“A fair administrative process should include the voices of those most directly affected by federal cannabis policy: consumers, patients, and the communities that have lived under prohibition. Excluding NORML from this hearing deprives the record of that perspective.”
NORML argues that the hearing record will be incomplete unless it includes the perspective of adult cannabis consumers — the constituency NORML has represented for more than fifty years.
“Acceptance of the newly proposed rule would mean that no state-legal medical cannabis patient will any longer have to choose between either their medicine or their constitutional right to bear arms.”
“Today’s order marks a historical reversal in federal cannabis policy. It validates the experiences of tens of millions of Americans, as well as those of tens of thousands of physicians, who have long recognized that cannabis possesses legitimate medical utility, as well as the legitimacy of the longstanding medical cannabis access programs available in the majority of US states.”
“These facts compel the federal government to recognize that marijuana can be legitimate in terms of medical applications.”
The following primer seeks to provide clarity to frequently asked questions surrounding cannabis rescheduling and its policy implications.
“While such a move potentially provides some benefits to patients, and veterans especially, it still falls well short of the changes necessary to bring federal marijuana policy into the 21st century.”
Absent cannabis descheduling, those who produce, dispense, possess, or use marijuana in compliance with state laws could still face federal prosecution for violating federal drug laws.