Court rejects petition asking DEA to move cannabis, but a judge says it could still be reclassified

By Nina Zdinjak

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth District ruled Monday against a motion asking the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to reschedule cannabis in all its forms under the Controlled Substances Acts (CSA).

A ray of hope came when Judge Paul Watford unanimously revealed that the agency may be required to reclassify cannabis amid misinterpretation of the medicinal value of marijuana.

Photo by matt_benoit / Getty Images

What happened – The original petition

The lawsuit was brought by cannabis researcher Dr. Sue Sisley of the Scottsdale Research Institute, the Battlefield Foundation and three military veterans submitted a previously filed one-page handwritten petition to the DEA to move cannabis. The petition was originally submitted by Stephen Zyszkiewicz, a California state prisoner, and Jeramy Bowers, a medical cannabis patient. This was denied by the DEA in a letter in which the agency alleged that cannabis currently has no recognized medicinal value.

Lawyers appealing the decision asked the courts to order the DEA to “conduct a formal rulemaking process that would include expert testimony and public comment,” Marijuana Moment reported. In addition, they argued that the DEA’s dismissal was unconstitutional and halted important research into the medicinal value of cannabis.

RELATED: United Nations Postpones Cannabis In Historic Vote Following WHO Proposal

However, the new ruling stated that “the petitioners have not exhausted their administrative remedies with the DEA. Although the CSA does not prescribe exhaustion of administrative remedies, the panel agreed with Second Circuit that the text and structure of the CSA show that Congress sought to favor administrative decisions that required exhaustion under the CSA. “

In addition, the opinion stated that the petitioners tried to bypass normal administrative procedure by asking for a review of the DEA’s response to the petition and trying to put forward arguments other than the original petition.

Applicants can still submit their own petition

“Nothing prevents the petitioners from submitting their own petition to the DEA and bringing up the arguments they want to bring before us now. Since the petitioners have not exhausted their administrative remedies with the DEA, their request for judicial review is rejected. “

RELATED: U.S. Supreme Court Judge Finds Federal Marijuana Laws Outdated

The Panel also noted that “while it is undoubtedly true that the interests of third parties would be harmed by a rescheduling of cannabis, this fact does not detract from the petitioners’ direct and particular interest in rescheduling.”

Judge recognizes the power of applicants’ arguments

Judge Paul Watford agreed, but also separately stated that “in an appropriate case, the Drug Enforcement Administration may be required to initiate a marijuana reclassification process, given the petitioners’ strong arguments that the agency misinterpreted the Control Act by concluding that “Marijuana ‘currently has no recognized medical use for treatment’ in the United States.”

This article originally appeared on Benzinga and was republished with permission.