Schedule III reclassification is appropriate.<\/p>\n In a prehearing statement submitted to ALJ John Mulrooney on Tuesday, DEA previewed the testimony its own witnesses plan to provide<\/a> at the upcoming hearing\u2014without clarifying where it stands on the rescheduling proposal.<\/p>\n The agency also said that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)\u2014which carried out a scientific review that informed the proposal to move cannabis to Schedule III\u2014\u201crejected\u201d its request to provide witnesses.<\/p>\n While the initial preliminary hearing is scheduled for December 2, the merit-based proceedings were delayed until at least early 2025 after Mulrooney notified DEA that it provided insufficient information about the 25 selected witnesses that Milgram submitted<\/a>.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, DEA on Monday denied allegations raised in a recent motion from pro-rescheduling witnesses<\/a> that it was involved in unlawful communications with a prohibitionist witness with the group Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), which separately denied the allegations.<\/p>\n Separately, the judge last week\u00a0denied a request from a cannabis and psychedelics researcher<\/a>\u00a0to postpone the upcoming rescheduling hearing over the agency\u2019s alleged \u201cimproper blocking\u201d of witnesses, while arguing that the process should be halted at least until President-elect Donald Trump\u2019s administration comes into power so it can review the rulemaking.<\/p>\n Mulrooney also\u00a0rejected a veterans group\u2019s petition to participate in the rescheduling hearing<\/a>, which the organization called a \u201ctravesty of justice\u201d that excludes key voices that would be affected by the potential policy change.<\/p>\n For what it\u2019s worth, Vice President Kamala Harris said recently that part of the reason for the delay in the administration\u2019s marijuana rescheduling effort is\u00a0federal bureaucracy that \u201cslows things down,\u201d including at DEA.<\/a><\/p>\n In March, Harris also expressed some frustration with the bureaucratic process of rescheduling marijuana, prior to DOJ\u2019s formal recommendation,\u00a0calling on DEA to expediently finish the job<\/a>.<\/p>\n While the Biden\u2013Harris administration facilitated the review that led to the DOJ rescheduling proposal, Trump has also voiced support for the reform.<\/p>\n In Congress, numerous lawmakers have shared their own perspectives on the proposed reform with DEA and DOJ since the Schedule III announcement was made.<\/p>\n In August, for example, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)\u00a0raised concerns about the Biden administration\u2019s justification<\/a>\u00a0for recommending marijuana rescheduling, demanding answers to questions from federal agencies about how they arrived at that decision in what he described as a rushed and unconventional administrative process.<\/p>\n A week earlier, top Democratic senators\u2014including\u00a0 Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY)\u2014sent a separate letter to DOJ\u2019s Garland and DEA\u2019s Milgram urging the agencies to\u00a0\u201dpromptly finalize\u201d the rule to reschedule marijuana<\/a>.<\/p>\n While rescheduling would remove certain research barriers and free up state-licensed cannabis business to take federal tax deductions under the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code known as 280E, it would not federally legalize marijuana, as the\u00a0Congressional Research Service (CRS) has made known in multiple recent reports<\/a>.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, two additional congressional lawmakers have joined the ranks of GOP members who are challenging what they say is\u00a0the \u201cunusual\u201d process that led the Biden administration to propose rescheduling marijuana<\/a>, expressing concern about how the review was carried out and demanding answers.<\/p>\n Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA)\u00a0condemned the Biden administration\u2019s push to reclassify marijuana<\/a>, as well as legislative efforts to enact bipartisan cannabis banking reform, because he says the policy changes would \u201cprop up this immoral industry\u201d and give a \u201cgreen light to the evil that comes from drug use.\u201d<\/p>\n Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) also blasted the Biden administration over what he described as\u00a0repeated refusals from federal agencies to brief Congress<\/a>\u00a0on its plans and justification for rescheduling marijuana, which he argues fuels speculation that the proposed policy change is politically motivated.<\/p>\n Similarly, 25 GOP congressional lawmakers sent a public comment letter in July opposing the administration\u2019s planned rescheduling of marijuana, specifically alleging\u00a0the government\u2019s recommendation was based on politics rather than science<\/a>.<\/p>\n Federal Appeals Court Hears Challenge To Gun Ban For Marijuana Consumers<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n \u00a0<\/p>\n The post DEA Posts Details On Next Week\u2019s Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing, Including Live Stream And Documents Portal<\/a> appeared first on Marijuana Moment<\/a>.<\/p>\n
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) issued an advisory on Tuesday to notify the public about an initial hearing on the Biden administration\u2019s marijuana rescheduling proposal that\u2019s scheduled for next week. The preliminary hearing on Monday, December 2 \u201cwill serve as a procedural day to address legal and logistical issues andContinue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":458,"featured_media":0,"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\/79238"}],"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=79238"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79238\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":79239,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79238\/revisions\/79239"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=79238"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=79238"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=79238"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
\nRead More: DEA Posts Details On Next Week\u2019s Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing, Including Live Stream And Documents Portal<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"