The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has come beneath renewed strain to be faraway from the upcoming hashish rescheduling course of amid recent allegations of bias.
In November, 2024, Enterprise of Hashish reported {that a} 57-page movement calling for the DEA to be faraway from the rulemaking course of and get replaced by the Division of Justice had been submitted, earlier than in the end being dismissed by Administrative Legislation Choose (ALJ) John Mulrooney.
Now, in keeping with attorneys representing Village Farms and Hemp for Victory, recent proof has come to mild that calls for a reconsideration of the decide’s ruling.
The brand new submitting, submitted on January 06, alleges that the DEA, relatively than supporting the proposed rule, has actively labored towards it by utilizing outdated and legally rejected standards to undermine hashish’ medical and scientific worth.
The attorneys level to a current declaration by a DEA pharmacologist that echoed ‘anti-rescheduling speaking factors,’ together with claims that hashish has a excessive potential for abuse and no accepted medical use. This stance instantly contradicts the findings of the Division of Well being and Human Providers (HHS), which beneficial rescheduling utilizing a broader two-factor evaluation.
Furthermore, the movement accuses the DEA of improper ex parte communications with opponents of rescheduling, together with the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation and anti-cannabis organizations like Good Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) and the Group Anti-Drug Coalitions of America (CADCA).
These teams are stated to have coordinated carefully with the DEA whereas pro-rescheduling members, such because the state of Colorado, have been denied participation within the hearings.
The exclusion of Colorado, a frontrunner in hashish regulation, and the inclusion of Nebraska’s legal professional normal, an outspoken opponent of rescheduling, have raised important issues about equity.
The attorneys additionally allege that the DEA intentionally delayed the submission of essential proof till shortly earlier than the hearings, circumventing HHS’s scientific evaluate and depriving pro-rescheduling events of a clear and balanced course of.
This last-minute knowledge submission, the movement argues, violates the Administrative Process Act (APA) and the Managed Substances Act (CSA), additional undermining the integrity of the proceedings.
The movement requires an instantaneous investigation into the DEA’s conduct, together with the extent of undisclosed communications with anti-rescheduling entities. The attorneys demand full disclosure of related communications, a postponement of the hearings, and a particular evidentiary listening to to handle the alleged misconduct.
In addition they request that the DEA formally declare its place on the rescheduling proposal, citing issues that the company is badly performing as each the proponent and opponent of the rule.
This newest growth follows earlier allegations that the DEA failed to supply ample details about its witnesses and improperly obstructed requests from advocacy teams and researchers to take part within the hearings. Critics argue that the DEA’s actions not solely compromise the rescheduling course of but in addition erode public belief within the company’s potential to conduct honest and neutral regulatory proceedings.
If the movement is granted, it might considerably delay the rescheduling hearings, presently set to start later this month, and power a reevaluation of the DEA’s function within the course of. The end result of those hearings is being carefully watched by stakeholders within the hashish business, as rescheduling to Schedule III would ease federal tax burdens, scale back analysis obstacles, and symbolize a pivotal shift in US hashish coverage.
