T
The420Guy
Guest
Challenge to Federal Law Regarding Marijuana Scheduling to be
Heard by the District of Columbia Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals on
Tuesday, March 19th, at 9:30 am
Marijuana is considered equal to heroin and worse than cocaine -- in terms
of abuse potential and lack of medicinal value, according to current
federal law. It is a "Schedule I" drug, meaning it has a "high potential
for abuse" and "no accepted medical use". This classification is
preventing many AIDS, cancer and other patients from legal access to
marijuana as medicine.
On Tuesday March 19 this scheduling will be challenged in the D.C. Circuit
of the U.S. Court of Appeals. The Court is being asked to order the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) to consider additional research and testimony in their
scientific and medical evaluation of marijuana. This challenge is being
brought to the Court by Jon Gettman, Ph.D., and High Times magazine, who
argue that marijuana does not have a "high potential for abuse" and does
have accepted medical use for people with certain illnesses.
Specifically, Gettman and High Times are asking the Court to order DEA and
HHS to hold public hearings to consider the testimony of patients, doctors,
and state health officials from jurisdictions that have accepted medical
marijuana use under state law.
According to petition researcher Gettman: "Eight states and the District
of Columbia have recognized the medicinal value of marijuana and almost
every state distinguishes marijuana from narcotics; but the federal
government still classifies this drug as equal in danger to cocaine and
heroin, thus prohibiting potential beneficiaries from access and
obstructing its development.. High Times and I are asking the court to put
an end to this charade."
Marijuana is presently a schedule I controlled substance. Under the
Controlled Substances Act (CSA) schedule I drugs and substances can only
be used for research under the most restrictive and expensive
conditions. Schedule I drugs must have a high potential for abuse relative
to other drugs regulated by the CSA and must also lack accepted medical use
in the United States. In this case the federal government argues that
marijuana has a similar abuse potential to heroin and cocaine, lacks
accepted medical use, and therefore must be maintained in Schedule I.
With the backing of High Times magazine, Gettman filed the original
petition for this case in July, 1995. The DEA referred the petition to HHS
for a formal scientific and medical evaluation in December, 1997. DEA
formally rejected the petition in March, 2001; the current case subjects
DEA's decision to judicial review.
Jon Gettman and High Times are represented by the Law Offices of Michael
Kennedy.
More background information is available upon request.
# # #
Background Questions and Answers
What is rescheduling?
The federal law that regulates marijuana is the Controlled Substances Act
(CSA). The CSA has five schedules that provide different levels of
regulatory control. Schedule I drugs, such as heroin, must have a high
potential for abuse relative to all scheduled drugs, lack accepted medical
use in the United States, and be unsafe for use even under medical
supervision. Schedule II drugs, such as cocaine, also have a high
potential for abuse, but differ from schedule I drugs in that schedule II
drugs have an accepted medical use. Schedule III drugs have a lower abuse
potential than schedule I or II drugs, and include Marinol, which contains
a synthetic version of marijuana's active ingredient. Schedule IV drugs,
such as valium, have a lower abuse potential than schedule III drugs.
What is the argument for rescheduling marijuana?
Petitioners argue that it is widely recognized that marijuana has a lower
abuse potential than heroin and cocaine. Furthermore, when all the factors
specified by law are considered it is also clear that marijuana presently
has an accepted medical use in the United States and is safe for use under
medical supervision. Federal law requires that marijuana be rescheduled
because it does not satisfy the criteria for Schedule I classification.
Who are the petitioners?
Jon Gettman received his Ph.D. in public policy and regional economic
development from George Mason University in 2000. Gettman is a former
National Director of NORML (the National Organization for the Reform of
Marijuana Laws) and is currently a marketing and public policy consultant
interested in the study and economic development of the cannabis
plant. High Times has published numerous articles by Gettman dating back
to 1986, including two articles on "Marijuana and the Brain" in early 1995
describing recent scientific advances and their implications on marijuana's
scheduling under the federal CSA.
What is the history of this challenge?
When DEA invited Gettman in April 1995 to submit documented evidence
supporting marijuana's rescheduling, High Times joined with him in a formal
administrative petition that would provide a basis to submit DEA's
consideration of marijuana's rescheduling to judicial review. The petition
was accepted for filing by DEA on July 27, 1995. After completing their
own review of the petition DEA referred the petition to HHS on December 17,
1997. The CSA requires HHS to conduct a complete scientific and medical
evaluation according to a wide range of specific criteria. HHS completed
this evaluation on January 17, 2001 and returned the petition to DEA, which
formally rejected the rescheduling request for marijuana on March 20, 2001
without providing the opportunity for a hearing. Gettman and High Times
then filed their appeal with the District of Columbia Circuit of the US
Court of Appeals on April 19, 2001. This case is scheduled for oral
argument on March 19, 2002.
What is the government's argument?
The government argues that because all use of an illegal drug is drug
abuse, the extensive illegal use of marijuana is sufficient evidence to
establish that it has a high potential for abuse suitable for schedule I
status. Also, because the Food and Drug Administration has not approved
marijuana for medical use DEA argues that the substance does not have an
accepted medical use in the United States. Furthermore, DEA argues that
even if marijuana did not have a high potential for abuse it must be kept
in schedule I because it does not have an accepted medical use. DEA is
also challenging the standing of Gettman and High Times to seek judicial
review in the federal courts.
What is being asked of the Court?
The Court is being asked to instruct DEA and HHS to compile a new
scientific and medical evaluation of marijuana that heeds the plain
language of the statute that requires assessment of marijuana's relative
abuse potential to other scheduled drugs and the impact of scheduling in
the individuals most affected by it. Gettman and High Times are asking the
Court to order DEA and HHS to hold a public hearing to hear testimony from
patients, doctors, and state health officials from California, and other
states that have enacted legislation accepting and recognizing medical
marijuana use under state law. (Petitioner's brief cites legislation from
Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.)
How would rescheduling affect the medical use of marijuana?
Contrary to popular belief marijuana's rescheduling would not in of itself
provide a legal basis for the medical use of marijuana under federal
law. However rescheduling would substantially reduce the research and
development costs of getting medical cannabis approved by the Food and Drug
Administration. Furthermore rescheduling would make it easier for state
governments to set up and maintain large scale research projects providing
medical marijuana to individual patients.
From: Jon Gettman <Gettman_J@mediasoft.net>
MEDIA ADVISORY
For Tuesday, March 19
Is Marijuana Really As Addictive As Heroin?
Heard by the District of Columbia Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals on
Tuesday, March 19th, at 9:30 am
Marijuana is considered equal to heroin and worse than cocaine -- in terms
of abuse potential and lack of medicinal value, according to current
federal law. It is a "Schedule I" drug, meaning it has a "high potential
for abuse" and "no accepted medical use". This classification is
preventing many AIDS, cancer and other patients from legal access to
marijuana as medicine.
On Tuesday March 19 this scheduling will be challenged in the D.C. Circuit
of the U.S. Court of Appeals. The Court is being asked to order the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) to consider additional research and testimony in their
scientific and medical evaluation of marijuana. This challenge is being
brought to the Court by Jon Gettman, Ph.D., and High Times magazine, who
argue that marijuana does not have a "high potential for abuse" and does
have accepted medical use for people with certain illnesses.
Specifically, Gettman and High Times are asking the Court to order DEA and
HHS to hold public hearings to consider the testimony of patients, doctors,
and state health officials from jurisdictions that have accepted medical
marijuana use under state law.
According to petition researcher Gettman: "Eight states and the District
of Columbia have recognized the medicinal value of marijuana and almost
every state distinguishes marijuana from narcotics; but the federal
government still classifies this drug as equal in danger to cocaine and
heroin, thus prohibiting potential beneficiaries from access and
obstructing its development.. High Times and I are asking the court to put
an end to this charade."
Marijuana is presently a schedule I controlled substance. Under the
Controlled Substances Act (CSA) schedule I drugs and substances can only
be used for research under the most restrictive and expensive
conditions. Schedule I drugs must have a high potential for abuse relative
to other drugs regulated by the CSA and must also lack accepted medical use
in the United States. In this case the federal government argues that
marijuana has a similar abuse potential to heroin and cocaine, lacks
accepted medical use, and therefore must be maintained in Schedule I.
With the backing of High Times magazine, Gettman filed the original
petition for this case in July, 1995. The DEA referred the petition to HHS
for a formal scientific and medical evaluation in December, 1997. DEA
formally rejected the petition in March, 2001; the current case subjects
DEA's decision to judicial review.
Jon Gettman and High Times are represented by the Law Offices of Michael
Kennedy.
More background information is available upon request.
# # #
Background Questions and Answers
What is rescheduling?
The federal law that regulates marijuana is the Controlled Substances Act
(CSA). The CSA has five schedules that provide different levels of
regulatory control. Schedule I drugs, such as heroin, must have a high
potential for abuse relative to all scheduled drugs, lack accepted medical
use in the United States, and be unsafe for use even under medical
supervision. Schedule II drugs, such as cocaine, also have a high
potential for abuse, but differ from schedule I drugs in that schedule II
drugs have an accepted medical use. Schedule III drugs have a lower abuse
potential than schedule I or II drugs, and include Marinol, which contains
a synthetic version of marijuana's active ingredient. Schedule IV drugs,
such as valium, have a lower abuse potential than schedule III drugs.
What is the argument for rescheduling marijuana?
Petitioners argue that it is widely recognized that marijuana has a lower
abuse potential than heroin and cocaine. Furthermore, when all the factors
specified by law are considered it is also clear that marijuana presently
has an accepted medical use in the United States and is safe for use under
medical supervision. Federal law requires that marijuana be rescheduled
because it does not satisfy the criteria for Schedule I classification.
Who are the petitioners?
Jon Gettman received his Ph.D. in public policy and regional economic
development from George Mason University in 2000. Gettman is a former
National Director of NORML (the National Organization for the Reform of
Marijuana Laws) and is currently a marketing and public policy consultant
interested in the study and economic development of the cannabis
plant. High Times has published numerous articles by Gettman dating back
to 1986, including two articles on "Marijuana and the Brain" in early 1995
describing recent scientific advances and their implications on marijuana's
scheduling under the federal CSA.
What is the history of this challenge?
When DEA invited Gettman in April 1995 to submit documented evidence
supporting marijuana's rescheduling, High Times joined with him in a formal
administrative petition that would provide a basis to submit DEA's
consideration of marijuana's rescheduling to judicial review. The petition
was accepted for filing by DEA on July 27, 1995. After completing their
own review of the petition DEA referred the petition to HHS on December 17,
1997. The CSA requires HHS to conduct a complete scientific and medical
evaluation according to a wide range of specific criteria. HHS completed
this evaluation on January 17, 2001 and returned the petition to DEA, which
formally rejected the rescheduling request for marijuana on March 20, 2001
without providing the opportunity for a hearing. Gettman and High Times
then filed their appeal with the District of Columbia Circuit of the US
Court of Appeals on April 19, 2001. This case is scheduled for oral
argument on March 19, 2002.
What is the government's argument?
The government argues that because all use of an illegal drug is drug
abuse, the extensive illegal use of marijuana is sufficient evidence to
establish that it has a high potential for abuse suitable for schedule I
status. Also, because the Food and Drug Administration has not approved
marijuana for medical use DEA argues that the substance does not have an
accepted medical use in the United States. Furthermore, DEA argues that
even if marijuana did not have a high potential for abuse it must be kept
in schedule I because it does not have an accepted medical use. DEA is
also challenging the standing of Gettman and High Times to seek judicial
review in the federal courts.
What is being asked of the Court?
The Court is being asked to instruct DEA and HHS to compile a new
scientific and medical evaluation of marijuana that heeds the plain
language of the statute that requires assessment of marijuana's relative
abuse potential to other scheduled drugs and the impact of scheduling in
the individuals most affected by it. Gettman and High Times are asking the
Court to order DEA and HHS to hold a public hearing to hear testimony from
patients, doctors, and state health officials from California, and other
states that have enacted legislation accepting and recognizing medical
marijuana use under state law. (Petitioner's brief cites legislation from
Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.)
How would rescheduling affect the medical use of marijuana?
Contrary to popular belief marijuana's rescheduling would not in of itself
provide a legal basis for the medical use of marijuana under federal
law. However rescheduling would substantially reduce the research and
development costs of getting medical cannabis approved by the Food and Drug
Administration. Furthermore rescheduling would make it easier for state
governments to set up and maintain large scale research projects providing
medical marijuana to individual patients.
From: Jon Gettman <Gettman_J@mediasoft.net>
MEDIA ADVISORY
For Tuesday, March 19
Is Marijuana Really As Addictive As Heroin?
