A coalition of health advocacy organizations and anti-cannabis groups sued the Trump administration on Monday over its plan to allow Medicare coverage for hemp-derived CBD and THC products. Plaintiffs include Smart Approaches to Marijuana, Cannabis Industry Victims Educating Judges, North Carolinians Against Legalization of Marijuana, Cannabis Impact Prevention Coalition, LLC, Cannabis Industry Victims Seeking Justice, County Drug Foundation of America, Save Drugs Courses International Anti-Drug Alliance, Illinois Family Institute and North Carolina resident and SAM donor David Evans.

The lawsuit was filed after the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) will begin covering CBD and THC products as an incentive to engage beneficiaries of substance access (BEI). The document names CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz and US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as a defendant.

Under the proposed BEI, patients enrolled in certain federal health insurance programs could cover up to $500 worth of hemp-derived products each year. The lawsuit alleges that the plan violates administrative rules because the CBD and THC products covered by the program have not received Food and Drug Administration approval and because CMS did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking, which prevented public comment.

The complaint further alleges that the program would violate the Social Security Act, which “does not permit CMS to sanction the possession and use of illegal and dangerous Schedule I substances by Medicare patients without express congressional authorization.”

“CMS’s action represents an unprecedented and unlawful assertion of binding decision-making authority that will profoundly affect the health of older Americans. “CMS took this action without the hurdles imposed by the administrative process, without any reasoned explanation, in violation of the agency’s final determination pursuant to the APA, and without statutory authority.” – Smart approaches to marijuana, etc. al v. HHS, US CMS

The filing alleges that Evans would be personally harmed by CMS’ changes because he is a Medicare recipient who was not allowed to submit public comment on the BEI and whose “health care relationship” with CMS is changed by the plan.

The lawsuit alleges that there is a “research gap” for medical cannabis and hemp products and alleges that “commercially available CBD products are contaminated and mislabeled.”

The suit seeks a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, a stay of the agency’s action pending a judicial review, and asks the court to vacate the EIB, declare it illegal and permanently enjoin the policy.

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R) vetoed it last week two laws that provided state law updates on medical cannabis. Together, the bills would have allowed ‘right to try’ provisions for patients and loosened rules on doctor visits. The reforms would also have eliminated THC caps on some medical cannabis products.

In his veto of the bill to loosen regulations and end some of the THC limits, Reeves said the legislation “seeks to erode three important safeguards” in state law “intended to minimize the potential diversion” of medical cannabis “for recreational purposes.”

“Requiring a mandatory six-month follow-up visit to ensure the patient is receiving a therapeutic benefit from the use of medical marijuana; requiring caregivers to pass an annual criminal background check; and limiting THC potency to 60% for oils and concentrates are reasonable and necessary checks and balances in the medical marijuana program and do not create barriers.” – Reeves in his the veto message

The vetoed bill was referred back to the House Committee on Business and Commerce

In his veto of the ‘right to try’ bill, Reeves said the bill would “extend the ‘right to try medical cannabis’ to every person on the planet”, which he opposes.

In the veto message, Reeves mentioned the concern of Dr. Daniel Edney, state health officer, who said the proposal “shifts the intent of the bill from giving Mississippians the ability to work with their treating physicians in dire situations when all other options have failed.”

“This policy position of the (Mississippi State Department of Health) was clearly communicated to leadership and the committee that we can only support this narrowly drafted and strict language,” the veto message said, citing Edney, “and will not support anything to make the program more outdoor fun. Unfortunately, the amended language distorts the intent of the bill’s original text.”

The vetoed bill returned to the House Public Health and Human Services Committee.