Federal Judge Hears Closing Arguments In Constitutional Challenge To Cannabis’ Schedule I Status

Federal Judge Hears Closing Arguments In Constitutional Challenge To Cannabis’ Schedule I StatusYesterday in Sacramento a federal judge heard closing arguments in a motion challenging the constitutionality of cannabis’ Schedule I classification.

At issue is whether a rational basis exists for the government’s contention that cannabis is properly designated as a schedule I substance — defined as possessing a “high potential for abuse,” “no currently accepted medical use in treatment,” and “a lack of accepted safety … under medical supervision.” A federal court has not heard evidence on the matter since the early 1970s.

Lawyers for the federal government argue that it is rational for the government to maintain the plant’s prohibitive status as long as there remains any dispute among experts in regard to its safety and efficacy. Defense counsel — attorneys Zenia Gilg and Heather Burke of the NORML Legal Committee — contend that the federal law prohibiting Justice Department officials from interfering with the facilitation of the regulated distribution of cannabis in over 20 US states can not be reconciled with the government’s continued insistence that the plant is deserving of its Schedule I status under federal law.

In October, defense counsel and experts presented evidence over a five-day period arguing that the scientific literature is not supportive of the plant’s present categorization. “Numerous clinical trials have been conducted using whole plant marijuana and have concluded the evidence strongly suggests therapeutic value,” defense counsel affirmed in a written brief filed with the court last month. “Physicians in 23 states and the District of Columbia have been recommending whole plant cannabis for treatment of a myriad of medical conditions. The United States, through SAMHSA (Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration, a branch of HHS), holds a patent [on the therapeutic utility of the plant.]”

“… It is unimaginable to believe that if heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine, or even over-the-counter medications were being distributed in 23 states and the District of Columbia, Congress and the President would abdicate all regulatory authority to those jurisdictions, and then cut off all funds … to intervene in related distribution activities. … Even the most vivid imagination would be hard pressed to reconcile such action with a ‘rational belief’ that marijuana is one of the most dangerous drugs in the nation.”

In a brief filed with the court by the federal government, it contends: “Congress’ decision to treat marijuana as a controlled substance was and remains well within the broad range of permissible legislative choices. Defendants appear to argue that Congress was wrong or incorrectly weighed the evidence. Although they failed to prove even that much, it would be insufficient. Rational basis review does not permit the Court’s to ‘second guess’ Congress’ conclusions, but only to enjoin decisions that are totally irrational or without an ‘imaginable’ basis.”

They add: “Congress is not required to be ‘right,’ nor does it matter if the basis on which Congress made its decision turns out to be ‘wrong.’ All that is required is that Congress could rationally have believed that its action — banning the production and distribution of marijuana — would advance its indisputably legitimate interests in promoting public health and welfare. Because qualified experts disagree, it is not for the Courts to decide the issue and the statute must be upheld.”

The Judge is anticipated to rule on defense’s motion within 30 days.

Legal briefs in the case, United States v. Pickard, et. al., No. 2:11-CR-0449-KJM, are available online here.

79 thoughts

  1. If “it is not for the Courts to decide the issue and the statute must be upheld,” then how did prohibition of alcohol and every other stupid law/amendment get repealed?

  2. No matter what the Judge’s verdict, I’ve said it before and I ‘ll say it again; Our NORML team did great and historic work here! Thank you Attorney Zenia Gilg for calling the government witnesses in this trial out for the impostors of Democracy that they are! And thank you Paul Armentano for all of the vital research you contributed to this case. You made MY donation and THEN some.
    I’d like to see the U.N. and Congress react to this case. Especially the highlight when one of the government’s witnesses went on a Pharma-rant trying to say marinol is better than herbal marijuana and apparently didn’t even realize he admitted that marijuana was medicine while under oath.
    Classic…
    And the denoumovement of the whole drama? “Congress doesn’t have to be right.” Yeah, I think my four year old tried that defense with me and he still got an @$$ woopin.

    [Paul Armentano responds: Thank you for the comment Julian. I know that you have been closely following this case from almost day one.]

  3. In the last 10000 years cannabis has failed to cause a single death. Unlike dangerous substances such as salt or sugar. It is stupid laws such as prohibition that cause the rational to lose respect for authority.

  4. So who is the judge and who exactly funded him?
    Because if ANY of his donors are pharmaceutical related, you can bet your ass that cannabis will continue to be a Schedule One

    [Editor’s note: Federal judges are appointed, they don’t run for office.]

  5. It seems to me that the Judge herself may side with the defense, but there is no legal basis for her to rule for them. She will likely rule for the prosecution because they have the legal advantage even though she disagrees with them.

  6. “Congress is not required to be ‘right,’ nor does it matter if the basis on which Congress made its decision turns out to be ‘wrong’.”

    This is nonsense.

    We should expect Congress to base its policies based on scientific truth and to change its policies as we learn more. Anything else throws money and lives away needlessly.

  7. I agree. The judge should do something. Like do a load of laundry, wash dishes, eat a snack, workout, watch some tv, take a crap, or troll a comment section on a website. It makes very little sense, what I say. In contrast, ending prohibition makes more sense than Mary Poppins. Tell me I’m wrong.

    Having your name associated in any way with the efforts to persecute those that choose to consume cannabis is a shameful embarrassment, and ignorance is not bliss. What a legacy to leave behind as one fades into the history books as a herded sheep of a person, choosing to remain uneducated or instead advocating a crime against all people with a self righteous attitude. Get rid of mint chocolate chip ice cream, I say. Let it ring out for all to hear. Non psilocybin mushrooms must be outlawed as well.

    Thank you for your time. Admittedly, not my best work. And I shan’t pay you for the seconds you just lost, sorry.

  8. I’m just here so I won’t get fined.

    Biscuits and gravy.

    My man, well alright.

    Four score and seven years ago, it was it was 1928.

    If ever there was, there was.

  9. Im so glad patent 6630507 for cannabinoids as neuroprotectants owned by SAMHSA was heard as testimony in this case. I can think of no greater hypocrisy in prohibition than both patenting and prohibiting cannabis by our Federal government.

  10. Hoping for two things:

    1) Judge Mueller chooses to apply the “rational basis with a bite” test, not the simple rational basis test, and

    2) she frames the question as whether congress has a rational basis for classifying cannabis as a Schedule 1 substance, not whether congress has a rational basis for classifying cannabis as a controlled substance, as the gov’t argues she should do.

    Paul, Zenia, Heather, you guys are the best!

  11. I hope that the judge rules soon and favorably, but if not, here is a possible successor plan.

    Marihuana is linguistically derived from marijuana, and marihuana is semantically derived from cannabis – which was legal before these derivations occurred within the current federal definition of marihuana.

    That definition is so wrong that it was, soon after, temporarily classified to be prohibited. Thus the prohibition of that ill-defined marihuana could again be used by the government against the people, in contempt of the Constitution’s mandate for necessary and proper laws.

    Remember that the previous prohibition had recently been ruled to be unconstitutional. Why is the prohibition of cannabis always
    constructed in such tricky ways?

    A simple reform of that definition will conform to a necessary and proper formulation, yet fit within the Schedule’s classification of an “other substance”. Such a definition can be constructed in one short sentence, which restores legality to cannabis, and provides real meaning to the term “marijuana” without the racist spelling,
    while continuing to advance the government’s “indisputably legitimate interests in promoting public health and welfare.”

    If the judge rules to maintain prohibition, then ask your representatives if they will support this definition of marijuana which actually shows respect for our Constitution:

    16. The term “marijuana” means all parts of the smoke produced by the combustion of the plant Cannabis sativa L.

    Signing this petition may also help: http://wh.gov/i4yLn

  12. And the “government’s argument” remains un-rational. Congress has the authority to jail innocent people, my ass it does! This is exactly why there is a three part government, so the judicial branch can remove illegal laws, like Marijuana Prohibition. Why isn’t congress interested in prosecuting the people who lied under oath to them that marijuana is a dangerous material??????????

    If a law does not have to be “correct”, then why do we need laws??? This just leads to chaos because, like with the police, my bullets say I’m right. These Prohibition Idiots just think law and law, but it is law and order. Disordered laws are for retards in theocracies and places that don’t want peace.

  13. im not going to pretend to understand all of this stuff but it seems to me that every branch of government just punts this issue.

    its doesnt matter if we are illegally jailing people so long as we thought we were right when we started.. by that logic the nazis should be absolved of all crimes.

    hopefully this court sees the error of the feds logic. at the very least this should be a state issue.

  14. Meanwhile, SCOTUS has given Colorado until March 27 to file a counter-brief in response to Nebraska/OKIE’s complaint. Leave for Nebraska to sue hasn’t been granted, yet.

    You can follow by going to scotusblog and entering Nebraska v Colorado in the search box.

  15. Hopefully it will be classified as a Sch V/5. Then maybe the Veterans Administration Medical Centers/VAMC facilities will stop piss testing and denying medical care to patients who are also taking opiates for severe chronic pain. You have to choose, the VA will not let you consume both. Been there, done that. Now I go to a civilian Dr for my pain management and still get my Hydro and STILL toke on!!; no piss tests for THC metabolites by private docs in Cali. Shame on the VA! Mega BS
    To classify marijuana in the same Schedule 1 class as opiates is beyond moronic imo, it shows how little these so called ‘experts’ really know about cannabis.

  16. Taking their time on this one… I been waiting on the outcome on this for way longer than it should take… Of Course it has medical use. Ofcourse it is not highly addictive. Coffee or nicotine would be more addictive in most peoples opinion that actually know anything about it.

  17. None of this is as it seems. The “federal laws” are not laws they are codes and statutes made corporations operating under the guise of government. The “federal judge” is not a real judge but an administrator for the corporation. The corporations make money off people in prison through prison bonds. This is big business for profit not justice which is why it seems irrational. There is a difference in legal and lawful. Learn this difference people for the sake of the children. This is bigger than cannabis even though i love cannabis i love truth and freedom more.

  18. Question: If the judge rules favorably, does that mean marijuana will automatically be moved to a less restrictive schedule until the case can be heard by a higher court?

    Thank you NORML for the hard work you continue to do everyday! You guys are well loved!

    [Paul Armentano responds: Any ruling will initially apply to the Ninth Circuit only. Also, the motion does not call for rescheduling; it simply argues that cannabis does not belong in schedule I. If the Judge agrees, it is not within her jurisdiction to say where it does belong; just whether or not she agrees with defense counsel that it does not meet the criteria for Schedule I.]

  19. Did anyone ever think to present the judge with the fact that the U.S. Government has a patent on marijuana since February 2nd 2001

    It clearly states that it has a medical use! That in itself seems to be enough evidence, how come norml.org doesn’t focus on this more?

    The patent is
    United States Patent 6,630,507
    Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants

    the web site is
    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN/6630507&RS=PN/6630507

    [Paul Armentano responds: The SAMHSA patent on cannabinoids was stressed in defendant’s final briefs to the Court, as excerpted in the blog post above, “Physicians in 23 states and the District of Columbia have been recommending whole plant cannabis for treatment of a myriad of medical conditions. The United States, through SAMHSA (Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration, a branch of HHS), holds a patent [on the therapeutic utility of the plant.]”

  20. They add: “Congress is not required to be ‘right,’ nor does it matter if the basis on which Congress made its decision turns out to be ‘wrong.’

    The harms produced by hiding behind such statements are precisely whats causing the erosion of our public health and welfare. And more to the point, as long as the ONDCP is allowed to lie to the American People this will continue. They lie everyday and are protected. Drug Czar Michael Botticelli when ask about lying to the American said that it was “within the stautory guidelines” for him to do so. This isn’t what the Constitution was meant to uphold so Richard Nixon bent it with executive power to push his prejudice views on the country and the world. The ONDCP is a corrupt and unconstitutional arm of the president and should be eliminated.

  21. FYI people, times are changing. I have been convicted but not sentenced yet for helping to manufacture/distribute over 500lbs of cannabis. I have been allowed to keep and renew my 215 by a federal (pre-trial) judge for medicinal purposes. I have been testing dirty for THC with the federal government for almost 2 years now. I know now that I am not the only person this is being done with by the federal govt. As far as I know at the time I was the only one this was being offered to. I did not request it from the judge. The judge recognized my need for cannabis due to allergies in other medicines. I have called NORML and offered for them to use my case in arguments. I would love to help if I can.

  22. this law will only change when it benefits the ones that have the power to change it, politically and financially!

    It is not fair, but that is life!

  23. It’s quite like, when DNA proves you innocent and they catch the real killer…..you STILL don’t get out of jail for some time.

  24. Some factual arguments I feel should be presented to refute the gov’t claims on cannabis; these URLs included are only a fraction of credible evidence and sources from proven medical studies…

    1) there is a federal cannabis program where the send the patients 300 rolled Marijuana cigarettes monthly and have been for years now.
     

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassionate_Investigational_New_Drug_program

    2) if cannabis has no medicinal benefits then why does the gov’t have patents on it as well as medications; ie: Marinol, dronabinol, sativex….

    http://nypost.com/2013/09/11/feds-patented-medical-marijuana-even-when-they-were-fighting-it/

     

    3) the DEA declassified dronabinol from their classification of schedule II to a schedule III back in 1999.

    http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/1999/fr0702.htm

     

      4) why are there medical doctors making attempts to have it declassified

        as well;

    http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1259095/doctor_group_endorses_medical_marijuana/

    http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/pharmaceutical-strength-marijuana-future-cancer-treatment-1

  25. “Congress is not required to be ‘right,’ nor does it matter if the basis on which Congress made its decision turns out to be ‘wrong’.”

    That isn’t the issue at hand, it’s not about being right or wrong, the issue is if the law is constitutional or not! To determine the that, you have to examine the law… to correctly examine the law, you must define “no currently accepted medical use in treatment”. The fact that the government owns a patent for it’s therapeutic properties, that large associations of physicians accept it, that 23+ states/territories allow prescribing it without prosecution, that the DOJ does not actively prosecute any medical use of it should clearly be enough to force a rescheduling. It is very sad if that’s not how the case is ruled.

  26. They add: “Congress is not required to be ‘right,’ nor does it matter if the basis on which Congress made its decision turns out to be ‘wrong.’ –

    Under this logic, schools should still be segregated, The Catholic Church was perfectly justified when they executed Copernicus and “The Alien and Sedition Act” should still be law.

  27. Thank you, NORML!
    Thank you for trying everything you can to make progress toward legalization.

    Congress should make quick work of removing cannabis from the prohibition schedule simply because the focus of law enforcement should be on REAL crimes such as safeguarding the American public from terrorists like ISIS and their sympathizers.

    This article from Rollingstoned.nl argues the same point against the Dutch DOJ which is cracking down on cannabis, first with the weedpass and now by shutting down grow shops and threatening cannabis social clubs. Overzealous prohibitionists OR closet cases who are all bark and no bite trying to get surrounding countries to lighten up on the sacred herb?

    Here the story in Dutch
    http://www.rollingstoned.nl/12-2-15-opstelten-helpt-is-strijders-een-handje/

  28. NO thanks, for what is, again, no submission of the fact, that, our US Constitution, was, originally – drafted on Cannabis Sativa. “Marihuana”, as FDR forces us to call it – IS the very fabric of our Constitution. Another major blunder of neglect!

  29. This sounds like a case of “because I said so.” propaganda is the reason marijuana was outlawed in the first place because of the threat to paper and cotton industry back in the 30’s. Times have changed and government mindset does as well. How are mushrooms classified as schedule II when someone can die from a bad batch?? Look at Colorado and the tax base collected. If I’m the Fed Government I’d be pissed at all the money they missed out on because marijuana dispensaries are not considered legal business entities. Stop wasting tax dollars on fighting marijuana, the courts & jail time. If you want to knock out a chunk of the national deficit, look no further!!!

  30. Yo ! @ Drew: Maybe you could contact the Sacramento “Clerk of Court” and “submit your testimony” to the Judge; very interesting!!:)

  31. Unless you want judges constantly overruling legislatures whenever they disagree with them you have to accept the “rational basis” test. Prohibition I got repealed when enough people stood up and said “this is ridiculous and I want to vote for someone who will end it,” for the politicians to listen and Prohibition II will end the same way.

  32. I find Judge Mueller’s closing questions to the prosecution very intriguing, stating:
    “If I bought [the defenses’] case… What would you lose?”

    Oooohhh, saaay, a Big Pharma monopoly on the supply and domestic price of cannabis? By GW Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer and GlaxoSmthKline just to name a few vultures that like to hike prices on life saving medicines…

    The judge’s rhetorical question demonstrates she is inquisitively aware of not only of the special intere$ts in this case, but in the inherent tragic flaw and hamartia of the prosecution’s self admitted attempt to justify injustice, and the Federal government’s indefensible prohibition of patented neuroprotective and neurogenerative medicine (cannabis) to replace it with addictive opiates for profit. The fingerprints of Big Pharma were all over this case; not only when the government’s own witness blundered and accepted the argument under the pretense that marijuana is medicine just to pitch some Marinol, (which patients reject unilaterally over herbal cannabis, for the record)… but the prosecution fumbled again in a closing argument that includes the words, “If Congress were listening here they would probably reschedule, but that is up to Congress to decide.”
    No, alas, dear Gregory, Congress had 45 years to make a fair decision concerning the Constitutionality of the scheduling of marijuana; hence, Mr. Broderick, this was the reason why you were in a Federal COURT and not testifying before Congress (jeez, and he calls himself an assistant U.S. Attorney?) While scheduling may be up to Congress, interpretation of the Constitution is up to Judge Mueller; specifically on how she interprets the testimony under the merits, as Mr. Armentano points out; whether cannabis should be classified or scheduled at all considering the grave hypocrisy presented in the allowed evidence.

    Dr Colleen Barry and Dr Carl Hart, both Dr’s who presented such hypocrisies in the U.S. v. Picard, et al, have furthered their comments to that regard in the Guardian today. Dr.Hart brought forth the testimony revealing the paradox of both patent and prohibition, cleverly defining himself a man of “science” when the prosecution attempted to portray him as an “activist.” (That’s right; we activists are a derogatory word for prohibitionists… We must be finally getting to them!)

    Dr. Barry’s research at John Hopkins University found over 1,700 fewer deaths due to opiate overdose from prescriptions in the 23 states that have legalized medicinal marijuana. Our health system overprescribes lethal opiates while both patenting and prohibiting life-saving cannabis that has no record of overdosing anyone… Ever.

    Top that with testimony heard by Sgt. Begin who represented thousands of soldiers on the stand during earlier testimony around Veteran’s Day last year when he explained how he was offered opiates while openly recovering from opiate addiction, until he finally had to choose being cut from opiate supplying VA funds to continue consuming the only medicine that properly managed his PTSD without demoralizing, lethal side effects ; marijuana. (His doctors literally told him ” It ‘s either VA funded lethal opiates or you pay for your own weed. Good thing for us Sgt. Begin chose the weed so he could testify on the stand. Well done Sgt.! Your country owes you a debt of gratitude!)

    I’ll say it again; Judge Mueller is highly likely to award the defense. “I will seriously consider the defense,” said Mueller after closing arguments today. The Guardian points out that Mueller said “There are contested points of fact,” about whether accepting cannabis in schedule 1 status “passes Constitutional muster.”

    After an inevitable appeal by Big Parma… (I mean, the Federal government… 😉 )This case will then appeal to the 9th circuit court of Appeals, affecting every Federal case that follows, including the pending case of Nebraska and Oklahoma v. Colorado.
    Although it would be highly entertaining to watch Colorado countersue Nebraska and Oklahoma for the inflated law enforcement and health care costs they are burdened with by prohibitionist states that fail to use state resources to capture rapists and murderers that flee into Colorado, a defense by Colorado under Constitutional grounds could attack the entire C.S .Act head on. A win for the defense in the U.S. v. Picard et al will ostensibly clear the way for a defense by Colorado on Constitutional grounds using the same evidence allowed in Picard. With the entire 9th Circuit map on Colorado’s Eastern border in a constitutional battle over the scheduling of marijuana under the C.S.Act, Nebraska and Oklahoma ‘s AG’s better be prepared to redefine their interpretation of “state’s rights.” If the argument over the scheduling of marijuana has now evolved into its cost, we may be looking at the tip of the hemp harvest when it comes to law suits. Time to sue prohibitionist states for costing state’s with legal marijuana laws billions in unnecessary law enforcement and medical expenses.

    It’s no wonder why this law suit against Colorado has top ranking Republicans telling the OK and NE AG’s to back off before their case backfires;
    Pretty soon state’s will be in a predicament of choosing whether to legalize marijuana or pay for the damages of prohibition their state caused on neighboring legalized states. How’s that for a twist in the old joint?

  33. Here’s the real problem. Congress is the actual power of authority in our government. The president, judges, all the king’s horses, and all the king’s men aren’t gonna put logic and reason back together again. Until all those dried up wrinkled taints turn to dust we’re screwed. If we keep voting for republitards, we’re screwed. Even if we try everything we’re allowed to withing to legal confines of ‘the law’ to claw out of the dark ages we’ll just be knocked back down again. You can never succeed when the rules you’re suppose to follow are made by people who don’t wan’t you to have success in the first place. Why would a group of politicians want to allow a plant to be legally consumed by it’s constituents if the plant has the potential to extend our lives. They don’t know WTH to do with all of us and we keep growing in numbers via crappy family planning. If everyone on the planet just tried for 2 kids this wouldn’t even be happening right now. They want a large chunk of the population to drop over so we’re easier to ‘govern’. I say roll out the barrels filled with hot tar and don’t forget the feathers. It’s about time for a public lynching.

  34. Not required to be right? What do you even say to that; I can’t think of any situation where that kind of excuse would be accepted in society? Not any, yet our government laughs at us and continues onward? This mentality is why I lost my father in Vietnam. I am loosing what little hope I have left.

  35. If the judge finds that schedule 1 status is unconstitutional, then employees working in the territory covered by the 9th Circuit should be protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act when using medicinal marijuana as directed by a physician.

  36. Upcoming Cannabis Event in the so very prohibitionist state of Pennsylvania

    Anyone interested is attending to listen or who can get on the panel or otherwise help move things along, this just might be for you

    Medical Cannabis and Industrial Hemp Town Hall Meeting: Annville, PA
    I will be holding a medical cannabis (SB3) and industrial hemp (SB50) town hall meeting on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 beginning at 6:30 p.m. in Leedy Theater, located in Mund College Center at Lebanon Valley College in Annville, PA.

    Speakers for the evening include:
    •Lieutenant Governor Mike Stack
    • State Senator Mike Folmer (sponsor of SB3 and cosponsor of SB50)
    • State Senator Daylin Leach (cosponsor of SB3 and SB50)
    • State Senator Judy Schwank (sponsor of SB50 and cosponsor SB3)
    •Dr. Jahan Marcu, Director of Research and Development at Green Standard Diagnostics, Senior Scientist at Americans for Safe Access, and an Auditor for the Patient Focuses Certification program
    •Lolly Bentch Myers, Mother
    •Dana Ulrich, Mother
    •Les Stark, Hempstone Heritage
    •Erica McBride, Keystone Cannabis Coalition

    All are welcome to attend, including advocates, those seeking more information, the agricultural industry and media. A question and answer session will be held at the conclusion of all speakers. Seating is limited to 180, on a first come, first served basis. If you have any questions, please contact Fallon in my office at 717-787-5708 or fbinner@pasen.gov.

    http://senatorfolmer.com/enews/folmer/2015/021615.htm

  37. Pennsylvania’s Senate Bill 3 prohibits the use of medical cannabis by smoking or vaporizing, still. Bunch o’ Bullshit! That’s gonna essentially make the state a tincture state for high CBD for kidz with seizures and for whatever medicinal cannabis drops veterans with PTSD can put under their tongues or in something to eat or drink, leaves out the precise and most rapid method of delivery or treatment–vaping or smoking, vaping preferred to avoid the tar and gases in the smoke, you know, for obvious reasons.

    James Carville’s take on Pennsylvania being Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama in between still holds true of the state’s political class. Have you seen the Pennsylvania Surgeon General? She’s transgendered; so Governor Wolf is very up to date and open minded, it’s just the other Bible Belching prohibitionist politicians.

    http://articles.philly.com/2015-01-26/news/58437758_1_gender-identity-lgbt-community-richard-levine

  38. Cannabis should not even be on the drug schedule. The laws are archaic and made up by racial issues. There is no common sense in congress except for, Earl Blumenauer, Steve Cohen, and Jared Polis.

  39. The pharmaceutical companies have to be behind this and they have to be funding someone. I had a wisdom tooth pulled the other day and was handed a prescription for hydrocodone. I told them I did not want it and would not use them anyway, they said they had to write the prescription for a painkiller. Does not make sense to me when you tell them you don’t want them and they try talking you into getting them. They said it would be good to have on hand just in case I needed them. I said I would deal with the pain and use Ibuprofen if I had to.

  40. My mother was also injured on the job, after the surgery, they prescribed pain meds and told her that workman’s comp would take care of the bill for as long as she needed the painkillers. Almost sounds to me like the federal government wants us on these drugs.

  41. No matter what the ruling is, I think it’s great that this issue is being given serious consideration by a federal judge. Many cases like this in the past have been casually dismissed as unimportant or too straightforward. It’s good to see that Judge Mueller is giving serious weight to both sides, rather than simply jumping to the foregone conclusion that weed is illegal therefore it’s bad.

  42. If the judge finds that schedule 1 status is unconstitutional, then employees working in the territory covered by the 9th Circuit should be protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act when using medicinal marijuana as directed by a physician. – Mr. Green Jeans

    The Illinois Medical Cannabis Compassionate Act excludes cannabis felons from ever receiving cannabis in The State of Illinois even with a Physician’s certification.

    Does that not violate the Americans with Disabilities Act?

    What are the Federal rights of federally disabled citizens who happen to live in The State of Illinois?

    Is this the basis for another legal challenge?

    Which law is ruling?’

    Federal or State?

    I am federally disabled and am protected from discrimination by the Federal Government.

    The Illinois Medical Marijuana law denies every former Illinois drug felon’s right to medical care even when recommended by their Physician(s).

    The drug felon exclusion will be overturned…in Federal Court.

  43. typical fear of what’s not understood. but what I don’t understand is how after all this time we still “don’t understand” this plant? OR do we more than we care to admit?

    this 30-day thing sounds like “let’s buy ourselves some time so we can come up with some kind of bullet-proof argument about why we simply can’t reschedule it.”

    I’m betting they’ll just pull some crap out of their asses and try to sell it to us as sound public policy.

Leave a Reply