This spring, almost five years after the Obama administration promised to temporarily close applications approved by several independent suppliers, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the federal government’s long-standing, monopoly on cannabis for medical research. But the DEA still maintains that the plant is included in Schedule 1 of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), a category reserved specifically for hazardous drugs that have no acceptable medical use.
At the center of both debates is the Arizona-based Scottsdale Research Institute (SRI), one of the first DEA-approved organizations to grow cannabis. SRI President Susan Sisley, a psychiatrist who has studied the usefulness of cannabis for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder, has asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for Circuit 9 to reject the DEA’s rationale for keeping cannabis in Schedule 1. It is wrong to ignore the state recognition of the medical utility of cannabis.
The CSA empowers the DEA to prescribe drug res in consultation with the Department of Health and Human Services. The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Loss made its first request to the DEA half a century ago, requesting a restructuring of cannabis. But those lawsuits or subsequent challenges did not make much progress, as federal courts have postponed the agency’s interpretation of the CSA scheduling criteria. According to the DEA, cannabis is “currently not receiving any treatment” because it is not satisfied with the agency’s five-part test, which claims the evidence needed to get a new drug approved by the diet. Drug administration. In the eyes of the DEA, it is irrelevant for most states to allow patients to use cannabis to relieve symptoms.
“Based on the statutory text, structure, history, purpose – and basic understanding of the Constitution – ‘currently adopted medical use’ means ‘legitimate’ or ‘legitimate medical purpose’,” Sicily v. DEA. “This is the only explanation that embodies the CSA’s cooperative federalism vision and respects state sovereignty.” Determining whether the legal use of cannabis is legal, Sicily said the legal treatment of state drugs must be counted for something.
“Can the DEA deny that cannabis has a ‘currently used medical use in the United States’ when more than two-thirds of states have enacted legislation in light of the use of marijuana as a drug?” The inaugural Ninth Circuit of Sicily asks short questions. “The unambiguous text of [the statute], Canon of Construction, History and Purpose of CSA and General Knowledge are all single, good answer: ‘No. “