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.

Previous , Next , Return to Index