The Justice Department’s decision to move state-legal medical marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III was a major development for the industry. On June 29, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) will hold an administrative hearing to discuss whether all cannabis should be reclassified. However, it appears the proceedings will be fairly one-sided, as all participants seem to be anti-weed.
RELATED: The FDA is quietly fast-tracking a THC drug — and it’s a big deal
Seven “interested parties” were selected to participate in the hearing. They include organizations critical of cannabis reform, including anti-drugged-driving nonprofit DUID Victim Voices and workplace drug-testing advocacy group the National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association.
Among the most vocal participants is Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), which has filed lawsuits challenging both cannabis rescheduling efforts and the new Medicare hemp pilot program. The group has also spent millions opposing state-level legalization initiatives.
Several cannabis reform organizations, including the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and the Drug Policy Alliance, applied to participate in the proceedings. DEA rules limit “interested party” status to those who are “adversely affected or aggrieved” by the proposed reclassification.
RELATED: How a little-known federal rule could make cannabis seeds illegal
Doug Benns of the American Council for Cannabis Medicine told MJBizDaily it was an “expected outcome.”
“A lot of us were considered long shots to be in there, quite frankly,” he said.
Even so, not all rejected parties are taking no for an answer. Representatives for NORML challenged the decision, filing an “emergency request for reconsideration.” According to Marijuana Moment, the nonprofit’s attorneys argue that “public interest will be substantially harmed if the record omits the consumer perspective.”
Despite a lack of pro-cannabis voices in the room, it remains unclear how the DEA proceedings will unfold. For stakeholders awaiting a final decision, the hearing is likely only one step in what could be a lengthy rescheduling process.
