Blog Voices from the Frontlines
Obama Can’t Reschedule Cannabis Before He Leaves…But Can Start the Process Internationally - Americans for Safe Access
Cannabis is currently classified as Schedule I and IV of the United Nations (UN) Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 as amended by the 1972 Protocol (the “Single Convention”). This scheduling was determined based on a report created by the Health Committee of the League of Nations in 1935. The UN General Assembly must have a recommendation from the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) to change the Scheduling of cannabis. The CND makes decisions on Scheduling of substances based on recommendations from the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD).
To date, the ECDD has not conducted an updated review on cannabis despite an increasing number of countries adopting medical cannabis policies. The CND in its Resolution 52/5 from 2009 requested an updated review by the ECDD and in 2013 the International Narcotics Control Board, in its annual report, invited WHO, in view of its mandate under the 1961 Convention, to evaluate “the potential medical utility of cannabis and the extent to which cannabis poses dangers to human health.”
For this reason, at ASA’s International Conference on Harmonization of Global Cannabis Policy March 18-23, 2016 in Washington DC, participants peer-reviewed Cannabis and Cannabis Resin Critical Review Preparation Document: safeaccessnow.org/critical_review. This important paper was created by an international whos who of cannabis experts including Jahan Marcu Ph.D., Tjaling Erkelens, Maria de los Angeles Lobos, Ph.D., Ethan Russo, MD, Roy Upton, Mahmoud Elsohly, Ph.D., Pavel Kubu, MD, Ethan Russo, MD, Pavel Patcha, Jason Schechter, Ph.D., and Phil Robson, Ph.D. to name a few.
PFC Review Board Member, Jim Tozzi’s Role in Stopping the DEA from Classifying Drug in Schedule 1 Status - Americans for Safe Access
Until a few months ago, few people in the US had ever heard of kratom, a tropical evergreen tree in the coffee family has been known to be used for medicinal purposes. That was until the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) tried place kratom in Schedule I of the controlled substances list through an emergency process. This action brought criticism from thousands of people including Senator Orrin Hatch and Senator Corey Booker. While kratom does possess opiate-like qualities, it also has been shown to treat opioid addiction and mitigate symptoms of pain, diarrhea, depression, and anxiety.
However, it looked like the fate of the medicinal herb was sealed until the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness (CRE) got involved. Jim Tozzi, head of the CRE, author of the Data Quality Act (DQA, also known as the Information Quality Act), and PFC Review Board member remarked on CRE’s involvement “when 100,000 members of the public express outrage with a regulatory decision, it deserves a second look.”
President-Elect Donald Trump announced today that he has nominated Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions to be the next US Attorney General. If approved by the Senate, Sessions would wield broad authority over federal drug law priorities and enforcement nationwide. What does that mean for medical cannabis in the US?
It could be really bad news... if we don’t fight back!
Last night, the voters in Arkansas, Florida, Montana, and North Dakota approved state medical cannabis ballots, with three of the four receiving landslide support! Patient advocates in these states will now turn their attention to working with state agencies to swiftly implement these laws. With a total of 44 states having some sort of medical cannabis law and 29 comprehensive programs, medical cannabis has firmly established itself as a mainstream issue. The clean sweep of state medical cannabis ballot initiatives was easily the best news for medical cannabis patients, but there were additional victories for patients as well.
Patients and Proposition 64 - What California’s Legalization Initiative Says About Medical Cannabis - Americans for Safe Access
California voters will decide on Proposition 64, the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, on Tuesday. The initiative will legalize the non-medical use, possession and cultivation of cannabis, within certain limits, by adults aged twenty-one and over. It also creates a state licensing and regulation program that is similar to the one that the state legislature adopted for medical cannabis in 2015.
Voters are likely to approve the ballot measure. A poll conducted by USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times shows support for Proposition 64 at 58%. Our mission at Americans for Safe Access (ASA) is focused exclusively on medical cannabis; and therefore, the organization generally does not take positions of support or opposition regarding adult-use cannabis laws. However, Proposition 64, if approved, will make beneficial changes to the state’s medical cannabis laws related to personal cultivation, taxation, and patients’ rights.
The DC Council passed a bill this week that will make several improvements to the District's Medical Marijuana Program. The bill, B21-210, will authorize the Department of Health to license third-party testing labs so that medicine the District can be independently tested for labeling and product safety. There were several amendments that were added to the bill at Final Reading and each was approved unanimously. While not all of the amendments were improvements, none are a step backward.
Councilmember Alexander and Council Chair Mendelson introduced a 1000-plant count limit amendment. While this artificially limits the production and variety of medical cannabis in the District, the current limit was already 1,000 through emergency and temporary legislation. The DC Department of Health (DOH) has often pushed against lifting plant-count limit, which was previously set at 95, then 500 plants. Many of the medical cannabis cultivation sites in the District were selected when the plant count was at lower statutory caps and therefore have had trouble reaching the 1,000-plant cap. However, the bill enables cultivation sites to expand or relocate within their current DC Council Ward. With eight licensed-growers, the program can handle its current capacity with the limit, but as more patients join the program, the limit may prove to be harmful.
It is less than two weeks until the 2016 elections. Do you know where the candidates stand on medical cannabis? It matters. Lawmakers at the local, state and federal level are going to make important decisions about medical cannabis that affect your life in the next two years. Cities and counties will decide whether to ban or regulate patient safe access, state legislatures will vote on commercial licensing and patients’ rights measures, and the new US Congress may decide whether or not to keep paying for medical cannabis enforcement.
Today ASA is relaunching our updated MMJ Voter’s Guide and voter education website. We have analyzed the voting records of every Member of Congress to create an educational guide about the voting records of each House Representative and Senator. We have also announced the organization’s positions on each of the medical and adult-use ballot measures.
Across the nation, candidates for federal and state positions are running ads, having town halls, engaging in debates, and knocking on doors. In some of these states, activists and patients are doing what they can to bring cannabis into the conversation.
ASA Executive Director Steph Sherer published a blog in the Huffington Post on Friday responding the the Drug Enforcements Administration's decision not to reschedule cannabis and to a landmark federal court ruling that upholds ASA's position that the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment prohibits the federal prosecution of conduct that is allowed by state medical cannabis laws. Steph points out that the ball is now back in Congress' court. It is time to pass comprehensive federal reform, and there is already a solution on the table - the CARERS Act.
Victory - Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment Continues to Help Medical Marijuana Defendants in Federal Court - Americans for Safe Access
An opinion today issued in the federal 9th Circuit by a three-judge panel has found that federal prosecutions of medical cannabis defendants may not proceed unless there is a violation of state law. In the opinion of U.S. vs. McIntosh, written by 9th Circuit Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain, the court held that the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendment prohibits the federal prosecution of conduct that is allowed by the state's medical cannabis law.
In the opinion, Judge O'Scannlain wrote:
We therefore conclude that, at a minimum, § 542 prohibits DOJ from spending funds from relevant appropriations acts for the prosecution of individuals who engaged in conduct permitted by the State Medical Marijuana Laws and who fully complied with such laws.
The opinion remanded all of the cases that included in the appellate ruling back to the trial court. If federal prosecutors want to continue pursuing their cases against the defendants, they must prove at an evidentiary hearing that the defendant violated state law.