Connect with us

Cannabis News

DOJ Marijuana Lawsuit Filing Cites Drug Testing Industry And Pharma Company ‘Pocketbook Interests’ In Opposing Rescheduling

Published

on

The Justice Department is asking a federal court to stop the marijuana opponents’ request to deny it The Trump administration’s cannabis rescheduling proposal advancing among the general lawsuits challenging the reform.

The government’s brief argues drug testing industry association and pharmaceutical company trying to block rescheduling of cannabis “fulfilling pocket interest by keeping all marijuana on schedule I.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia District is handling three separate cases regarding whether cannabis is subject to Schedule I through Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Against moving to the Annex.

A lawsuit is led by a prohibitionist organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) and National Drug and Alcohol Screening (NDASA)and they say they are “offended” by the reform. Another comes from a coalition anti-marijuana activists, substance abuse professionals, doctors and a cannabis-focused biopharmaceutical corporation. He filed a third claim Attorneys General of Indiana, Nebraska and Louisiana— although the latter appeared later withdrew from the suit.

Two of the entities involved in the case — NDASA and the cannabis-based biopharmaceutical corporation MMJ International Holdings — filed a separate motion asking the court to stay the reorganization while the broader challenge is considered.

The DOJ responded to that request on Thursday, arguing that the court should not halt cannabis reform because NDASA and MMJ lack standing to bring the challenge and have not “demonstrated a likelihood of success” in the overall lawsuit.

“Applicants are nowhere near meeting the exacting standard of such exceptional relief.”

The government report says NDASA, which represents drug-testing companies, “only cited general speculation about how the reorganization order might affect the drug-testing industry, rather than specific allegations about how the order affected specific members of the association.”

The group argued that its members would lose revenue due to less employer drug testing for marijuana and the “higher costs” required to “determine whether positive results reflect state-licensed medical use.”

But the DOJ says that’s not the government’s problem.

“In addition, NDASA’s feared future injury would result from customers’ decisions to stop testing marijuana altogether or from its members and their customers’ decisions to increase drug testing costs. Petitioners have not demonstrated that it is “foreseeable,” rather than “speculative,” that third parties will choose to use any illegal testing for marijuana. Increasing costs to drug screeners from continued customer testing would be a continuation of their voluntary billing decisions, not in the reprogramming order.”

The government’s report also states that MMJ has also not set out to pursue its review request, stating that it is “not a current market competitor” and without products that have completed the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) clinical research process.

“Petitioners do not establish an Article III identification: the association does not identify any concrete harm to any of its members, and the pharmaceutical company does not demonstrate a competitor’s position when it has not yet produced a product authorized to compete on the market. Nor do the petitioners’ alleged injuries fall within the purview of the CSA. The CSA was enacted to provide a permanent source of revenue for drug enforcement to test marijuana, nor to enact the law to protect “market opportunities” to create “cannabinoid-based drugs.” also

The DOJ filing says the drug-testing group and pharmaceutical company are not “adequate challengers” to the marijuana rescheduling movement.

“The intended beneficiaries of the CSA are therefore the United States public and scientists and physicians seeking legitimate access to controlled substances for research and patient treatment. Petitioners are not the intended beneficiaries of the CSA, nor are their interests systematically aligned with those beneficiaries. Petitioners invoke (1) the interests of drug controllers; to avoid cost losses in business; drug testing protocols; and (3) to prevent market competition by a pharmaceutical company (MMJ), therefore, They call the pocket interests that all marijuana is kept in Schedule I.

NDASA and MMJ argued in their stay motion that cannabis is a “dangerous drug that destroys lives,” and asked the court to suspend reform “to avoid the devastating consequences of ballooning marijuana while this case is pending.”

But the government said in its opposition document that “as the reorganization order recognizes, 40 states have already ‘legalized the sale and use of marijuana for medical purposes’.”

“In light of existing state practice, there is no basis to believe that the limited reorganization action here would result in such prejudice in this appeal,” he said.

This week, Two medical marijuana companies filed a motion to intervene in the reconsideration case siding with the government and opposing the prohibition lawsuits.

The evolution of the case is coming The DEA this week began an administrative hearing on the proposed marijuana redistricting government witnesses and lawyers present highlighting the medical uses and relative safety of cannabis opponents, meanwhile, challenge the process by which officials developed the recommendation for reform.

Under an action announced in April by Attorney General Todd Blanche, marijuana products regulated by a state medical cannabis license were immediately changed from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Annex, as well as marijuana products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The ongoing hearing is looking at broader rescheduling of cannabis, including for recreational products.

The challenge to SAM and NDASA’s reconsideration request was signed by attorneys at Torridon Law PLCC, where former US Attorney General William Barr, who led the DOJ during Trump’s first term, is a partner.

SAM announced in January that it was Hiring Barr’s firm to fight cannabis rescheduling After Trump signed an executive order directing officials to quickly complete the process.

Meanwhile, the Appropriations Committee of the Chamber Federal officials voted to block further steps to reschedule cannabis. Bipartisan lawmakers told Marijuana Moment, however don’t expect legislative efforts to block rescheduling to be successful.

Separately, SAM, MMJ and other plaintiffs filed a lawsuit seeking to block the Trump administration’s program. Certain hemp-derived products are covered by Medicare. That the case was dismissed by a federal judge in May, though that decision is being appealed.

Read the full DOJ short in the marijuana reorganization case below:

Marijuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Cannabis News

Ora Pharm affirms uninterrupted access to Helius products

Published

on

By

Ora Pharm has confirmed that New Zealand patients, prescribers and pharmacies continue to have uninterrupted access to Helius Therapeutics products following the successful acquisition of the business and its key assets, directly challenging the misinformation being circulated to patients and prescribers by cannabis importer MW Pharma Limited (trading as NUBU).

Industry monitoring was highlighted on Monday, July 20th, when Helius Therapeutics announced that NZ Grow Co. As he inaugurated Growers Day. The event demonstrated the full operational strength, advanced capabilities and integrated supply chain now fully operational under Ora Pharm’s leadership to support the growth of the NZ sector.

At the event, CEO Zoë Reece addressed concerns stemming from a July 9 industry bulletin distributed by NUBU, which stated that “Helius Therapeutics has ceased production and all products are now discontinued.”

© Ora Pharm

Ora Pharm said the statement was incorrect and had the potential to create unnecessary uncertainty in a highly regulated healthcare sector.

“Inaccurate information about the availability of medicines can cause unnecessary worry for patients, prescribers and pharmacies, interfere with treatment decisions and undermine confidence in the New Zealand cannabis industry.”

Ora Pharm completed the business and acquisition of key assets of Helius Therapeutics on June 18, 2026, resuming manufacturing, packaging and nationwide distribution the following day. All Helius brand formulated products and locally grown products remain approved and available for patient supply.

CEO Zoë Reece said the company’s focus is on ensuring continuity of care while strengthening New Zealand’s medicinal cannabis industry.

“The Helius facility gives New Zealand growers direct access to world-class pharmaceutical drying, extraction and manufacturing capabilities. Combined with NZ Grow Co., we are creating a secure and integrated pathway from cultivation to finished products and international markets. Our focus is on clinical continuity, quality assurance and confidence in patients and prescribing physicians every day.”

© Ora Pharm

The integration of the GMP-certified Auckland manufacturing facility with NZ Grow Co.’s cultivation network creates New Zealand’s largest medicinal cannabis supply chain. This unified network insulates domestic patients from volatile international import dependencies while providing independent local growers with a transparent, high-standard route to export markets.

Ora Pharm remains committed to working collaboratively across the sector to support patient access, strengthen confidence in the New Zealand cannabis industry and continue to invest in New Zealand’s pharmaceutical manufacturing capacity.

For more information:
Ora Pharm
(email protected)
www.orapharm.co.nz

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

California Treasurer Announces Hearing On Marijuana Business Banking Access Issues

Published

on

By

California’s state treasurer has announced he will convene a hearing next week to highlight the marijuana industry’s banking access “challenges” and its impact on businesses, workers and communities.

The hearing, organized by Treasurer Fiona Ma (D), comes ten years after her predecessor launched a Cannabis Bank Task Force to look into the issue.

Titled “Continuing the Conversation: Advancing Safe and Legal Banking for California’s Cannabis Industry,” Wednesday’s hearing will feature state and local officials, financial institutions and representatives of marijuana companies. The plan is to “review progress made, discuss remaining obstacles, and consider practical steps California can take to support a safe, transparent and well-regulated legal cannabis market,” Ma’s office said in a press release.

“Nearly a decade after the launch of the Cannabis Banking Working Group, California’s legal cannabis industry continues to face barriers to access to affordable and reliable financial services due to state-federal conflict,” Ma. he said. “This hearing it will help us assess what has changed, identify challenges that remain, and continue the conversation about practical solutions that support public safety, transparency, and responsible business operations.”

Last month, bipartisan members of the US House and Senate reintroduced the legislation protect banks from being penalized for providing financial services to marijuana businesses.

Previous iterations of the banking legislation have been introduced in previous sessions of Congress, and while the House of Representatives has passed versions on several occasions, the reform has never become law.

While some banks serve marijuana businesses, the continued federal illegalization of the plant has made many reluctant to work with the industry.

“Limited access may increase operating costs, complicate routine financial transactions, and require some businesses to handle larger amounts of money, creating additional security and administrative concerns,” Ma’s office said.

Marihuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Peat is a lot more sustainable than we think

Published

on

By

Increasing public scrutiny has questioned whether the use of peat is environmentally sustainable. A new review According to Dr. James Altland, research director of the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service, and Dr. Bruce Bugbee of Utah State University, they present a more nuanced picture than much of the current evidence portrays.

“Much of the debate in the popular press suggests that the use of peat in horticulture is unsustainable because it causes global warming and other environmental impacts,” shares James. “We have seen that agriculture is much more sustainable than some parties in the media want us to believe.”

© USDA

Differences between regions matter
The review states that assessments of peatland sustainability should differentiate between regions. While European peatlands have been heavily impacted by centuries of drainage and peat extraction, most Canadian peatlands remain undisturbed, with only a small proportion used for horticulture. According to the authors, this distinction is important when assessing the environmental impact of peat production.

“Currently, Canadian peatlands are sequestering carbon faster than the rate of extraction from container crop production. At current rates of extraction and with appropriate restoration, peatland use in North America is environmentally sustainable.”

The authors note that horticultural peat extraction in Canada accounts for only a small fraction of the total peatland area and that harvested sites are routinely restored after production.

© USDA

Restoration supports long-term recovery
The paper highlights the role of restoration practices, particularly the Moss Layer Transfer Technique (MLTT), in restoring peat-forming ecosystems.

“Restoration techniques, such as the moss layer transfer technique, can turn harvested peatlands into carbon sinks over decades,” he added. The review found that restored peatlands can restore vegetation, biodiversity and carbon sequestration functions over time, while improvements in water storage and hydrological performance are also documented.

© USDA

Alternatives also have environmental impacts
The researchers also looked at published life cycle assessments comparing them to substrates such as peat, korea, wood fiber, perlite and rock wool. “Life cycle assessments show that alternative substrates often have environmental impacts comparable to or greater than peat, especially when considering water use, transport and fertilizer inputs.”

The review concludes that comparisons depend on system limitations and assumptions, and that broad claims that alternatives are inherently more sustainable than peat are not consistently supported by published analyses.

© USDA
Figure A: Global carbon storage in natural systems (Gt, gigatons)
(Hirschler and Osterburg, 2022; Cleary et al, 2005; IPCC, 2023)

Performance remains an important consideration
Beyond sustainability, the paper reviews the functional characteristics that have made peat the reference substrate for container production.

“Soil’s high cation exchange capacity, water retention and stability support optimal plant growth and nutrient uptake,” shares James. The authors point out that these properties contribute to efficient irrigation and fertilizer management, maintaining good root zone conditions.

Although wood fibers, coir, and other materials can reduce peat use in mixes, each introduces its own management considerations, such as nutrient immobilization, water use, or processing requirements.

© USDA
Figure B: Annual carbon flux from human activities and sequestration through natural processes (Gt CO2-eq per year)
(Hirschler and Osterburg, 2022; Cleary et al, 2005; IPCC, 2023)

Managing future demand
As the global demand for soilless growth media is expected to increase significantly in the coming decades, the authors believe that a variety of substrate materials will be required.

“At current rates of extraction and with appropriate restoration, peat use in North America is environmentally sustainable and remains essential for horticulture and urban greening.”

For more information:
US Department of Agriculture
James Altland, Head of Research
Application Technologies Research Unit
(email protected)
www.usda.gov

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media