Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:


After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.

US: DEA Denial Of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition To Be Appealed

NORML - Press Release

Tuesday 27 Mar 2001

---


Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 18:33:34 EST
Subject: DEA DENIAL OF MARIJUANA RESCHEDULING PETITION TO BE APPEALED

Please direct all media inquiries to:

ROBERTO RIONDA
212-935-4500

March 27, 2001

From the Law Offices of Michael Kennedy, New York, NY.

DEA DENIAL OF MARIJUANA RESCHEDULING PETITION TO BE APPEALED

A statement on Behalf of Petitioners Jon Gettman and High Times Magazine.

In a cruel and mean spirited attempt to deprive cancer and other seriously
ill patients with the benefit of medical marijuana, the DEA formally denied
a petition to repeal marijuana's Schedule I status and reschedule it under
the provisions of the Controlled Substance Act (CSA).

The denial of the six year old petition was issued only one week before
oral arguments in the United States Supreme Court case, United States v.
Oakland Buyers' Cooperative and Jeffrey Jones, a separate proceeding in
which the Court will determine the viability of the "medical necessity"
defense for medical marijuana patients. Clearly, the timing of the DEA's
decision was a calculated attempt to strengthen the government's position
in the Supreme Court case with the DEA's conclusions on the petition. This
tactic poses a great danger to ill patients who rely on medical marijuana
because the Supreme Court's decision may be influenced by the flawed
conclusions of the DEA before the rescheduling petition has been appealed.

In denying the petition, the DEA concluded that marijuana has a high
potential for abuse similar to cocaine and heroin, that even small levels
of THC in industrial hemp pose a threat to public health, and that
marijuana use will lead to the use of other drugs. Further, the DEA argues
that evidence of widespread nonmedical marijuana use is sufficient evidence
of the drug's high potential for abuse to justify its Schedule I status.

The decision departs widely from contemporary scientific consensus on the
assessment of the relative abuse liability of both legal and illegal drugs,
even while conceding that marijuana has low toxicity, a low dependence
liability and that it contains a medically beneficial drug. In fact,
several states have recently passed initiatives allowing medical marijuana
use by patients with various illnesses.

The DEA also argues that as long as marijuana has no accepted medical use
in the United States and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical
supervision, it must stay in Schedule I regardless of its abuse potential.
The same argument has been rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals, which
noted in 1977 that the statute requires all three criteria be met for
schedule I status. The DEA is also in violation of the Administrative
Procedures Act by not providing an opportunity for a hearing on the record,
as provided for in the CSA.

Guaranteeing access to medically necessary drugs and substances is one of
the primary purposes of the CSA. Another flaw in DEA's denial of the
petition is that the impact of this decision on medical marijuana users was
not considered in their review, despite instructions in the legislative
history to study the impact of scheduling on those most affected by the
decision.

We cannot allow this erroneous opinion to result in the miserable and
painful deaths of terminally ill patients, nor is it acceptable for
government officials to define abuse potential without regard for
scientific convention or due process of law. An appeal by petitioners will
be filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals in the near future.

-end-

----- End of forwarded message from NATLNORML@aol.com -----

 

 

 

After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.




This page was created by the Cannabis Campaigners' Guide.
Feel free to link to this page!