Opponents of federal marijuana rescheduling have filed another response to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), completing the latest round of written arguments and leaving Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius to decide whether to reopen the hearing for additional testimony and document discovery.
Today, October 21, Julius granted the National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association, DUID Victim Voices and physician Kenneth Finn permission to submit one additional reply to DEA’s October 20 filing. The judge limited the response to five pages and required it to be submitted that same day, rather than allowing another week or two for arguments. The opponents complied, filing their response today.
In his new order, Julius said he was allowing the additional filing “in the interest of fairness and due process,” but emphasized that the timeframe would be expedited “to avoid further delay.”
The shortened deadline marks a change from the previous rounds of briefing. On September 29, Julius gave the government until October 13 to respond to an earlier motion, a two-week window. On October 14, he gave DEA another seven days to address the opponents’ request to reopen the hearing. This time, he allowed just the remainder of October 21 for the final reply.
In their latest response, the opponents disputed DEA’s argument that additional discovery is unnecessary, maintaining that the existing record does not adequately explain how federal officials selected the two-part test used to determine whether marijuana has a currently accepted medical use. They also argued that restrictions on earlier witness testimony prevented them from fully examining the decision-making process.
The filing follows DEA’s October 20 response, in which the agency urged Julius to reject the request for additional discovery and testimony, characterizing it as a “fishing expedition.” DEA maintains that the existing record is sufficient and that opponents have not demonstrated grounds for reopening the proceedings.
The dispute centers on a September 23 report from the Government Accountability Office identifying gaps in written policies and procedures used by DEA and the Food and Drug Administration when evaluating controlled substances. Opponents want the report admitted into the hearing record and are seeking additional evidence concerning how federal officials evaluated marijuana for rescheduling.
The marijuana rescheduling hearing concluded July 15, with post-hearing briefs submitted in August. Julius was preparing to issue a recommendation on moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III before the new dispute prompted him to stay the proceedings on September 29.
With both sides having submitted their latest arguments, Julius must now determine whether to admit the GAO report and authorize additional discovery or testimony, as opponents are requesting, or reject those requests and allow the case to move toward a final recommendation.
The judge has not agreed to reopen the hearing, and the stay remains in effect. If the proceeding moves forward without additional testimony, Julius can proceed toward issuing his recommendation to the DEA administrator, who is responsible for the final scheduling decision.
No deadline has been announced for Julius to rule on the pending motions.
Related posts:
Federal Appeals Court Finds Louisiana Marijuana Conviction Wrongly Used to Enhance Sentence, but Ref...
New York Court Upholds Marijuana Tracking Requirements, Dismisses Separate Enforcement Lawsuit
