norml03 - Page 2

Page 2 Previous , Next , Original Image
Return to Index

 2 3
 Rescheduling to Schedule II would permit doctors to pro-
 No. 92.-1179
 scribe marijuana for therapeutic purposes. Petitioners' ccn-
 DRUQ POLIO3" FOUNDATION AND THE NATIONAl. tra] claim is that the Administrator's order rests on an
 ORGANIZATION FOR TtlE REFORM OF MARUUANA LAWS, unreasonable interpretation of the statute. Because our pre-
 PETITXONERS ViOUS disposition of this matter in Alliance for Can,robiN
 Therapeutics v. DEA, 930 F.2d 936 (D.C. Cir. 1991) ("ACT")
 Vo constitutes the law of the case, we decline to reconsider this
 claim. We also find that the Administrator satisfied ACT's
 DauG EN_'0RC_MENT ADMINISTRATION, mandate on remand and that petitioners' other claims lack
 Petitions for Review of an Order of the A. Statutory Scheme
 Drug Enforcement Administration The Controlled Substances Act CCSA") places hazardous
 drugs in five categories, or schedules, which impose varying
 restNctions on access to the drugs. See 21 U.S.C. § 812
 (1988)o Marijuana is assigned by statute to Schedule }, the
 Steven K Davi&_on argued the cause for petitioners. With most restrictive of these. See id. Schedule l[ drugs may be
 him on the brier were Amy Vc: and Kevin B. Zeese. obtained and used lawfully only by doctors who submit a
 Tho.mzz C Collier, Jr. entered an appearance for petitioner detailed research protocol for approval by the Food and Drug
 Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics and inte_'enors in No. Administration and who agree to abide by st.Net record-
 92-1168_ keeping and storage rules. See 21 G.F.Ro §§ 1301.83,
 Lena D. Mi_chvI_ Attorney, U.S° Department of Justice_ 1301.42.
 argued the cause for respondent° With her on the brief was The CSA allows the Attorney General to reschedule a drug
 John C Keenly, Acting Assistant Attorney General. Eumi if he finds that it does not meet the criteria for the schedule
 L. Choi entered an appearance for respondent, to which it has been assigned. 21 UoSoC. § 811(a). The
 St. even K David_on and Amy W. Lust'(q were also on the Attorney General has delegated this authority to the Admire-
 brief for interveners, istrator. See 28 C.F.R. § 0.1O0(b). In rescheduling a drug
 the Administrator must consider, innter alia, "[s]cientific evi-
 Before M_wA, Chief Judge, and BUCKLEY and (,_NS_I. RG, dence of [the drug's] pharmacological effeck if knower" and
 Cir_it Judges. '_[tlhe state of current scientific knowledge regarding the
 Opinion fi)r the come filed by Circuit Judge B_._cxLm'. drug or other substance" in determining whether to reached-
 ule the drug. 21 U°S°C. § 811(c)(2), (8).
 BUCKLEY, Circuit Judge: The Alliance for Cannabis Thera-
 peutics, the Drug Policy Foundation, and the National Orga- A drug is placed in Schedule I if (1) it "has a high po*mntia!
 nization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws petition for re_%w for abuse," (2) it has "no currer_ly accepted medical use in
 of a final order of the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement treatment in the United States," and (3) "It]here is a lack of
 Administration declining to reschedule marijuana from Sched- accepted safety for use of the drag ... under medical super-
 ule I to Schedule H of the Controlled Substances Act. vision." 21 U.S.C. § 812(b)(1)(1988)(emphasis added). The

Previous , Next , Return to Index