The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration
ignored research showing marijuana had legitimate medical uses when it
rejected efforts to reclassify the drug as a less harmful substance last
year, a lawyer for medical marijuana backers told a federal appeals
court.
Joseph Elford, a lawyer for Americans
for Safe Access, asked a three-judge panel in Washington today to order
the DEA to reconsider its decision to keep marijuana a Schedule I
narcotic, saying the agency’s ruling that there are no scientific
studies finding an acceptable medical use was arbitrary and capricious.
"There are over 200 studies that are adequate and well-controlled studies," Elford told the judges.
The case involves an 10-year-old petition from medical marijuana
advocates who asked the DEA to reclassify marijuana as a Schedule III,
IV or V drug, which would allow for looser regulation. On June 21, 2011,
the DEA rejected the request, stating that existing clinical evidence
wasn’t adequate to warrant reclassification.
The judges questioned whether the
medical marijuana patients and the advocacy group had the authority to
challenge the DEA’s decision. U.S. Circuit Judge Merrick Garland said
the court has limited authority to review it as long as the agency made a
proper showing of support for it.
"I’m trying to figure out what our standard of review is," Garland asked a lawyer for the Justice Department.
"Is there evidence to support the administration’s position that there
is no substantial evidence? That sounds funny." Lena Watkins, a lawyer
for the Justice Department,
said the studies cited by the marijuana proponents were rejected
because the research didn’t meet government standards. She said about 15
studies meet the standards, though the government doesn’t have the
final results yet.
The case is Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration, 11-1265, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (Washington).
