E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Anthony Bolante / Reuters file
A marijuana starter plant is shown at Canna Pi medical marijuana dispensary in Seattle on Nov. 20.
Advocates of looser federal restrictions on marijuana suffered a significant legal setback Tuesday, as a panel of three judges found that the federal government acted properly in refusing to loosen restrictions on pot.
Pro-marijuana groups and a disabled veteran who said it improves his medical condition asked the Drug Enforcement Administration to put marijuana on a lower tier of federal restrictions. They said the agency was ignoring a growing body of scientific evidence that it has some medical benefits. When the DEA refused, they sued.
But by a 2-1 vote, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said Tuesday that the DEA did consider all the available information. "We find nothing in the record that could move us to conclude that the agency failed to prove by substantial evidence that such studies confirming marijuana's medical efficacy do not exist," the majority opinion said.
The ruling comes as a stark contrast to actions by a growing number of states that allow use of marijuana on the recommendation of a doctor. And voters in Colorado and Washington approved ballot measures in November that ease state restrictions against recreational use.
The DEA has long classified marijuana as a Schedule I drug, the most-restrictive category, finding it "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." The production, sale, and use of marijuana remain illegal under federal law as a result.
Judge Harry Edwards, who wrote Tuesday's opinion, took note of the controversy. "There is a serious debate in the United States over the efficacy of marijuana for medicinal uses," he said.
But the issue for the court, he said, "is not whether marijuana could have some medical benefits." Instead, Edwards said, the court's job was to determine whether the DEA acted within the scope of its authority in declining to reclassify the drug, given claims in the lawsuit that peer-reviewed scientific studies found some evidence that it could be beneficial.
"We defer to the agency's interpretation of these regulations and find that substantial evidence supports its determination" that no studies exist that are "adequate and well-controlled" proving its effectiveness in medical treatments.
The dissenting judge, Karen LeCraft Henderson, expressed no view on whether marijuana has medical benefits. Instead, she said the court should have dismissed the case on the grounds that none of those filing the lawsuit had legal authority to bring the case to court in the first place.
Leave a Comment:
After that decision I need a bowl.
Another win for the reefer madness cronies. Pot still on the same level a drug as heroin and meth, our government, real intelligent.
Legalize it now please....this is crazy. I understand these judges kinda did what they thought they had to...but this is crazy...and the FDA and DEA are out of touch completely. Continuing to criminalize their neighbors, friends and families...not to mention good american citizens. Come on really - everyone knows that Pot is harmless and has too many benefits to mention here.
This is my strategy - to teach my kids the correct information regarding marijuana and maybe when they become adults they can finally get it changed. I suggest we all do the same.
Also - as I get older - and my kids get older - I am going to continue to use it - and eventually when I am really old I am going to get arrested (on purpose) - and spend my later years in jail as a cause celebre in the name of Pot...that's my retirement plan. I am cool with prison as a means of peaceful protest...
stand by Uncle Sam !!!
I sort of agree with you to a degree. I too want to get arrested...as a protest...but I don't actually want to go to jail. I have this idea that if the government was faced with literally every pot smoker in the country demanding to be arrested, that "they" would back down. "They" can't put half the country in jail for pot. Someone needs to pick a date and see what happens. If everyone who smokes would actually stand up and be counted, I think there would be a lot of shocked people in this country. The average non smoker has no idea of who and how many people smoke pot.
When my daughter was 16 I told her, that if she had a choice between pot and drinking, that I prefer that she smoke. I know the dangers of drinking, I used to be a drunk and I didn't want her making the same mistakes that I made. Of course she didn't listen...after 2 DWI's and 2 vehicle damage accidents that the cops never found out about...she finally figured it out.
And for those interested, I'm a retired white female who will be 64 this weekend and I take no medication other than a calcium supplement. My only pain/problem comes from the repair of my right hip that I broke 9 years ago. There's a big chunk of metal holding it together and I have bone pain in the area of the incision. It's a pain I have learned to live with. I drink occasionally and by that I mean once or twice a year and I also gave up cigarettes.
Let's "stand up and be counted" and force the government to listen to us.
If the government refuses to admit that pot has any medical benefit, why are they still supplying a number of patients with free pot to help them fight their pain? I didn't make that up. The marijuana is grown at a university in the Eastern US and is made into cigarettes at that site, then distributed by the government to the users. Why the double standard for just a few people if there is no recognized medical use for marijuana?
Mississippi I believe.
HUH ?
It's only a matter of time before more states legalize it. It's a losing battle in the long run to not legalize marijuana. Alochol and Tobacco are legal; it's high time that cannabis be legalized, no pun intended.
This stupid War On Personal Freedom - I mean "War on Drugs" needs to end! There is no reason why anyone should arbitrarily be given the right to tell me what I can or cannot put into my own body! I also hate it when people say that we need to legalize and tax marijuana. Legalize? Yes. Tax? Why? Do you want even MORE taxes? I'd say that it should obviously be subjected to normal taxes (such as sales taxes if you're in a state that has them) but why the extra taxes? We already pay enough taxes that just get wasted with stupid $170B inaugurations.
The government isn't smart enough to know that if they legalize pot people might become more passive?
I think there would be less crazy people running around with guns, just more people sitting at home stoned, questioning the things they thought they knew for sure earlier that day. It's a sign of intelligence to question your own beliefs.
I thought I knew what you meant, then smoked a bowl and thought about it and realized that I wasn't sure that I really knew what you thought you said. So, I smoked another bowl (just so it would really sink in) and now I know for sure that what you said was not what I thought you meant and it really made me realize that I should smoke another bowl and watch the Simpson's. Hmmm, I forgot what I was going to say. Well Happy Birthday anyway...puff puff
Yo Boondoglez: My sentiments exactly!!!
And there lies the rub. Those that want it legal (myself included), are too laid back or spaced out to organize and maintain a long term, agressive movement to educate & pressure those podunks in the 'gummint' that are bought & paid for by the booze, paper, & textile lobbies. Also, as one poster stated - money talks. Hard call - send my congressman a powerpoint presentation or buy a nickel bag.
Boondoglez --
Awesome post. Happy birthday to you too.
Most every thing from the Feds is BS
As a former marijuana dealer and user for over 25 years I have to agree with the decision the court made.
Why?
Less money for him I suppose if the government makes it legal the Pot dealers of today are out of business that means they are against it. regulation and taxation of this plant is the right way to go for the users not the dealers they make their money without paying a dime to the feds no wonder they are against removing it from the schedule 1 it is greed plain and simple.
I feel that I was introduced to other drugs, ie: acid, coke, herion, meth,pcp, you name I tried it. I was always told that it was a gateway drug but would have argued that it wasn't when I was using but I would have to say now that marijuana is a gateway drug. I loved getting high, it was basically all I did. I didn't set a good example for my children either, 4 out of 5 ended up using drugs, 2 of them are still addicted to herion to this day. I can't help but blame myself.
So much for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. All I see is more lies, loss of rights, and a morally bankrupt government that continues to make us their slaves.
I thought it was a good attempt at satire, but then again, I do have THC in my system from last night. I do feel that there are many like me- 50 something, college educated, middle class professional, grown kids, homeowner,etc., that much prefer a small amount of cannabis over an alcoholic drink. My wife and I talk more, laugh more and really enjoy life together thanks to the addition of cannabis. As the social stigma changes, there will be more smokers "coming out" and showing that the benefits far outweigh any negatives. (if there are any. In my view, all of its negatives have to do with its illegality.
I agree, but are you sharing it with your grandkids? If not, don't you think it wise to sell it in liquor stores? I don't think it should be sold in the grocery store or in a shack with a green leaf stenciled on the door. I'd like to think that parents had a choice about whether or not their kids got it. Being an ex- smoker, I think it's a good recreational drug, but I could have done more with my life if I had lit up when I was so young.
Don't blame your short falls on something you did blame it on what you didn't do.
Whew, thanks! Maybe it went over my head at first read for the same reason! :o)
As do I tovarich...I think some of the problem lies in the frequency and amount with which it's used by some. As an early user (in the 60's & 70's) it was apparent that excessive use created a level of lethargy and "dumbness". I broke away when my first daughter was born and didn't touch it for 25 years. Now it's strictly very light use, on occasion and calibrated recreational. I find it much more satisfying and stimulating much as you've described. I would never buy from a state supplier. I just prefer my personal broker in that sense.
Boondoglez -- "Now it's strictly very light use, on occasion..."
Bingo! Even proponents of mj should realize that steady day-long use of it, everyday, is not always helpful (I say "not always" because there could be some medical exceptions to this rule). Occasional use, however, can open the mind to new hopes and possibilities. The trick is to find the balance that works for you.
I am saddened to say that I cannot smoke freely because I am subject to random drug tests at work.
The justice system in this country does not act in the best interest of the people and never will. They base rulings to best serve their corporate and political masters. Marijuana will never be legal on a federal level because the pharmaceutical drug barons (aka legal cartels) cannot corner the market on something the average citizen can grow themselves.
To everyone posting here,I know what this $hit is, and I'm not taking the Bill Clinton route, OK. If this drug is harmless,not worth the fuss, then give it to your kids! Do it now no matter what their age is. Don't wait til they're 18 or 21 do it now because it's harmless and not worth the fuss!
Do you give your kids alcohol or cigs?
they are much, much, much worse than pot. it's harmless compared to alcohol and cigs, but i guess you believe pot is dangerous bcz the establishment says so.
I do not give alcohol to my kids. When they are old enough to make this decision, they can do as they wish. I tell my kids not to do those energy drinks either. Common sense, man.
Putting folks in prison for smoking a joint is idiocy at best. I used to watch the anti marijuana commercials and they appeared to be more applicable to to alcohol use.
Hypocrit: A person drinking a beer or other alcoholic drink talking about those damn pot smokers.
Peace, Myst
Sebuttpan, You just made my point,alcohol is illegal unless you are 21, Cigs are too unless you are 18. If pot was legalized would there be a user age law? And if so ,when,16-18-21? When? Hell in some states you can marry at 15! Because if you say that there should be a defined user age you are also saying that there is something to this $hit(Marijuana) and that it is not a harmless drug. Which is the consensus of the posters of this Vine thread claim, it's harmless.
fender "bender" perhaps? You sound like a carwreck!
Who do I believe? The 'Gummint' or these lyin' eyes? This whole thread has been a lot more intelligent, informative & POLITE than most people wailing about yonder brother's/sister's political/religious perversions. Kudos to all.
MysticMyst, I agree with what you are saying. As a kid I was fortunate to have sober parents. But I would refer to the parents of my "stoner friends" who drank as using"liquid Marijuana", as they were all over Pot smokers. My point is that I have seen the error in my ways. And why make legally available anything that would rob young people of their ambition which is Marijuana? The Marijuana "junkies" f^^ked up by calling Marijuana,"medicine". Once they went that route they declared it a drug. You seem like a responsible parent as I try to be. And that we would both caution our kids about the dangers of taking drugs,right?
The entire thing is a joke. For the people that actually use pot "medicinally" compared to the number that use is strictly to get high, the argument is ridiculuous. In my state, it's legal for medical use...and yet, out of the thousands of people holding their precious "patient" cards, it's a proven fact that only a small percentage of them actually have medical needs that the "meds" (as they call them) can help. Nope, in my state and in my town and in my little world, it's the best means for stoners to get some "good %$#@*" for their own use and to sell on the side. It's quite the little racket around here and frankly, I'm sure everyone in the biz (including the local state government) is well aware of it.
Yo Laughing: here in Montana it's kind of different. Friends of mine who used to move Keys, then got a card, are acting like reformed prostitutes - won't give it up no more, pledge allegiance to the wrong dealer. I liked them better when they were federal criminals. And some of the med-pot going around is only 'sleepy-time dope'. Won't lie to ya, I don't do it for the meds although, I carry my fair share of shrapnel (blame the gov't. They're the ones that sent me to Panama & the Nam). But most of the people I know with cards are the same as me, just better at self-deception.
Yo Ghost! Love the honesty! My big gripe is the deception. If you're going to use the medical card to obtain enough to sell and smoke recreationally, then at least stand up and be counted. Why hide behind a card? If you're proud of it, then shout it from the roof tops and stop acting like your attempts to be 'discreet' are anything but dishonesty at a deeper level. Again, I find the entire argument a joke. Make a legal for all I care. By the way, I find one thing very ironic on boards like this...anyone that expresses anything that even romotely hints at having a conscience, traditional values or simply doesn't follow the typical arguments being expressed...they're collapsed. Why is that?? Just curious. This is the first time I've ever responded on an article but I read them once in a while, I see a trend there.
Why is it necessary for marijuana to have some medical benefit in order to be legal? Do bananas have a medical benefit? How about celery? I know that marijuana advocacy groups are trying to leverage the medical usage (which I agree marijuana does have) to reduce the restrictions, but having to resort to that just highlights how screwed up the federal government is. The DEA is out of control, needs to be reigned in, and have clearly defined boundaries set. Marijuana should be legal, if for no other reason than unreasonable drug laws make felons out of marijuana users.
It is just the steps they take to get there. First legalization for medical use, then privatize the liquor sales, and close down the state controlled liquor stores, and then legalize pot for recreational use. No more liquor stores to sell it in. What could be better for the big business that put the money up to get this law passed? You don't think the money is being put up by pot smokers, do you?
I'm for decriminilizing marijuana use but against classifying it as a medicine. I'll say one thing: Don't vote to do away with your state's liquor stores because the first thing the people trying to legalize pot are trying to do is get rid of liquor stores and then legalize pot. If you think about it, it makes sense because they want to put the control in private hands. The logical place to sell pot if it were to be legal would be a state regulated liquor store, but in Washington State, first they legalized it for medicinal use and sold it by prescription only in private dispensaries. The next step was to privatize liquor sales and move the sale of alcohol to grocery stores and Costco stores, then came the legalization of marijuana. Now they don't have a place to sell it, so private business is going to have to keep supplying it. I believe this was all engineered to keep the government out of the grow operation, the harvesting, and the sale and control of pot. I am going to make sure to vote against this privatization of liquor sales when it comes to a vote in my state, so that if marijuana is legal, the sales are handled in government controlled locations. I have no objection to marijuana, but I'm not going to let them argue that the state will get the taxes and then give the states crumbs while big business ends up getting fat off it.
The campaign to privatize the liquor stores in Wa was almost entirely financed by Costco. You don't really believe their master plan is to market Kirkland brand pot, do you?
I do agree with you, though: it would have made more sense to use the existing liquor store infrastructure than set up new, separate, dedicated stores that sell pot. They already have a system to restrict consumers by age, secure distribution networks, etc, etc.
I can't remember when I've read such a rambling mess!
Costco may have poured a lot of money into the campaign (and who cares, really?), but the people of WA voted to get out of the liquor biz and have been trying to YEARS and it has nothing to do w/marijuana. Geez - how do you make THAT stretch - they are totally separate issues. And why WOULDN'T we sell it in liquor stores? And btw- we totally bypassed the whole "medicinal" thing (although you can't obtain it that way) and went directly to just legalize it which is what people want anyway.
In other news....The War on "WE THE PEOPLE" continues over a PLANT! with over million arrested yearly for simple possession. Have to keep all those DEA/Police officers protecting and arresting us. The jails, Judges, Lawyers...More money in prohibition...
When you believe that pot which never killed anyone should be illegal, but guns which kill millions of people should be legal, you are an evil scumbag who belongs in hell.
It is time to get these evil rednecks out of this country. Send the scumbags to Africa to live where they can kill lots of big animals with their guns to make them feel like big men even though they are just scared little punks.
NO killing of big animals...Put them on a deserted island and let them take pot shots at each other...(pun intended)
Legalize it.