By DEA Argues for Schedule III Status
The Drug Enforcement Administration filed its final brief in the marijuana rescheduling proceedings. The agency stated that cannabis no longer fits the statutory requirements for Schedule I. DEA argued that marijuana has a currently accepted medical use within the United States.
The brief noted that the substance has an accepted safety for its use under medical supervision.
DEA said it must give significant deference to an extensive ten-month study by the Department of Health and Human Services. The agency highlighted that over 30,000 practitioners treat more than six million patients in 43 U.S. jurisdictions. DEA claimed there is substantial evidence that marijuana’s abuse profiles better align with Schedule III substances.
The agency said the vast majority of individuals use marijuana without resulting dangers to themselves or communities.
The DEA brief asserted that there is no merit to arguments that a new two-part test improperly departs from a former five-part test. The agency stated that opposition witnesses supported the therapeutic use of marijuana in certain instances. DEA asked the judge overseeing the hearing to expeditiously recommend that marijuana be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule III.
Opponents Challenge Legal Standards
A joint brief from Smart Approaches to Marijuana and the states of Idaho, Indiana, and Nebraska challenged the government’s approach. The group noted that DEA and HHS previously considered rescheduling marijuana at least nine times. They argued that on each occasion, the government determined marijuana must remain in Schedule I.
The brief stated that the new standards are not found in the Controlled Substances Act.
The opponents claimed the government proposes to reschedule marijuana based on new and different standards. They argued these standards run contrary to previous HHS and DEA practices. The group stated that the evidence points in only one direction regarding the current listing.
They urged the tribunal to reject the government’s attempt to supplant established legal standards.
The brief referenced a 2024 statement from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. The OLC said the prior five-part test was impermissibly narrow. The office stated that the two-part review is sufficient to establish that a drug has CAMU.
DEA has since embraced the new approach to evaluating cannabis for CAMU.
Transcript Review and Next Steps
Administrative law judge Derek Julius oversees the proceedings at the DEA headquarters in Arlington, Va. Parties have until Aug. 17 to propose corrections to the official hearing transcript.
Julius issued an order on July 16 limiting corrections to misspelled names or words. He stated that this is not an opportunity to materially alter the testimony of witnesses.
The courtroom capacity was limited to roughly 50 people during the multiweek process. Julius forbade the hearing from being televised or livestreamed in any way.
He prohibited attendees from using recording devices during the sessions.
Designated participants must file their nonmandatory briefs by Aug. These briefs allow parties to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The final transcript will serve as an evidentiary record for those hoping to challenge the outcome. Cole’s expected rescheduling decision will likely be subject to judicial review.
