MAPS: Fwd: D.C. Court of Appeals to Review Administrative Petition Challenging Pot's Prohibitive Status

["Nicholas V. Cozzi, Ph.D." <nvcozzi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This just in from the NORML Weekly News:

January 10, 2002

D.C. Court of Appeals to Review Administrative Petition Challenging
Pot's
Prohibitive Status

Court to Decide Whether DEA Erred By Not Assessing Marijuana's Low
Abuse
Potential Compared to Other Drugs

Washington, DC: Oral arguments will be heard in March in the D.C. Court
of
Appeals to determine whether DEA officials improperly rejected a
1995
rescheduling petition filed by former NORML Director Jon Gettman
challenging
marijuana's legal status as a Schedule I prohibited substance.

"The DEA and HHS [US Department of Health and Human Services] did
not
address Gettman's principal argument that marijuana does not have a
high
potential for abuse as compared to other substances," argues a
petition for
review filed on behalf of Gettman by NORML Legal Committee member
Michael
Kennedy of New York City.  The DEA issued a final denial of
Gettman's 1995
petition on March 20, 2001.

"Specifically, HHS concluded that marijuana is structurally related
to
Dronabinol (the prescription drug Marinol), a Schedule III drug;
Naboline, a
Schedule II drug, and all other cannabinoids, which are listed as
Schedule
I." Gettman's original petition requested the rescheduling of all
four
substances, arguing that there is no scientific basis for the assertion
that
marijuana or any cannabinoid has a greater dependence liability or
potential
for abuse than Marinol, a drug the DEA recently reclassified from
Schedule
II to III because of its relatively low abuse potential.  By
definition, all
Sch edule I prohibited drugs must have a "high potential for
abuse" and "no
currently medical accepted use in treatment."

In 1999, a comprehensive review of marijuana's therapeutic potential by
the
National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine (IOM) determined
that
"few marijuana users develop dependence," and described the
symptoms of
so-called "marijuana withdrawal" to be "mild and
short-lived." Authors
concluded, "Except for the harms associated with smoking, the
adverse
effects of marijuana use are within the range of effects tolerated for
other
medications."

"Rather than establish that marijuana has a level of abuse
comparable to
other Schedule I or II substances, HHS essentially concluded that it has
a
high potential for abuse because it is widely used, creates a hazard in
some
users' health, and because people are taking the substance on their
own
initiative," Gettman's petition for review states.  "Not
surprisingly, HHS
provides no authority for the proposition that widespread use of a
controlled substance constitutes a high potential for abuse.  ... In
fact,
HHS conceded that marijuana has relatively low levels of toxicity
and
physical dependence as compared to other illicit drugs.  ... At
most, the
HHS and DEA findings establish that marijuana has a level of abuse
potential
that may be sufficient for Schedule V (the lowest scheduling category,
which
includes prescription drugs like codeine-containing analgesics) under
the
Controlled Substances Act."

The D.C. Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in the case on March
19.

NORML filed a similar rescheduling petition with the DEA in 1972, but
was
not granted a federal hearing on the issue until 1986.  In 1988,
DEA
Administrative Law Judge Francis Young ruled that marijuana did not meet
the
legal criteria of a Schedule I prohibited drug and should be
reclassified.
Then-DEA Administrator John Lawn rejected Young's determination, a
decision
the D.C. Court of Appeals eventually affirmed in 1994.

For more information, please contact Allen St. Pierre, NORML
Foundation
Executive Director, at (202) 483-8751 or the law offices of Michael
Kennedy
at (212) 935-4500.