According to industry media reports in the United States, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) is once again under pressure to accept an investigation and withdraw from the upcoming marijuana reclassification program due to new allegations of bias.
As early as November 2024, some media reported that a 57 page motion had been submitted, requesting the court to withdraw DEA from the rule making process of marijuana reclassification and replace it with the Department of Justice. However, the motion was ultimately rejected by Administrative Judge John Mulrooney of the Department of Justice.
Earlier this week, according to lawyers representing Village Farms and Hemp for Victory, two participating units in the hearing, new evidence has emerged and the judge’s ruling needs to be reconsidered. A total of 25 units were approved for this hearing.
Lawyers representing Village Farms, headquartered in Florida and British Columbia, and Hemp for Victory, headquartered in Texas, claim to have discovered evidence of bias and “undisclosed conflicts of interest, as well as extensive unilateral communication by DEA that must be disclosed and included as part of public records.
According to a new document submitted on January 6th, the US Drug Enforcement Administration has not only failed to support the proposed reclassification rules for marijuana, but has also taken an active opposition attitude and undermined the evaluation of the medical benefits and scientific value of marijuana by using outdated and legally rejected standards.
According to the documents, specific evidence includes:
1. The US Drug Enforcement Administration submitted an “untimely, biased, and legally inappropriate” document on January 2, which “echoes the talking points against reclassifying marijuana,” such as “marijuana has a high potential for abuse and currently has no recognized medical use,” and refused to give other participants enough time to review and respond, violating federal procedures.
2. Concealed that “approximately 100″ requests to attend the hearing were denied, including requests from Colorado and their “communication and coordination with at least one government agency opposing the reclassification of marijuana, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.
3. Relying on the Community Anti Drug Alliance (CADCA) in the United States, which is a “partner” of the Drug Enforcement Administration on fentanyl related issues, there is a “potential conflict of interest”.
These documents point out that “this new evidence confirms that the US Drug Enforcement Administration clearly favors those who oppose the reclassification of marijuana when selecting hearing participants, and hinders a balanced and thoughtful process based on science and evidence, in an attempt to prevent the proposed rule from passing.”
Lawyers also point out that a recent statement by a pharmacologist at the US Drug Enforcement Administration has echoed their “arguments against the reclassification of marijuana,” including claims that marijuana is highly likely to be abused and has no recognized medical use. This position directly contradicts the findings of the relevant survey conducted by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which suggests using a broader two factor analysis to reclassify marijuana.
It is reported that some opposition groups, such as the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, the Cannabis Intelligent Methods Organization (SAM), and the American Community Anti Drug Alliance (CADCA), are working closely with the US Drug Enforcement Agency, while participants in Colorado who support the reclassification of marijuana have been denied access to the hearing.
Colorado began selling adult marijuana over a decade ago and has effectively regulated medical marijuana programs, accumulating a wealth of practical experience. On September 30th last year, Governor Jared Polis wrote a letter to the Director of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, Anne Milgram, requesting permission for the state to provide “relevant, unique, and non repetitive” data to demonstrate that “the medical utility and abuse potential of marijuana is far lower than that of opioid drugs. Unfortunately, this request was ignored and firmly rejected by DEA Director Anne Milgram, who also “prohibited Colorado from submitting this data”. This move reflects the DEA’s questioning of the success of this state regulatory program, which has been in place for over a decade.
Excluding Colorado, the leader in marijuana regulation, instead includes Nebraska’s Attorney General and Tennessee’s Bureau of Investigation, who are outspoken opponents of reclassifying marijuana, while Nebraska is currently trying to block voters from voting on the medical marijuana proposal approved in November. This has raised significant concerns among the industry and the public about its fairness. The lawyer also claimed that the Drug Enforcement Administration intentionally delayed the submission of key evidence until shortly before the hearing, intentionally bypassing the scientific review of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and depriving all parties supporting the reclassification of marijuana of their right to participate in transparent and fair procedures.
The motion states that such last-minute data submission violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and further undermines the integrity of the litigation process. The motion requires the judge to immediately investigate the actions of the Drug Enforcement Administration, including undisclosed communications between entities opposing the reclassification of marijuana. The lawyer requested full disclosure of the relevant communication content, postponed the hearing, and held a special evidence hearing to address the suspected misconduct of the Drug Enforcement Administration. At the same time, the lawyer also requested that the Drug Enforcement Administration formally state its position on the reclassification of marijuana, as it is concerned that the agency may improperly play the role of both supporters and opponents of the proposed rule.
Previously, there were allegations that DEA failed to provide sufficient witness information and improperly obstructed advocacy organizations and researchers from attending hearings. Critics argue that DEA’s actions not only undermine the process of reclassifying marijuana hearings, but also weaken public trust in the agency’s ability to conduct fair and impartial regulatory procedures.
If the motion is approved, it could significantly delay the reclassification hearing for marijuana currently scheduled to begin later this month and force the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to reassess its role in the process.
Currently, stakeholders in the marijuana industry across the United States are closely monitoring the progress of the hearing, as the reform to reclassify marijuana to Schedule III will greatly reduce the federal tax burden and research barriers for businesses, representing a key shift in US marijuana policy.
Global Yes Lab will continue to monitor.
Post time: Jan-14-2025