![](\"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/MM_Bill_Tracker_V5_blank-3.jpg\"){kind=tracking}
<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
A Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) judge has denied a cannabis research company\u2019s request to allow it to add a young medical marijuana patient and advocate as a witness<\/a> in an upcoming hearing on the Biden administration\u2019s proposal to reschedule the drug.<\/p>\n Cannabis Bioscience International Holdings (CBIH) had filed a motion to add Alexis Bortell as a witness late in the process, saying that it experienced challenges contacting her earlier. But in an order issued on Wednesday, DEA Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) John Mulrooney said the \u201cpurported, unspecified difficulties in contacting its new proposed witness\u201d did not amount to \u201cgood cause\u201d for the lat request.<\/p>\n \u201cThere was no indication in CBIH\u2019s prehearing statement that it was endeavoring to locate an additional witness or evidence, and the only noticed witness for the organization is its director, the drafter of the Motion to Amend, who is representing his company as a non-lawyer,\u201d the judge said.<\/p>\n The motion \u201cexceeds the one-witness-per-Designated-Party limitations established in this case, without consolidation or an adequate demonstration of good cause for doing so,\u201d the order said. \u201cAdditionally, the Motion to Amend presents insufficient credible good cause for late notice, and seeks to present testimony that is essentially anecdotal.\u201d<\/p>\n Even if the potential testimony described by CBIH \u201cpresents a compelling life story\u201d about Bortell\u2019s experience dealing with intractable epilepsy that benefits from marijuana, Mulrooney said \u201cthere is no proffered evidence of treatment controls or medical documentation that could provide competent and material evidence that would aid in a determination of the present rescheduling hearing.\u201d<\/p>\n Marijuana Moment reached out to CBIH for comment reacting to the judge\u2019s denial, but a representative was not immediately available.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, the judge separately said this week that DEA made a critical \u201cblunder\u201d in its effort to issue subpoenas<\/a> to force Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials to testify in upcoming marijuana rescheduling hearings\u2014but he allowed the agency to fix the error and ultimately granted the request.<\/p>\n Separately, one of the nation\u2019s leading marijuana industry associations is asking the judge to clarify whether it will be\u00a0afforded the opportunity to cross-examine DEA during the upcoming hearings<\/a>\u00a0on the cannabis rescheduling proposal.<\/p>\n Also, a coalition of health professionals that advocates for cannabis reform recently asked that the\u00a0DEA judge halt future marijuana rescheduling hearings<\/a>\u00a0until a federal court is able to address a series of allegations they\u2019re raising about the agency\u2019s witness selection process.<\/p>\n That came on the same day the Mulrooney issued a ruling that laid out\u00a0the timeline for merit-based hearings on the rescheduling proposal<\/a>.<\/p>\n Doctors for Drug Policy Reform (D4DPR) requested that the DEA judge stay the hearings\u2014which are currently set to commence on January 21\u2014pending a review from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Circuit. A separate organization that was also denied participation, Veterans Action Council (VAC),\u00a0similarly filed a petition with the same court last month to request a review<\/a>\u00a0of the agency\u2019s decision to exclude it from the proceedings.<\/p>\n Mulrooney also recently addressed motions seeking to remove DEA from the proceedings altogether, in part due to the alleged unlawful communications with the president of one designated participant, the prohibitionist group Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), signaling that he considered it statutorily complex and potentially impractical to force the agency to turn over its records on the reported\u00a0ex parte<\/em>\u00a0communications.<\/p>\n \u201cIf people were going to be bad people, would they write it down in a memo so that everyone could read it?\u201d he asked attorney Matt Zorn, who filed a\u00a0Freedom of Information Act request and subsequent lawsuit to obtain any records<\/a>\u00a0of the talks and represents D4DPR in the latest motion. \u201cWhat are you chasing? Are you chasing a note that somebody wrote, \u2018I had an improper conversation with somebody else, I wanted to put it the memo in case someone wants to indict me?\u2019\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 In a prehearing statement submitted last month,\u00a0DEA previewed the testimony its two agency witnesses plan to provide<\/a>\u00a0at the upcoming hearing\u2014without clarifying where it stands on the rescheduling proposal.<\/p>\n While the initial preliminary hearing happened last week, the merit-based proceedings were delayed until at least early 2025 after Mulrooney notified DEA that it provided insufficient information about\u00a0the 25 selected witnesses that Milgram submitted<\/a>.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Mulrooney also\u00a0denied a motion to remove the agency from hearings on the cannabis proceedings<\/a>. However, he sharply criticized responses from DEA and a prohibitionist group over an allegation that they unlawfully communicated during the cannabis rulemaking process.<\/p>\n An attorney subsequently\u00a0filed a lawsuit against DEA for allegedly violating federal public records laws<\/a>, requesting that a court compel the agency to disclose communications with SAM.<\/p>\n Separately, the judge\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 \u2014 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. That group has\u00a0asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to intervene<\/a>\u00a0on its behalf.<\/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 Trump\u2019s recently announced pick for DEA administrator, Hillsborough County, Florida Sheriff Chad Chronister,\u00a0backed a cannabis decriminalization policy<\/a>\u00a0enacted by local officials.<\/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 Read the DEA judge\u2019s\u00a0order<\/a> on the cannabis company\u2019s request to add a patient witness below:\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Marijuana CBIH Order DEA<\/a> by KyleJaeger<\/a> on Scribd<\/p>\n\n Federal Health Officials \u2018Rejected\u2019 DEA\u2019s Request To Testify At Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing, Agency Tells Judge<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis \/\/ Side Pocket Images.<\/em><\/p>\n The post DEA Judge Denies Cannabis Research Company\u2019s Request To Add Young Patient As A Witness For Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing<\/a> appeared first on Marijuana Moment<\/a>.<\/p>\n
A Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) judge has denied a cannabis research company\u2019s request to allow it to add a young medical marijuana patient and advocate as a witness in an upcoming hearing on the Biden administration\u2019s proposal to reschedule the drug. Cannabis Bioscience International Holdings (CBIH) had filed a motionContinue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":458,"featured_media":79445,"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\/79444"}],"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=79444"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79444\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":79446,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79444\/revisions\/79446"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/79445"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=79444"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=79444"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=79444"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nMarijuana Moment is tracking more than 1,500 cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills<\/a> in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters<\/a> pledging at least $25\/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don\u2019t miss any developments.<\/strong>
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/MM_Bill_Tracker_V5_blank-2.jpg\"){kind=tracking}
<\/a>
\nLearn more about our marijuana bill tracker<\/a> and become a supporter on Patreon<\/a> to get access.
\n\u2014<\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n
\nRead More: DEA Judge Denies Cannabis Research Company\u2019s Request To Add Young Patient As A Witness For Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"