The DEA is moving to reclassify the dope like a drug less dangerous. The Justice Department’s proposal would recognize the medical uses of cannabis, but would not legalize it for recreational use.
The proposal would move marijuana from the group “List I” to the group of “List III”less strictly regulated.
So what does that mean and what are the implications?
What has really changed? Whats Next?
Technically, nothing yet. The proposal must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, and then go through a public comment period and review by an administrative law judge, a process that could be lengthy.
However, the reclassification is considered a “paradigm change, and it is very exciting”Vince Sliwoski — a Portland, Oregon-based cannabis and psychedelics attorney who runs well-known legal blogs on those topics — told The Associated Press when the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommended the change.
“I can’t overemphasize what great news this is,” he added.
It came after President Joe Biden last year asked both HHS and the attorney general, who oversees the DEA, to review how marijuana is classified. Legally, Schedule I has it on par with heroin, LSD, quaaludes (metaqualones), and ecstasy, among others.
Biden supports the legalization of medical marijuana for use “when appropriate, in accordance with medical and scientific evidence”White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Thursday. ““That is why it is important that this independent review be carried out.”
If marijuana is reclassified, would that legalize recreational cannabis nationwide?
No. Schedule III drugs—which include ketamine, anabolic steroids, and some combinations of acetaminophen and codeine—are still controlled substances.
They are subject to several rules that allow some medical uses, but also to federal criminal prosecution of anyone who traffics these drugs without permission.
No changes are expected in the medical marijuana programs currently authorized in 38 states, nor in the legal recreational cannabis markets in 23 states, but they are unlikely to meet federal production, record-keeping, prescribing and other requirements for Schedule III drugs.
There haven’t been many federal prosecutions for simple possession of marijuana in recent years, even under cannabis’ current Schedule I status, but reclassification wouldn’t have an immediate impact on people already in the criminal justice system. .
“Simply put, this move from List I to List III will not get people out of jail,” said David Culver, senior vice president of public affairs at the US Cannabis Council, an industry trade group that advocates for legalization.
But the list change itself would have some impact, particularly on research and taxes on marijuana companies.
What would this mean for research?
Because marijuana is Schedule I, it has been very difficult to conduct authorized clinical studies involving the administration of the drug. This has created a kind of vicious circle: it demands more research, but there are impediments to carrying it out. (Scientists sometimes rely on people’s reports of their marijuana use.)
Schedule III drugs are easier to study, although reclassification would not immediately reverse all barriers to research.
“It’s going to be very confusing for a long time.”said Ziva Cooper, director of the Center for Cannabis and Cannabinoids at the University of California, Los Angeles campus. “When things have settled — I don’t know how many years — the investigation will be easier.”
Among the unknowns: Whether researchers will be able to study marijuana from state-licensed dispensaries, and how the Food and Drug Administration might oversee that. Some researchers are optimistic.
“Reclassifying the list to List III will open the door for us to conduct research with human subjects and cannabis,” said Susan Ferguson, director of the Alcohol, Drug and Addiction Institute at the University of Washington in Seattle.
What about taxes and banking?
Under the federal tax code, companies involved in “traffic” Marijuana or any other Schedule I or II drug cannot deduct rent, payroll, or other expenses like other companies do. (Yes, some cannabis businesses—particularly those licensed by the state—pay taxes to the federal government, even though it prohibits marijuana use.) Industry groups say the tax rate often results in 70% or more.
The deduction rule does not apply to Schedule III drugs, so the proposed change would substantially reduce taxes for cannabis businesses.
They say it would give them similar treatment to other economic sectors and help them compete against illegal traffickers who frustrate licensees and officials in places like New York.
“You are going to strengthen these state legal programs,” says Adam Goers of medical and recreational cannabis giant The Cannabist Company, formerly Columbia Care. Goers co-chairs a coalition of corporate and other actors pushing for the reclassification from one list to another.
If those costs could be deducted, it could also mean more cannabis promotion and advertising, according to Beau Kilmer, co-director of the RAND Corporation’s Center for Drug Policy Research.
Changing the list would not directly affect another problem in the marijuana business: difficulty accessing banks, particularly for loans, because federally regulated institutions are wary of the drug’s legal status. Rather, the sector has been awaiting a measure called the Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation (SAFER) Banking Act. The House of Representatives has passed it repeatedly, but it has stalled in the Senate.
Are there critics? What do they say?
Indeed, there are, including Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a national group that opposes legalization. Its president, Kevin Sabet, a former drug policy official in the Obama administration, said the HHS recommendation “it goes against science; “It reeks of politics.” and gives a regrettable wink to a sector “desperately seeking legitimacy.”
Some legalization advocates say delisting marijuana is too gradual. They want to continue to focus on removing it entirely from the list of controlled substances, which does not include items like alcohol or tobacco (which are regulated, but not the same).
Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said that simply reclassifying cannabis would be “perpetuate the existing divide between state and federal marijuana policies.”
Kaliko Castille, former president of the Minority Cannabis Business Association — an industry group dedicated to serving the needs of minority cannabis businesses — said the reclassification from one list to another only “redefines prohibition”instead of giving the green light to those with state licenses and putting a definitive stop to decades of arrests that have disproportionately affected black people.
“Schedule III will leave it in this kind of amorphous, muddy middle space where people won’t understand the danger of it still being illegal at the federal level.”he added.
It may interest you
Mexico wastes the potential of cannabis two years after the historic ruling of the Supreme Court
Why hasn’t cannabis cultivation been profitable in Latin America?
Chilean cannabis startup raises capital for laboratory
Source: Gestion
Ricardo is a renowned author and journalist, known for his exceptional writing on top-news stories. He currently works as a writer at the 247 News Agency, where he is known for his ability to deliver breaking news and insightful analysis on the most pressing issues of the day.
