norml02 - Page 27
Page 27
Previous ,
Next ,
Original Image
Return to Index
Petitioners urge this court to order the Administrator to
interpretation the statute as requiring merely "acceptance [of
medical use] by a respectable minority of the medical community."
According to petitioners_ this interpretation reflects the
reality that research on substances in Schedule I is "difficult
and costly." Pet. 31. Petitioners would place marijuana in
Schedule II in the interest of promoting research based solely on
an alleged '_accidental discovery of therapeutic: benefitso '_
Pet. 31. No support exists for this interpretation of the
statutory standard°
In Grinspoon_ the First circuit concluded that the existence
of obstacles to research does nots by itself, render the decision
to place a substance in Schedule ! arbitrary and capricious. 828
Fo2d at 896. The court stated that "nothing in the CSA_ its
legislative history, or its implementing regulations can be
read to require the Administrator to consider the impact of a
scheduling determination upon legitimate scientific research°"
id. at 897. The court further concluded that Congress _ balancing
of _'the costs and benefits of legitimate research on dangerous
drugs _' is already taken into account in the Schedule I criteria
and is not a separate relevant factor. Ido
Petitioners argue that_ because marijuana is a plant, 'sit
would be extremely difficult -- if not impossible --'_ for
marijuana to satisfy the Administrator;s first factor, scientific
establishment of the substance_s chemistry _'to permit it to be
re-produced into dosages which can be standardized. _ See 5"7 Fed.
q
Previous ,
Next ,
Return to Index