A major military veterans group is urging a federal court to take up a case challenging the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) restrictive classification of marijuana.
The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), an advocate for expanding cannabis research, said in an amicus brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit last week that the current scheduling status of marijuana under federal law is inhibiting studies that could demonstrate the plant’s therapeutic potential in the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
This comes one week after a coalition of scientists and veterans—including Sue Sisley of the Scottsdale Research Institute and the Battlefield Foundation—submitted a plaintiffs’ brief to the court, outlining the history of cannabis criminalization and arguing that DEA’s justification for keeping marijuana in Schedule I is unconstitutional. They want the court to force DEA to reconsider its decision to reject a 2020 petition calling for rescheduling.
“Medical marijuana holds promise for treatment-resistant post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but randomized controlled studies with real-world medical marijuana are necessary to determine the efficacy and safety of medical marijuana as a PTSD treatment,” the veterans group said in their new filing. “A significant percentage of combat veterans develop PTSD, and suicide is more frequent among veterans suffering PTSD. Consequently, the prevention or delay of clinical research into medical marijuana as a safe and effective treatment has a direct impact on IAVA’s constituency.”
1/5: In our most recent annual survey, 83% of #IAVA members surveyed support the use of medical cannabis. Policies are outdated, research is lacking, and stigma persists. #CannabisForVets #PTSD pic.twitter.com/SUx9p7oMU4
— IAVA (@iava) October 8, 2020
IAVA said that the Schedule I status of cannabis “prevents the [U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs] and private practitioners from studying the efficacy, benefits and risks of medical marijuana and thus harms veterans’ health and welfare.” Further, it “keeps life-saving treatment away from veterans suffering with PTSD who reside in states where medical marijuana is not available or where medical marijuana is available, but cannot be afforded.”
3/5: Veterans suffering from PTSD, their loved ones, and America as a whole can only benefit from knowing more about the safety and efficacy of medical marijuana as a treatment for #PTSD. #CannabisForVets #IAVA pic.twitter.com/0RgmMe05qm
— IAVA (@iava) October 8, 2020
Travis Horr, director of government affairs for IAVA, told Marijuana Moment that the group’s members “have made it clear that they support research done on the use of cannabis as a treatment option.”
“It is for these reasons that IAVA believes it is crucial to remove cannabis as a schedule I drug, to allow this research to be done and potentially provide much-needed relief for veterans,” he said.
In its filing with the federal court, group cited a survey it conducted that shows 20 percent of veteran respondents reported using cannabis or cannabinoids for therapeutic purposes, and they reason that’s partly because nearly half of veterans say that federally approved medications available to them are ineffective.
“Veterans suffering from PTSD, their loved ones, and America as a whole can only benefit from knowing more about the safety and efficacy of medical marijuana as a treatment for PTSD. If the treatment is safe and effective, more veterans will find relief from a debilitating disorder. If the treatment is not safe or effective, then veterans will stop self-medicating with and doctors will stop prescribing medical marijuana for PTSD, and scientists can turn their focus to other potential treatments or cures.”
IAVA also referenced a report released earlier this year by a federal commission that was responsible for issuing recommendations to improve mental health treatment for veterans. That report similarly observed that cannabis, as well as certain psychedelics, could hold significant therapeutic potential—but the plant’s legal status “precludes VA from conducting research on their efficacy.”
“The United States of America is morally compelled to address injuries—both physical and psychological—veterans suffer as a result of their military service,” the IAVA brief states. “There is overwhelming evidence that PTSD is a severe injury suffered by a significant percentage of veterans and that veterans with PTSD are more likely to take their own lives than veterans with no such psychological injury.”
“Our country should be doing everything it can as quickly as it can to find treatments for PTSD and help prevent veteran suicide, including properly interpreting the Controlled Substance Act so as to not impose unwarranted barriers to research,” it continues. “Both the executive and legislative branches of government have made the prevention of veteran suicide and related medical research national priorities, and yet the DEA continues to insist on a Catch 22 that effectively prevents approved clinical research study of medical marijuana as a PTSD treatment.”
The group also said DEA restrictions on cannabis means that researchers have been unable to access marijuana that reflects what’s available in state commercial markets. That’s also an issue that would be addressed legislatively under a bill that cleared a House committee last month.
5/5: We need YOUR help in getting this critical legislation passed into law. Stand with IAVA and tell Congress to cosponsor the VA Medicinal Cannabis Research Act (S. 179 / H.R. 712): https://t.co/fpsSsXtvcu #CannabisForVets #PTSD #IAVA pic.twitter.com/fHJGuTLux7
— IAVA (@iava) October 8, 2020
“Without such clinical studies, veterans who live in states where medical marijuana is not available as a treatment for PTSD cannot obtain the treatment, and veterans who can obtain the treatment in states where it is legal do so at their own personal expense, without coordination with their VA medical teams, and without any scientific evidence to establish the promise of the efficacy and safety of the treatment,” IAVA said.
This isn’t the first time that this group of scientists and veterans has taken the feds to court over their marijuana decisions.
The plaintiffs were also successful in forcing DEA to issue an update on the status of applications to become federally authorized cannabis manufacturers for research purposes and then got the Justice Department to hand over a “secret” memo that DEA allegedly used to justify a delay in deciding on those proposals.
Meanwhile, DEA could also become involved in a separate U.S. Supreme Court case challenging its marijuana scheduling actions.
In a petition filed in July and formally docketed for a private conference at the high court on Friday, a group of patients and advocates asked the justices to take up their case challenging the constitutionality of federal cannabis prohibition. This comes after a series of rulings in lower courts since the original lawsuit was filed in 2017.
Seven members of Congress and a slew of marijuana reform groups submitted legal documents last month urging the court to take up the case.
Separately, a federal court recently ruled that California regulators must comply with a DEA subpoena demanding information about marijuana businesses that they are investigating.
Read IAVA’s amicus brief on the marijuana scheduling case below:
Retired South Dakota Police Officer Endorses Marijuana Legalization Initiative In New TV Ad
The campaign to legalize marijuana in South Dakota recently released an ad featuring a retired police officer speaking about why he endorses two reform initiatives that appear on the state’s November ballot.
South Dakota is one of five states that will be voting on cannabis measures next month. But it’s the only state where both medical and recreational legalization will be on the ballot. Bill Stocker, a former Sioux Falls police officer, said he’s backing both.
“I can tell you, our harsh marijuana laws aren’t working,” he said in the ad, which was published on social media last week and is airing on television.
“In 2018, 4,000 people were arrested for marijuana possession in South Dakota. That’s one in 10 arrests,” Stocker said, referencing a report that South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws published last month. “Each arrest costs $4,000. It doesn’t make us any safer. We’re wasting law enforcement time and resources that should be fighting serious crimes. So I’m voting ‘yes’ on A and 26.”
The data from that report also shows that—as is the case across the country—marijuana enforcement has had a disparate impact on people of color, despite comparable rates of consumption among white people.
On average, black residents and Native Americans in South Dakota have been more than five times as likely to be arrested for cannabis compared to white people over the 10-year period the report examines.
The new ad comes just weeks before South Dakota voters will get to decide on separate ballot measures to legalize cannabis for adult use and for medical use. And according to a poll recently released last month by opponents of the policy change, about 60 percent of voters support the broader reform proposal and more than 70 percent back the narrower medical-focused initiative.
Under the adult-use constitutional amendment, people 21 and older could possess and distribute up to one ounce, and they would also be allowed to cultivate up to three cannabis plants.
The separate medical cannabis legalization measure that voters will decide on would make a statutory change to allow patients suffering from debilitating medical conditions to possess and purchase up to three ounces of marijuana from a licensed dispensary.
With less than two weeks to go until Election Day, a variety of drug policy reform campaigns in states across the U.S. are airing ads on TV and online.
A campaign working to pass a marijuana legalization referendum in New Jersey released a series of English- and Spanish-language ads touting the measure last week.
Also this month, an Oregon campaign behind a ballot initiative to decriminalize drug possession and expanding funding for substance misuse treatment rolled out a series of TV and online ads promoting the measure.
The campaign behind a separate initiative to legalize psilocybin for therapeutic purposes in Oregon is reaching voters through a TV ad that was released earlier this month that features a state lawmaker who is also a medical doctor. Activists are also using billboards to highlight the medical potential of the psychedelic. A nonprofit veterans group recently released a separate TV ad touting the benefits of psilocybin therapy. It doesn’t explicitly mention the psychedelic reform measure, but it could help further inform how voters approach that question nonetheless.
Trump Campaign Orders Mississippi Medical Marijuana Activists To Cease Using President’s Name
President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign has issued a cease and desist order against a Mississippi medical marijuana legalization campaign, claiming “unauthorized and misleading representation” of the president’s position on the reform initiative in one of its mailers—even though he has on multiple occasions spoken favorably on camera about medical cannabis.
Michael Glassner, chief operating officer of Donald J. Trump for President Inc., sent a letter to Mississippians for Compassionate Care (MCC), demanding that they stop distributing campaign materials touting the president’s past remarks.
While the mailer and the envelope it’s being sent in don’t at any point state that Trump has specifically endorsed Initiative 65, they encourage voters to “join President Trump and 3 out of 4 Mississippi Republicans who support medical marijuana” and point out that he’s voiced “complete support for medical marijuana.”
It is indeed the case that the president has, on several occasions, stated that he’s in favor of medical cannabis reform.
For example, while he said in 2015 that Colorado has “a lot of problems going on right now” with its recreational marijuana program, medical cannabis “is another thing.”
“I think medical marijuana, 100 percent,” he said.
Beyond stating his personal support for medical cannabis, Trump has said multiple times that he personally knows people who have benefited from using it.
“I think medical should happen, right? Don’t we agree? I mean I think so,” he said at a 2015 rally in Nevada. “I know people that are very, very sick and for whatever reason, the marijuana really helps them.”
“I know people that have serious problems and they did that and it really does help them,” he said In a 2016 interview on Fox News.
But the president’s reelection campaign evidently takes issue with the state cannabis effort using his on-camera quotes.
“President Trump has never expressed support for Initiative 65, and his campaign demands that you immediately cease and desist all activities using the President’s name, image or likeness in support of the legalization of medical marijuana in Mississippi,” Glassner wrote in the October 12 letter, which was first reported by Y’all Politics.
“The President’s campaign strongly believes in and encourages your organization’s fundamental right to engage in speech on issues of public importance, but this is not about that,” he said. “You are misleadingly using the President’s name in support of your own agenda without authorization or justification.”
But MCC is defending the mailers, which also feature endorsements from multiple Republican legislators in the state.
“President Trump has clearly stated on multiple occasions that he supports medical marijuana. That is all that we’ve shared—the truth,” MCC Communications Director Jamie Grantham said in a press release. “The politicians and bureaucrats behind Mississippi Horizon clearly orchestrated this letter from the Trump campaign. It’s just the latest example of the lengths to which they will go to prevent any form of medical marijuana in Mississippi.”
“President Trump himself has said he supports medical marijuana and is letting the states decide,” she said. “Initiative 65 is the only plan on the ballot that will create an actual medical marijuana program in Mississippi.”
While Trump has made his views on medical cannabis clear—and he’s expressed support for a states’ right approach to marijuana policy—he’s also on several occasions released signing statements on spending legislation stipulating that he reserves the right to ignore a long-standing rider that prohibits the Justice Department from using its funds to interfere with state-legal medical marijuana programs.
He also proposed deleting the rider altogether in multiple annual budget proposals to Congress, though President Obama did the same thing when he was in office.
The Mississippi mailer neglected to acknowledge those nuances, however.
“For the last two years, he has signed legislation offered by Republican Senators to prevent his Department of Justice from prosecuting medical marijuana businesses in states that have legalized its use,” it states.
“The Trump campaign’s decision in this matter is a further indication that this administration is unwilling to either embrace or act upon marijuana policy reform,’ Justin Strekal, political director of NORML, told Marijuana Moment. “For four years, this administration has been silent at best and hostile at worst when it comes to marijuana policy, and there is no indication that they would change going forward if given the opportunity.”
“At the end of the day, this is just bad politics,” he said.
A Quinnipiac poll found last year that 93 percent of Americans support medical marijuana, including 86 percent of Republicans, 96 percent of Democrats and 96 percent of independents—raising questions about why the president’s reelection campaign chose to take the proactive step of distancing their candidate from such an overwhelmingly popular issue that enjoys supermajority backing across partisan lines.
Meanwhile, the Democratic presidential nominee, Joe Biden, favors legalizing medical marijuana, decriminalizing cannabis possession more broadly, expunging prior convictions, modestly rescheduling the drug under federal law and letting states set their own policies. That said, he helped craft some of the nation’s most infamously punitive anti-drug laws during his time in the Senate—a record that the Trump campaign has seized on.
“More than 81 percent of Mississippians agree with President Trump in supporting medical marijuana for people who are suffering,” Grantham said, referencing a poll released last month. “Voters see through the actions of politicians who failed to act on this issue and who are now trying to block this initiative. 65A lets politicians decide. More than 228,000 Mississippians signed petitions for Initiative 65 which lets doctors and patients decide.”
The medical cannabis reform campaign has faced a series of obstacles before and after qualifying for the state’s November ballot.
The primary complication for advocates is the fact that two competing initiatives will appear alongside each other on the ballot. After MCC qualified their measure, the legislature approved an alternative that is viewed as more restrictive. The result is a muddled ballot that requires voters to answer a two-step series of questions—and that potential confusion threatens to jeopardize the activist-led proposal.
More recently, the Mississippi State Medical Association and American Medical Association have also contributed to the opposition, circulating a sample ballot that instructs voters on how to reject Initiative 65.
Last week, Gov. Tate Reeves (R) signed legislation that amends state law to allow people to obtain marijuana-derived medications that are approved by the Food and Drug Administration. He also reiterated his opposition to broader medical cannabis reform, stating that he’s “against efforts to make marijuana mainstream.”
If the campaign’s measure passes, it would allow patients with debilitating medical issues to legally obtain marijuana after getting a doctor’s recommendation. The proposal includes 22 qualifying conditions such as cancer, chronic pain and post-traumatic stress disorder, and patients would be allowed to possess up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana per 14-day period.
In June, lawmakers introduced yet another medical cannabis alternative resolution that would’ve similarly posed a threat to the activist-driven reform initiative. But, to advocates’ relief, the legislation didn’t advance before lawmakers went home for the summer.
Read the Trump campaign’s cease and desist letter below:
New Jersey Voters Strongly Back Marijuana Legalization And Cannabis Pardons, New Poll Finds
Support for a referendum to legalize marijuana in New Jersey remains strong, according to a new poll released on Tuesday. And what’s more, voters want Gov. Phil Murphy (D) to go a step further by pardoning people with low-level cannabis convictions.
The survey, which is the fourth and final from the law firm Brach Eichler LLC this election cycle, shows that 65 percent of New Jersey voters are in favor of the reform proposal that will appear on the state’s November ballot. Just 29 percent are opposed to the policy change and six percent remain undecided.
These results are statistically consistent with the prior three polls from the firm as well as one from Fairleigh Dickinson University, which similarly found roughly two to one support for the measure. A separate survey released last week by Stockton University showed three to one support for legalizing cannabis among New Jersey voters.
As has historically been the case, Democrats are most likely to back legalization (70 percent), followed by independents (62 percent) and Republicans (52 percent).
But beyond legalizing cannabis for adult use, New Jersey voters are also strongly in favor of having the governor use his clemency powers for those previously convicted over low-level marijuana offenses. Sixty-eight percent of respondents said Murphy should grant those individuals pardons, compared to 21 percent who are against it and 11 percent who are unsure.
For the first time since the firm starting polling on cannabis issues this year, a majority of voters (51 percent) also said that prior marijuana records of all levels of convictions, rather than just simple possession, should be expunged.
“The Brach Eichler Cannabis Poll, which has consistently reported overwhelming support for legalizing cannabis, today again confirms that New Jersey voters support this long overdue change by a significant margin,” Charles Gormally, co-chair of the firm’s cannabis practice, said in a press release. “After election day it is imperative that our legislature move to create the most efficient, safe and regulated marketplace to capture the tri-state cannabis business.”
The survey, which involved interviews with 500 registered voters from October 5-13 and has a margin of error of +/- 4.4 percentage points, also asked about the policy of local control for the marijuana market. Forty-seven percent said that individual jurisdictions should be allowed to ban cannabis businesses from operating in their area, compared to 39 percent who are opposed to the proposal and 14 percent who are undecided.
“It is clear that home rule is a topic that needs to be more fully addressed,” Gormally said. “Cannabis businesses are going to need an immediate understanding of local politics and community issues before embarking on plans for certain parts of New Jersey.”
Five states have recreational or medical marijuana legalization on the ballot this election, and polling broadly indicates that the measures will be successful.
Two recent surveys of Arizona voters show growing majority support for an initiative to legalize adult-use cannabis.
Montana voters seem poised to approve a pair of marijuana legalization initiatives next month, according to a poll released last week.
In South Dakota, polling signals that voters will approve separate initiatives to allow both medical and recreational cannabis.
A survey of Mississippi voters that was released in September found that an activist-led measure to legalize medical marijuana “stands a strong chance of passage.”
Meanwhile, in New Jersey, putting legalization to voters as a referendum question was the result of the legislature’s failure to pass reform legislation last session.
Murphy, the governor, has been a vocal advocate for approving the measure.
He said during a virtual fundraiser with the pro-legalization NJ CAN 2020 earlier this month that the state “can’t fail” at enacting the policy change this round. A top lawmaker also spoke at the event and said an enabling and regulatory bill was being prepared in anticipation of a favorable vote, and that it could be voted on by the legislature as soon as the first week of November.
The governor also recently recorded a video ad that was released by the reform group, outlining why he’s embraced the policy change. Murphy said that the ongoing criminalization of cannabis in New Jersey wastes taxpayer dollars, and he emphasized that prohibition is enforced in a racially disproportionate manner.
Murphy similarly said in a recent interview that the marijuana reform proposal prioritizes social justice.
“I wish we could have gotten it done through a legislative process,” he said at the time, referencing lawmakers’ inability to advance a legalization bill last session. “We just couldn’t find the last few votes, so it’s on the referendum. I’m strongly supporting it—first and foremost for social justice reasons.”
Last month, Murphy also called on voters to support the proposal in an email blast that was circulated by the New Jersey Democratic State Committee.
“Legalization would right those wrongs while also spurring massive economic development opportunities, job creation, and new tax revenue,” the governor wrote. “Now, we have the opportunity to get this done and finally legalize adult-use marijuana here in the Garden State, and I need your help to make it happen.”
He said in July that legalizing cannabis is “an incredibly smart thing to do” both from an economic and social justice perspective.
The governor isn’t alone in his attempts to get out the vote for cannabis reform. Filmmaker Kevin Smith earlier this month urged his Twitter followers to “VOTE YES when you see State Public Question Number 1: Constitutional Amendment to Legalize Marijuana.”
NJ CAN 2020, one of two campaign committees working to pass the cannabis referendum, released a series of English- and Spanish-language video ads last week, after having published one prior ad. Meanwhile, campaign finance records compiled show that legal marijuana supporters are out-raising opponents by a ratio of nearly 130:1.
In June, the state Assembly passed a cannabis decriminalization bill that would make possession of up to two ounces a civil penalty without the threat of jail time, though it hasn’t advance in the Senate.
Photo courtesy of Philip Steffan.