Pressure is building on the Trump administration from parties on both sides of the aisle to take a definitive stance on cannabis as upcoming Supreme Court cases could force his hand.
Earlier this month, in his first public statement on the ongoing cannabis Rescheduling process, Trump announced that his government would be deciding on whether cannabis should be reclassified as a Schedule III substance, potentially having significant benefits for the industry.
With the fervent excitement surrounding the cannabis industry failing to abate, seeing stocks retain the bulk of their value since spiking on the news, various political and lobbying groups are now throwing their hat into the ring.
On the pro-cannabis side, the leading policy group Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) has launched a new campaign urging the president to go beyond rescheduling, seeing it declassified and removed from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
They have now launched a petition calling for equity-focused reform, including the expungement of past convictions, reinvestment in communities, and stating clearly that rescheduling would continue to criminalise citizens, and that ‘anything less than descheduling falls short’.
Meanwhile, the hardline anti-drug group Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), alongside a coalition of law enforcement and religious groups, also announced efforts to sway the administration in the opposite direction, and keep cannabis in Schedule 1.
In a letter signed by organisations including the Drug Enforcement Association of Federal Narcotics Agents, the Family Research Council, and the National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition, the groups warned that rescheduling would provide a ‘$2 billion tax break’ to dispensaries and illicit operators, undermine workplace drug testing, and send ‘the wrong message’ to youth.
The groups also rejected the conclusions of the Department of Health and Human Services review under the Biden administration, which found that cannabis has accepted medical uses and should be moved to Schedule III.
It comes as two separate US Supreme Court cannabis cases, each holding the potential to reshape cannabis law, edge closer to being heard.
The first case, US vs Hemani concerns whether federal law prohibiting anyone who uses controlled substances from possessing a firearm applies to cannabis consumers.
A lower court ruled that the statute could not be used to prosecute a Texas man who was a regular cannabis user but not intoxicated at the time FBI agents found a firearm in his home.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has appealed, arguing that longstanding precedent allows legislatures to disarm habitual drug users, while defence attorneys warn that millions of Americans who lawfully consume cannabis under state law could face felony charges if the Supreme Court upholds the ban.
Elsewhere, Canna Provisions vs Bondi was filed by Massachusetts-based cannabis operators and backed by multistate operator Verano Holdings.
It challenges the Controlled Substances Act on the grounds that Congress has no authority to criminalise the cultivation, possession, or sale of cannabis that occurs entirely within a single state.
The case seeks to revisit the Court’s 2005 ruling in Gonzales v. Raich, which upheld federal jurisdiction over intrastate cannabis. Plaintiffs argue that conditions have changed significantly since then, with state-level legalisation reducing, rather than increasing, illicit interstate cannabis markets.
The Court’s decisions could paint a clearer picture of the Trump administration’s fractured and inconsistent position on cannabis reform at a crucial time.
The Court’s next term begins on 6 October. It has not yet announced whether it will hear either case.
The post Pressure Builds on Trump Administration to take Definitive Stance on Cannabis Rescheduling appeared first on Business of Cannabis.
Continue reading...
Earlier this month, in his first public statement on the ongoing cannabis Rescheduling process, Trump announced that his government would be deciding on whether cannabis should be reclassified as a Schedule III substance, potentially having significant benefits for the industry.
With the fervent excitement surrounding the cannabis industry failing to abate, seeing stocks retain the bulk of their value since spiking on the news, various political and lobbying groups are now throwing their hat into the ring.
On the pro-cannabis side, the leading policy group Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) has launched a new campaign urging the president to go beyond rescheduling, seeing it declassified and removed from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
They have now launched a petition calling for equity-focused reform, including the expungement of past convictions, reinvestment in communities, and stating clearly that rescheduling would continue to criminalise citizens, and that ‘anything less than descheduling falls short’.
Meanwhile, the hardline anti-drug group Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), alongside a coalition of law enforcement and religious groups, also announced efforts to sway the administration in the opposite direction, and keep cannabis in Schedule 1.
In a letter signed by organisations including the Drug Enforcement Association of Federal Narcotics Agents, the Family Research Council, and the National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition, the groups warned that rescheduling would provide a ‘$2 billion tax break’ to dispensaries and illicit operators, undermine workplace drug testing, and send ‘the wrong message’ to youth.
The groups also rejected the conclusions of the Department of Health and Human Services review under the Biden administration, which found that cannabis has accepted medical uses and should be moved to Schedule III.
It comes as two separate US Supreme Court cannabis cases, each holding the potential to reshape cannabis law, edge closer to being heard.
The first case, US vs Hemani concerns whether federal law prohibiting anyone who uses controlled substances from possessing a firearm applies to cannabis consumers.
A lower court ruled that the statute could not be used to prosecute a Texas man who was a regular cannabis user but not intoxicated at the time FBI agents found a firearm in his home.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has appealed, arguing that longstanding precedent allows legislatures to disarm habitual drug users, while defence attorneys warn that millions of Americans who lawfully consume cannabis under state law could face felony charges if the Supreme Court upholds the ban.
Elsewhere, Canna Provisions vs Bondi was filed by Massachusetts-based cannabis operators and backed by multistate operator Verano Holdings.
It challenges the Controlled Substances Act on the grounds that Congress has no authority to criminalise the cultivation, possession, or sale of cannabis that occurs entirely within a single state.
The case seeks to revisit the Court’s 2005 ruling in Gonzales v. Raich, which upheld federal jurisdiction over intrastate cannabis. Plaintiffs argue that conditions have changed significantly since then, with state-level legalisation reducing, rather than increasing, illicit interstate cannabis markets.
The Court’s decisions could paint a clearer picture of the Trump administration’s fractured and inconsistent position on cannabis reform at a crucial time.
The Court’s next term begins on 6 October. It has not yet announced whether it will hear either case.
The post Pressure Builds on Trump Administration to take Definitive Stance on Cannabis Rescheduling appeared first on Business of Cannabis.
Continue reading...
