The DEA ( Drug Enforcement Agency) is requesting the state court to snub a case prompting for a review on its move of not recategorizing cannabis under state law.
Earlier this week, in a case filed with America’s Court of Appeals for the 9th circuit, the state agency stated that the lawsuit is irrelevant. It cited that the case’s plaintiffs were not responsible for making the dismissed rescheduling request, and they alleged that the petition didn’t have merit.
In May, veterans and scientists sued the state department, stating that DEA’s legal parameters to justify including Marijuana in Schedule I of Controlled Substances Act are unlawful. They called for a review of its efforts to slam rescheduling petitions in 1992, 2016, and 2020.
DEA advised the court to rebuff the lawsuit; however, that request was declined during August. The judges said that it was denied without bias to renewing discussions in the response brief.
In the response brief, the department repeated multiple arguments to prove that the court should slam the case. They asserted that the petitioners lacked standing for pursuing the lawsuit. They didn’t lay out all administrative options, and the 2020 rescheduling petition in question was appropriately decided when DEA rejected it.
However, the petitioner’s lawyers said that these claims are similar to those made by the agency when their dismissal claims were previously rejected. This shows that DEA might have a weak defense concerning the lawsuit.
Pennington Shane (a lawyer on the case) insisted that DEA gave arguments that the court had viewed and declined already; thus, it feels great.
They also said that the agency immensely didn’t dispute the benefits of the case.
Petitioners gave concerns over DEA’s dependence on scheduling parameters that are capricious and misinterpret state law. They’re specifically searching for reviews about DEA’s claims that cannabis has to be strictly scheduled.
