Grasscity - Cyber Week Sale - up to 50% Discount

Fed court to review Marijuana drug status, first time in 20 years

Discussion in 'Marijuana News' started by thehighman, Oct 9, 2012.

  1. Ignoring the Debbie downers in here, I hope these guys come more prepared in the next case. Sounds like they presented their case like amateurs, but we'll see what the outcome is. A little publicity would be cool.
  2. Standing (law) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Eseentially, they are saying that the ASA is successfully showing harm is done to people by denying them cannabis as medicine. :cool:
  3. they will reschedule it.
  4. Appeals Court hears case on medical value of marijuana
    October 16th, 2012 Posted by Jonathan Bair [​IMG]

    This morning, the federal Appeals Court for the DC Circuit heard an appeal in the case called Americans for Safe Access v Drug Enforcement Administration. The case is an appeal of the DEA's rejection of a petition filed in 2002 seeking to change the placement of marijuana as a Schedule I drug per the Controlled Substances Act. Based on the scientific evidence, ASA and our fellow plaintiffs feel that it is simply untrue that cannabis is a drug with a “high potential for abuse” and “without accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.” The hearing today offered a glimpse at the Court's approach to this topic.

    Posted in a new thread
  5. From the perspective of someone who'd like to see full outright legalization, it did feel a little like amateur hour on some of his arguments. At one point, one of the judges did hint at why they were seeking to reschedule instead of completely removing it from the schedule. The counselor didn't really go for it, which was annoying to see, but understandable considering the actual purpose of today's hearing.

    He wasn't there to argue for legalization though. He wasn't even really there to prove that cannabis belongs elsewhere on or off the schedule. The only point of this hearing was to prove to the court that the ASA has the right to sue the DEA...and they appear to have accomplished that goal. If the court rules in favor of the ASA, they're really only saying that the ASA has the right to sue the DEA. Then they'll go back to court and actually get to challenge the DEA to have to recognize current science.
    It seemed like the counselor for the ASA was trying to be really careful to make that one solid case and not spread to thin trying to cover all bases, which was pretty appropriate.
    Keep in mind, each side was only allotted 15 minutes total to present their case, followed by a brief but effective rebuttal by the ASA.

    I think a lot of folks are misunderstanding what this hearing was really about. This hearing alone will not result in the rescheduling of marijuana. This hearing will only result in a ruling that the ASA does or does not have the right to sue the DEA. Only if the court rules in their favor based on this hearing can they then go and actually fight the DEA.
  6. does anyone in this thread speak english???? did anything happen in the hearing?????

    did it get rescheduled?
  7. [quote name='"Tihspeed"']does anyone in this thread speak english???? did anything happen in the hearing?????

    did it get rescheduled?[/quote]

    Frantic question guy is frantic.
  8. the post above yours has your answer...:cool:
  9. so what was decided? do they have the right to sue the dea?
  10. it's going to take months to get an answer...:(
  11. The court hasn't made a ruling yet. That's what the folks at the ASA are currently saying they'll expect to take months to hear back on.

    Trudging through the federal molasses is a slow and sticky process.
  12. thanks....

  13. I'd like to thank the ASA for their efforts.
  14. I'm on my phone so I don't feel like scrolling back, but thanks for whoever took the time to look up and explain "standing" to me. Didn't even realize that was a legal term or I would've looked it up myself.
    And I'm with decoy, they're doing good just getting some sort of fight going. I'd donate a few bucks.
  15. well...that was a bust.
  16. "more research" = more grant money to the DEA to buy moar drugs and hookers.
  17. so what about the ballot measure to legalize it for recreational use in oregon washington and colorado? honestly.. fuck the feds we have to make it happen ourselves

Share This Page