Cannabis News
Three Myths and Three Facts on the HUGE Marijuana Rescheduling Recommendation
Published
1 year agoon
By
admin
Huge news yesterday. Huge! The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has officially recommended that marijuana be rescheduled, from Schedule I to Schedule III of the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This means that the country’s top health agency has finally conceded that cannabis has medical value, and isn’t a drug of abuse on par with fentanyl or heroin. We haven’t yet seen the HHS letter so we’re not sure what changed from the last “medical and scientific” evaluation undertaken by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and HHS in 2015, but hey, we’ll take it.
Griffen Thorne in our office recently predicted that administrative action, and not Congressional action, would be the course of reform at hand. Kudos to him and others who shared that view. Rescheduling is not the best possible outcome, however. It’s really not. We’d like to see marijuana descheduled entirely, like alcohol or tobacco– which are demonstrably harmful substances. Still, moving marijuana down to Schedule III would be monumental progress.
The internet is full of hot takes on yesterday’s news, of course. They range from 0% accurate to 100% accurate. This blog post aims to dispel a few myths around rescheduling, and trot out some interesting facts.
Myth 1: It’s a done deal
It’s not a done deal! This all looks pretty good right now, but the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has final say on whether to schedule or reschedule marijuana following the HHS recommendation. As an HHS spokesperson explained:
“While HHS’s scientific and medical evaluation is binding on DEA, the scheduling recommendation is not. DEA has the final authority to schedule a drug under the CSA (or transfer a controlled substance between schedules or remove such a drug from scheduling altogether) after considering the relevant statutory and regulatory criteria and HHS’ scientific and medical evaluation. DEA goes through a rulemaking process to schedule, reschedule or deschedule the drug, which includes a period for public comment before DEA finalizes the scheduling action with a final rulemaking.”
Here, the spokesperson is paraphrasing the CSA at 21 USC § 811(b). That CSA section references the Attorney General (AG) rather than DEA (and refers to the AG only as a “he”, embarrassingly). In any case, the DEA Administrator reports to the AG (through the Deputy AG). The HHS spokesperson is ultimately correct that DEA will have to instate rulemaking. The AG could then reschedule.
So, will DEA actually commence the rulemaking process? It seems inconceivable that DEA wouldn’t, but DEA has taken many bad positions on controlled substances over the years. This includes ignoring orders from its own administrative law judges to reschedule marijuana back in the day. Without having seen the HHS letter, I strongly believe that DEA will commence rulemaking to reschedule marijuana to III. Biden himself requested this HHS review, after all, for better or worse.
A couple of other, very important questions include: Will DEA drag its feet? How long will the rulemaking process take? What will the proposed rule actually say? How much testimony will be entertained, and from whom? Will the rulemaking be litigated? I could go on. Overall this is not a done deal, and although it feels imminent, this may take some time.
Myth 2: State marijuana businesses would be clear of federal enforcement
Nothing is going to change here, legally speaking. Practically speaking, same story: not much will change on federal enforcement exposure. This is because moving marijuana to Schedule III would have no effect on the federally verboten status of state-licensed marijuana businesses. These businesses would still be in violation of federal law if the AG reschedules, similar to any other business selling Schedule III drugs like methamphetamines or anabolic steroids. For a fuller analysis, check out this old chestnut from 2016.
But would moving marijuana to Schedule III make the risk of federal enforcement even more unlikely? I suppose. Truth be told, we haven’t worried much about federal law enforcement against state-licensed cannabis businesses since the days of notorious cannabis dingus Jeff Sessions. Moving the plant to Schedule III can’t hurt, though.
The only way state-licensed cannabis businesses will become insulated from all risk of federal enforcement is for marijuana to be removed from the CSA entirely, as half of Congress has voted to do and as Senators have recently petitioned the Attorney General to do (citing yours truly). Let’s hope we get there eventually.
Myth 3: Marijuana businesses would be taxed like other businesses
This is almost correct. If marijuana goes to Schedule III, the margins-crushing statute known as IRC § 280E would not apply, and the cannabis industry would change forever. That said, state-level taxation of cannabis will not change. Or, it may change for the worse, as states feel emboldened to raise cannabis-related taxes in the absence of § 280E.
Do states tax cannabis heavily? Yes they do. Although several states have passed laws designed to mute the effects of § 280E at the state return level, most states (and many cities and counties) levy significant taxes on cannabis in some form or other. These taxes usually accrue at the point of sale and are borne by the consumer. They are designed to raise prices, however, and place downward pressure on sales. For that reason, cannabis businesses tend to oppose them.
Still, I cannot emphasize enough that removal of § 280E would change the industry forever. Having worked with cannabis businesses for 13 years, I view taxation as the largest affront to marijuana businesses— more than banking access, intellectual property protection problems, lack of bankruptcy, you name it. This would be HUGE.
Fact 1: Marijuana rescheduling would give industry more leverage with investors
The cannabis industry is depressed and starved for capital. The last big investment spike came in on the COVID wave; since that point equity has been cheap and investors hold all the cards. With § 280E gone, many struggling cannabis outfits should begin producing better financial statements. The most efficient cannabis businesses would look sexy as all get-out.
Cannabis businesses also would have an easier time explaining their models, and we’d see fewer people scheming to do things like move to Puerto Rico or build these types of rats’ nests. It is also worth noting that U.S. small business lending has held up recently despite higher costs of credit. More of those available dollars could flow to cannabis businesses. They would have more value overnight (the pubcos already got a jolt), and should be able to generate financial statements on par with other industries.
Fact 2: Marijuana rescheduling wouldn’t fix the banking thing
The banking thing will not be fixed. At Schedule III, marijuana would still be a controlled substance and state-licensed businesses would still be “trafficking” in a controlled substance, contrary to federal law.
As someone who has advised many banks and credit unions on cannabis, including the federal government, I’m here to tell you that the analysis for financial institutions won’t fundamentally change. We need the perpetually stalled SAFE Banking Act or some other act of Congress to fix this, so long as cannabis remains on any CSA schedule. Even if marijuana is moved to Schedule III, cannabis businesses would be stuck with current options (which aren’t as bad as advertised.)
Fact 3: Marijuana would become easier to research, and subject to the morass of health care regulation (kind of)
These are probably two different facts. Oh well. Due to its Schedule I status, marijuana has always been incredibly difficult to research (see: How to Study Schedule I Controlled Substances). That paradigm changed a bit with passage of the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act last July, but a move to Schedule III would open the floodgates. Substances on lower schedules are simply more accessible from a DEA licensing perspective.
Related to this, the plant would “officially” have medical value if placed on Schedule III. That would be great and not so great. As a law firm with a substantial ketamine practice, for example, we’ve seen how the morass of health care regulation is brought to bear on controlled substances fit for medical use (ketamine is also a Schedule III drug). Granted, ketamine is an FDA approved drug, but the classification of a substance as something with medical value opens the door to any number of opportunities for medical application and attendant regulation.
The cannabis industry has always been worried about Big Pharma moving in. That fear has been somewhat irrational in my view, especially given the size and staying power of the non-pharmaceutical market. With a Schedule III placement, however, we would see more FDA drug development opportunities, which means more FDA drugs, which means off-label uses, etc. Expect to see a dual-track market for cannabis going forward, including an intensive regulatory structure.
Wrapping up on marijuana rescheduling
Again, really great news. In the absence of descheduling we’ll gladly take it. Keep your fingers crossed for a smooth and speedy process. In the meantime, we’ll continue to share thoughts and track this crucial development, as I’m certain we’ll have much more to say in coming weeks and months. For now, it’s time to celebrate!
Cannabis News
America’s Constitutional Conundrum: Guns and Ganja
Published
20 hours agoon
January 21, 2025By
admin
Of Guns and Ganja: America’s Constitutional Conundrum
If there’s one thing America is famous for, it’s guns – and lots of ’em! In the land of the free and home of the brave, firearms aren’t just a right, they’re practically a national pastime. With over 400 million firearms floating around a nation of 330 million people, it’s safe to say that guns are as American as apple pie and baseball.
But you know what else Americans love? Drugs. The US remains the world’s largest drug market, with an particularly passionate affair with cannabis. Mary Jane has come a long way since the “Just Say No” propaganda of the D.A.R.E. days. Now, millions of Americans legally light up in their home states, transforming from “criminals” to “consumers” faster than you can say “tax revenue.”
Here’s where things get sticky though. Despite the Biden administration’s vague promises of reform, cannabis remains stubbornly classified as a Schedule I substance at the federal level. This creates a peculiar predicament for freedom-loving Americans who appreciate both their Second Amendment rights and their evening toke.
You see, there’s this obscure interpretation of federal law that says if you consume cannabis – even legally in your state – you’re technically not allowed to own firearms. Let that sink in for a moment: in a country with more guns than people, where cannabis is legally sold in most states, you’re forced to choose between your constitutional right to bear arms and your state-sanctioned right to consume a plant.
As you might imagine, telling Americans they can’t have their guns AND their ganja isn’t exactly going over well. It’s a uniquely American saga that pits state rights against federal law, personal freedom against bureaucratic overreach, and common sense against, well… whatever you’d call this situation.
Let’s dive into this bizarre legal battleground where constitutional rights and cannabis collide.
As America’s cannabis landscape evolves, we’re witnessing a fascinating legal tug-of-war between state sovereignty and federal authority. The latest battleground? The constitutional rights of cannabis consumers to bear arms.
In a groundbreaking decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently reaffirmed that banning occasional marijuana users from owning firearms is unconstitutional. The case, known as U.S. v. Daniels, centers around a man who was sentenced to four years in prison after police found trace amounts of cannabis and firearms during a routine traffic stop. Talk about wrong place, wrong time!
The federal government, particularly under the Biden administration, has been performing some impressive mental gymnastics to justify their position. Their argument? Cannabis users with guns “endanger public safety,” “pose a greater risk of suicide,” and are more likely to commit crimes “to fund their drug habit.” They’ve even argued that cannabis consumers are “unlikely to store their weapons properly.” I guess they never met my ex-military uncle who meticulously organizes his gun safe while enjoying his evening edible.
But here’s where it gets really interesting. The Department of Justice claims the restriction is perfectly constitutional because it aligns with the nation’s history of disarming “dangerous” individuals. They’re essentially putting cannabis users in the same category as folks with domestic violence restraining orders. As someone who’s spent considerable time around both cannabis users and domestic abusers (professionally, of course), I can tell you there’s a slight difference in temperament.
The courts, however, aren’t buying it. As the Fifth Circuit pointed out, the government failed to prove that Daniels was “presently or even regularly intoxicated at the time of arrest.” They noted that even if the government had proven frequent intoxication, they offered “no Founding-era law or practice of disarming ordinary citizens ‘even if their intoxication was routine.'”
The ruling doesn’t completely invalidate the federal statute (known as § 922(g)(3)), but it does expose its shaky constitutional foundation. As the court stated, “This is not a windfall for defendants charged under § 922(g)(3),” but rather a recognition that the government’s enforcement approach is fundamentally flawed.
Meanwhile, the National Rifle Association (NRA) – not exactly known for their progressive stance on substances – acknowledges the absurdity of the situation. They point out that “marijuana use is no longer limited to the domain of indigenous religious customs or youth-oriented counterculture and now includes a wide variety of people who use it for medicinal or recreational reasons.” When even the NRA is suggesting your gun control measure might be a bit extreme, you know something’s amiss.
The result of all this legal wrangling? A patchwork of confusion where state-legal cannabis users must choose between their Second Amendment rights and their medicine or recreational preference. It’s a prime example of how federal prohibition creates more problems than it solves, forcing otherwise law-abiding citizens to become unwitting criminals simply for exercising multiple legal rights simultaneously.
Welcome to America, folks, where you can have your guns or your ganja, but apparently not both – at least until the courts finish sorting out this constitutional cannabis conundrum.
Let me be blunt – we’re caught in a classic American political pretzel. The Biden administration dangles the carrot of rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III, making vague promises that sound good on the campaign trail but do little to address the fundamental issues plaguing cannabis consumers, including their right to bear arms.
While some celebrate these baby steps toward reform, I’ve been around this block enough times to know that rescheduling is like putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. It might stop some bleeding, but it doesn’t address the underlying trauma. The gun rights issue is just one of many complications that arise from cannabis’s continued inclusion in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: there’s only one real solution, and it runs straight through the halls of Congress. The same body that created this mess with the CSA in 1971 is the only one with the power to truly fix it. Congress needs to completely remove cannabis from the CSA – not reschedule it, not modify its status, but fully deschedule it.
Think about it. Rescheduling to Schedule III would still leave cannabis in a weird legal limbo. Sure, it might make research easier and give Big Pharma more room to play, but what about the millions of Americans who use cannabis medicinally or recreationally in their state-legal markets? They’d still be federal criminals, still banned from purchasing firearms, still caught in the crossfire between state and federal law.
The only path forward is complete removal from the CSA, coupled with a federal framework that respects state markets while establishing basic national standards. This would resolve the gun rights issue overnight – no more choosing between your Second Amendment rights and your medicine or recreational preference.
Would I love to see Congress completely overhaul the CSA? Absolutely. The entire scheduling system is based on outdated science and political theater rather than actual harm reduction principles. But let’s be realistic – that’s about as likely as finding bipartisan agreement on… well, anything these days.
Instead, we need to focus on what’s achievable: complete cannabis descheduling. This isn’t just about guns and ganja – it’s about fixing a broken system that’s created countless legal paradoxes and unnecessary criminal penalties. It’s about acknowledging that the emperor has no clothes, that cannabis prohibition has failed, and that it’s time to move forward with a sensible federal policy.
Until Congress acts, we’ll continue to see these legal battles play out in courts across the country, watching judges try to reconcile constitutional rights with outdated federal drug laws. It’s a waste of judicial resources, taxpayer money, and most importantly, it’s a waste of Americans’ time and freedom.
The solution is clear. The only question is: how many more Americans need to get caught in this legal crossfire before Congress finally does its job?
Inspiration:
https://www.marijuanamoment.net/federal-court-reaffirms-that-ban-
on-gun-ownership-for-people-who-occasionally-use-marijuana-is-unconstitutional/
https://www.marijuanamoment.net/nra-says-federal-ban-on-
marijuana-amid-state-level-legalization-has-created-confusing-legal-landscape-for-gun-owners/
CANNABIS AND GUN RIGHTS, READ ON…
Cannabis News
MLK Day 2025: Cannabis and Civil Rights
Published
2 days agoon
January 20, 2025By
admin
It’s MLK Day once again.
I’ve been writing an MLK Day post on this blog for eight consecutive years. The theme of my posts is that cannabis is a civil rights issue, and that Dr. King would have advocated for ending prohibition based on that fact.
Each year, I have demonstrated with facts (upon facts upon facts) that the War on Drugs continues in insidious ways. In, 2023, which is the most recent year that FBI data is available, law enforcement officials made over 200,000 arrests for marijuana-related convictions. Those 200,000 arrests constitute roughly 25% of all drug-related arrests.
Sadly, arrests of black people constituted 29% of all drug arrests in 2023, although only 13.6% of Americans are black.
Heading into MLK Day weekend, President Biden announced that he is commuting the sentences of nearly 2,500 people convicted of non-violent drug offenses. The focus was predominantly on individuals “who received lengthy sentences based on discredited distinctions between crack and powder cocaine…”, as opposed to cannabis-related crimes. According to the Last Prisoner Project, “the total number of those incarcerated for cannabis who received commutations is not knows, but nine LPP constituents will be free.”
For all that Biden promised as to cannabis, it’s the least we could have asked. Under the new Trump administration, attention will quickly return to the frustrating marijuana rescheduling process. If cannabis ends up on Schedule III, criminal penalties for traffickers may soften, but make no mistake: possessing and distributing cannabis will still be a federal crime.
At the state level, where most arrest occur, progress has slowed in the last few years. Out here where I live in Oregon, with our 800 cannabis stores, it’s astonishing to think of 200,000 annual cannabis arrests– most for simple possession, no less.
There is a lot of work to do. Here are a short list of organizations if you’d like to get involved:
For prior posts in this series:
Cannabis News
No Smoking, No Vaping – What’s the Safest Way to Consume Cannabis Based on Your Genetics and Science?
Published
2 days agoon
January 20, 2025By
admin
The Safest Way To Consume Cannabis For Health, According To Science and Genetics
Marijuana legalization continues to help thousands of people.
Most especially those who need marijuana to treat conditions in a safer, more natural, and more cost-effective manner compared to pricey, addictive, and dangerous pharmaceutical medications. That said, not all weed is made the same: depending on where you get your weed, some of it may be grown using pesticides, which can be bad for your health especially when smoked. So yes, it does matter what kind of weed you’re smoking and where you got it from.
In addition, not all methods of consumption are also the same. Many consumers, particularly extremely health-conscious individuals, prefer not to smoke weed. Smoking weed that’s been grown with pesticides can also be dangerous for one’s health. It’s especially not recommended if you are immunocompromised,
That’s why a growing number of consumers prefer to explore the variety of other consumption methods available these days, such as edibles, tinctures, beverages, and cannabis oil to name a few.
Now, the results of a new study have just been published, suggesting that cannabis oil extracts may be the safest way to consume weed. Researchers studied MCT oils that contained high concentrations of CBD with some THC.
“Several studies have found damage to various chromosomal associated with cannabinoid use,” said the researchers. “Considering numerous studies demonstrating the genotoxicity of cannabis, it is noteworthy that many of these investigations have focused on individuals who consume cannabis through smoking or in cigarette form, normally rich in THC,” they said.
The researchers specifically found that extracts of cannabis sativa don’t exhibit genotoxic or mutagenic potential in doses that are commonly used by patients to manage anxiety, pain, epilepsy, and other conditions. “Although the current literature on cannabis sativa extract remains inconsistent, most evidence suggests that these extracts are safe for cells and DNA under both acute and chronic experimental conditions, even at high doses, in studies involving both male and female animals,” wrote the researchers.
Some consumers were alarmed recently when studies, albeit weak in nature, were published, which suggested that cannabis smoke had the potential to be genotoxic. That said, it still isn’t recommended for individuals who may be immunocompromised but there is no strong evidence that cannabis can indeed cause genetic mutations.
Since oral consumption of cannabis oil bypasses the respiratory system and allows patients a more accurate way to dose, it’s become the preferred method of consumption for many medical cannabis patients. Whether you’re young or old, the safety profile of cannabis oil has been proven; this is especially true if you wish to avoid respiratory harm.
The Role Of Quality Cannabis In Health
As cannabis consumers, there are many ways you can ensure that you’re medicating with clean, safe cannabis that’s free from dangerous contaminants. Pesticides aren’t the only contaminants to be aware of; street cannabis sold by dealers can be laced with toxic additives and even fatal ingredients, such as in the notorious case of the tainted THC vapes containing Vitamin E acetate. Other undesirable ingredients to take note of include residual solvents and heavy metals.
It’s also your role as a consumer to do research about the quality of cannabis you buy. Of course, it makes sense to only buy from licensed cannabis dispensaries since they can easily supply laboratory-tested cannabis products. From edibles to oils, flowers and more, licensed dispensaries can provide products that have a Certificate of Analysis or COA, which can either be printed on the packaging itself, accessed online, or via a QR code. A cannabis product with a COA can give you peace of mind that the product meets stringent testing and quality standards.
In addition, you can also seek out certified organic cannabis products. Of course, the fact that cannabis still isn’t federally legal means that there is nothing similar to a USDA Organic certification for weed, though some manufacturers make it easier for consumers these days to know if they are buying organic or not. For example, if you live in California, you can look for Clean Green Certified or OCal (weed that has been grown in standard that are comparable to organic).
Conclusion
If you are older or have pre-existing medical conditions, the best way to medicate with marijuana is by taking cannabis oil orally. It’s also extremely versatile, since it can be used to treat an array of conditions ranging from nausea to chronic pain, headaches, muscle pain, and so much more. While it may have reduced bioavailability compared to smoking, cannabis oil extracts do provide fairly quick relief for several conditions.
Smoking weed in any form, whether by flower, vape oil, or concentrates, should be avoided or limited altogether. There are also other potential consumption methods that are safer and more suitable for the immunocompromised, such as sprays, edibles, and topicals.
It also helps to carefully consider the type of cannabinoids you are consuming. For patients that need to medicate during the daytime, CBD or high-CBD products are always preferred. One must be careful with THC especially if you are older, operate machinery, or have no previous experience with psychoactive drugs. Always start with the lowest dose possible, and work your way to a higher dose slowly.
SAFEST WAY TO USE WEED, READ ON…
Panama And Cannabis
LA’s cannabis community steps up for wildfire relief
Does Your Dog Really Care When You Are Sad
Fun Life Lessons Learned From Spaghetti Westerns
America’s Constitutional Conundrum: Guns and Ganja
A Look At Martin Luther King And Cannabis
Meet the new and improved home of the growers, ILGM
MLK Day 2025: Cannabis and Civil Rights
No Smoking, No Vaping – What’s the Safest Way to Consume Cannabis Based on Your Genetics and Science?
MLK Day: Cannabis and Civil Rights
Distressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
What you Need to Know
Drug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
NCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
It has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
Cannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
A new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse
Your Go-To Source for Cannabis Logos and Designs
UArizona launches online cannabis compliance online course
Trending
-
Cannabis News2 years ago
Distressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
-
One-Hit Wonders2 years ago
United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
-
Cannabis 1012 years ago
What you Need to Know
-
drug testing1 year ago
Drug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
-
Education2 years ago
NCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
-
Cannabis2 years ago
It has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
-
Marijuana Business Daily2 years ago
Cannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
-
California2 years ago
A new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse