Pubdate: Wed, 17 Oct 2012
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Copyright: 2012 Los Angeles Times
Contact:  http://www.latimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/248
Author: David G. Savage

COURT IS URGED TO RETHINK POT'S DRUG CLASSIFICATION

A Medical Marijuana Advocate Cites a 'Bias,' Saying the Benefits Are 
Ignored and the Dangers Exaggerated.

WASHINGTON - A medical marijuana advocate urged a federal appeals 
court to require the U.S. government to relax, or at least rethink, a 
more-than-40year-old rule that treats marijuana as a highly dangerous 
drug with no medical value.

Federal drug regulators "have failed to weigh the evidence" from a 
growing number of medical studies showing that marijuana is effective 
for relieving pain and nausea, said Joe Elford, counsel for Americans 
for Safe Access.

In his legal brief, he said the Drug Enforcement Administration 
displayed a "bias" against marijuana by ignoring its medical benefits 
and exaggerating its danger. That is the only way to explain how the 
"federal government could conclude that marijuana is as harmful as 
heroin and PCP and even more harmful than methamphetamine, cocaine 
and opium," he told the court.

Elford was challenging the DEA's insistence that marijuana is 
properly classified as a Schedule I drug, meaning it has no accepted 
medical benefits and has a high potential for abuse. This 
classification means, for example, that doctors at the Veterans 
Administration may not give marijuana to a disabled veteran to treat 
his chronic pain, he said, citing the plight of one of the plaintiffs 
in the case.

If marijuana were reclassified, Elford said, it would help doctors 
and patients by permitting its use under medical supervision.

Marijuana's classification as a Schedule I drug dates to 1970, when 
Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act. On two occasions since 
then, marijuana advocates have petitioned the DEA to reconsider the 
classification, citing the medical benefits of cannabis. They also 
noted that 16 states and the District of Columbia have opted to allow 
medical use of marijuana in some instances.

But the DEA turned down the most recent petition last year and made 
no change in the classification schedule. By way of explanation, the 
agency said there was not a scientific consensus on the medical 
benefits of marijuana. It also said marijuana has many "chemical 
components" that are not well understood.

During Tuesday's argument, a Justice Department lawyer said the 
government remained convinced of the danger of marijuana. "It's the 
most widely abused drug in the United States," said Lena Watkins, the 
government lawyer.

The case was heard by a veteran panel of three judges who questioned 
whether they were in a position to reject the DEA's determination.

"Don't we have to defer to their judgment" on what the medical 
studies show? asked Judge Merrick Garland. "We're not scientists. They are."

"The real question is to what extent we have to defer to the agency," 
added Judge Harry Edwards.

The two judges said they could not overturn the DEA's decision unless 
they found it to be "arbitrary and capricious."

Elford responded that the judges should send the case back to the DEA 
to require the agency to hold a hearing to consider research over the 
last decade on the benefits of marijuana.

Judge Karen Henderson, the third member of the panel, noted that 
changing the classification of marijuana would not decriminalize it. 
"It would still be illegal," she said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom