Politics
Washington Officials Join Cancer Patients In Federal Court Argument Pushing DEA To Allow Psilocybin Access
The Washington State attorney general’s office appeared alongside lawyers representing cancer patients on Thursday, telling a federal appeals panel that people in end-of-life care deserve legal access to psilocybin—the main psychoactive compound in psychedelic mushrooms—under state and federal right-to-try laws.
“It is entirely consistent with the purpose and language of the state and federal right-to-try laws to include any controlled substances that have completed Phase 1 trials, including Schedule I controlled substances,” Washington Deputy Solicitor General Peter B. Gonick said in oral argument before a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, referring to a category of illegal drugs that includes psilocybin. “It’s entirely inconsistent with the right-to-try laws to prevent patient access to these treatments.”
Congress and 41 U.S. states have adopted right-to-try (RTT) laws, which allow patients with terminal conditions to try investigational medications that have not been approved for general use. But in the case before the Ninth Circuit, two patients and a Seattle-based palliative care clinic, the Advanced Integrated Medical Science (AIMS) Institute, say the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is standing in their way.
The group sued DEA in March, after the agency replied to a request for guidance from the clinic’s co-director, Dr. Sunil Aggarwal. DEA asserted that the only way for the AIMS Institute to dispense psilocybin legally would be to obtain a federal research permit, which “would not be applicable to Dr. Aggarwal at this time.”
Out of the gate at oral argument Thursday, judges initially expressed skepticism over whether they even had jurisdiction to hear the case at this point. DEA maintains its letter to the clinic was simply an informal opinion, not a reviewable decision.
“Isn’t that the beginning and the and of this case?” Judge Ryan D. Nelson, an appointee of President Donald Trump, interjected barely 10 seconds after arguments began. “They wrote, seeking instructions on how to proceed… So if they sought instructions, how can a response for instructions ever be a final order?”
Attorney Matthew Zorn, who represented the patients and clinic suing DEA at Thursday’s oral arguments, replied that the agency’s response effectively gave them no options. “That response was: There is no process,” Zorn said. “If they had identified a process, we would have used that process. Because the agency said, ‘There is nothing for you to use,’ there is nowhere for us to go.”
For several minutes, judges on the panel—which also included Trump appointee Judge Mark J. Bennett and Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta, appointed by President George W. Bush—peppered Zorn with questions about whether DEA’s reply was even reviewable under court precedent.
“You didn’t ask [DEA] for an interpretive rule,” Nelson said.
“You asked for guidance,” agreed Ikuta.
“We didn’t ask for it,” Zorn told Nelson, “but that’s what we got.”
“I agree if that’s what you got the case might be different,” Nelson answered with an audible chuckle.
Though Zorn’s allotted time ended with some questions from judges unanswered, the panel’s mood appeared to change as the attorney dissected a federal court decision out of the Eastern District of Tennessee, which Nelson raised as a challenge. Zorn explained how he thought that decision was made in error, running contrary to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling dealing with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
“This is crystal clear. I do think that court erred,” Zorn argued, as Nelson nodded his head.
Speaking after Zorn, Gonick, the Washington State deputy solicitor general, offered arguments on behalf of that state. Lawmakers there, where the AIMS Institute is located, passed a state right-to-try law unanimously in 2017, allowing terminally ill patients access to treatments that have passed Phase 1 of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s approval process.
“The average time, Phase 1 to FDA approval, is seven to 10 years,” Gonick told judges, “and Congress and 41 states determined that was just too long for some patients suffering life-threatening illnesses.”
The laws express the recognition that some patients “may not have time to wait for FDA approval to receive treatments,” he added, “treatments that currently have ‘no accepted medical use,’ as the drugs in Schedule I have been designated” under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
The DEA attorney, Department of Justice (DOJ) appellate lawyer Thomas Pulham, argued the case itself should be dismissed because the court lacks jurisdiction. If the agency had explicitly rejected the clinic’s application for a research permit, he said, only then could that decision be appealed.
“DEA’s action is not subject to judicial review, because it neither reflects the consummation of a decision-making process nor results in any legal consequences,” Pulham said. “It was an informal response to a request for assistance from a member of a regulated community that did nothing more than provide the agency’s view on existing law.”
The agency also argued to the court in a June filing that loosening restrictions on psilocybin could fuel the illegal drug trade.
Judges were skeptical of the government’s stance, however, and repeatedly asked Pulham how the clinic and its patients should have proceeded, in DEA’s view.
“What about under the Right to Try law, though?” asked Judge Ikuta. “Is there a pathway where they could apply under the Right to Try Act?”
No, the lawyer for DEA replied. “As the agency indicated in its letter, there’s no procedure available under the Right to Try Act, because the Right to Try Act does not provide the agency any authority to waive the requirements of the Controlled Substances Act.”
Pulham argued that if the AIMS Institute and its patients were to proceed with psilocybin therapy and face enforcement action by the DEA, they could raise their right-to-try arguments at that point.
“Usually we don’t require a party to go and subject themselves to liability in order to appeal,” interrupted Judge Nelson. “It sounds like there might actually be some legal consequences here. I mean, it is prohibiting them from doing what they want to do, and it’s subjecting them to enforcement action if they were to go forward.”
“The letter does not do that,” Pulham stressed. “The Controlled Substances Act does that.”
“When Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act, it designated psilocybin as a controlled, Schedule I controlled substance based on findings that the drug had a high potential for abuse and no accepted medical use,” he continued. “That determination made psilocybin, in the Supreme Court’s words, contraband for all purposes, except for one exception, which is research.”
In his few remaining minutes of argument for rebuttal, Zorn emphasized that his clients are merely asking DEA to explain how clinicians and patients should move forward under right-to-try laws. “The agency has said it has no authority to give us what we’re asking for, which is a process to apply for a waiver and exemption to vindicate right-to-try use,” he said, “which is very different from research use.” He also noted that DEA has accommodated some ceremonial use of controlled substances under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which is also not explicitly exempt from the CSA.
Zorn’s colleagues and clients cheered Zorn’s performance and said they hope it helps persuade the three-judge panel to rule in their favor.
“I am so grateful for such a landmark day in a higher court for us, in which our legal team was able to help in the slow chipping away of the DEA–CSA industrial complex status quo that stymies public health, healthcare, religious freedom, and the needs of the seriously ill,” Aggarwal, co-director of the AIMS Institute, told Marijuana Moment. “Now we await a swift and just ruling.”
Attorney Kathryn Tucker, who also represents AIMS and the patients, said that the panel “appeared over the course of the argument to appreciate that the agency had left no avenue open and hence the matter was properly before the court.”
“The sense I had watching the arguments was that the judges wanted to know how DEA would accommodate RTT and enable access for therapeutic use,” she said. “DOJ had no good answer to that.”
As AIMS and its patients challenge DEA’s restrictions on therapeutic psilocybin for end-of-life care, jurisdictions across the country are increasingly removing or reducing penalties around drug possession and consumption, especially when it comes to psychedelics.
A task force in Seattle, where AIMS is located, recently called on the City Council, as well as state lawmakers and other municipalities, to decriminalize all drugs as a way to curb overdose deaths. The group’s report also notes the potential shown by psychedelics in particular for treating various mental health disorders.
At the state level, Washington lawmakers reduced the state’s felony charge for drug possession to a misdemeanor earlier this year and earmarked more money for treatment following a state Supreme Court decision that overturned the states felony law against drug possession completely.
Not far north, in Canada, the country’s Health Ministry has granted case-by-case approval for some patients, as well as health care professionals, to access psilocybin for therapeutic use.
In California, meanwhile, a Senate-passed bill to legalize possession of a wide range of psychedelics advanced through several Assembly committees this session, but it will not move further this year following a decision by the sponsor that more time is needed to build the case for the reform and solidify its chances of being enacted.
California psychedelics activists also recently filed a petition for the 2022 ballot to make the state the first in the nation to legalize psilocybin mushrooms for any use. Oakland and Santa Cruz have already enacted psychedelics decriminalization. The state’s nonpartisan Legislation Analyst’s Office said this week that the statewide ballot measure could save the state tens of millions of dollars in annual enforcement costs.
In Michigan, the Ann ArborCity Council approved the policy change last year—and local lawmakers recently passed a resolution to officially designate September as Entheogenic Plants and Fungi Awareness Month.
In Massachusetts, cities that have enacted the policy change include Northampton, Somerville and Cambridge.
In Denver the first city to adopt psilocybin reform, activists are now pushing to expand the psilocybin decriminalization policy to cover gifting and communal use of the substance.
The governor of Connecticut recently signed legislation recently that includes language requiring the state to carry out a study into the therapeutic potential of psilocybin mushrooms, meanwhile, and Texas recently enacted a bill to require the state study the medical benefits of psychedelics for military veterans.
A New York lawmaker introduced a bill in June that would require the state to establish an institute to similarly research the medical value of psychedelics.
In Oakland, the first city where a city council voted to broadly deprioritize criminalization of entheogenic substances, lawmakers approved a follow-up resolution in December that calls for the policy change to be adopted statewide and for local jurisdictions to be allowed to permit healing ceremonies where people could use psychedelics.
After Ann Arbor legislators passed a decriminalization resolution last year, a county prosecutor recently announced that his office will not be pursuing charges over possessing entheogenic plants and fungi—“regardless of the amount at issue.”
The Aspen, Colorado City Council discussed the therapeutic potential of psychedelics like psilocybin and proposals to decriminalize such substances at a meeting in May. But members said, as it stands, enacting a reform would be more better handled at the state level while entheogens remain strictly federally controlled.
Activists in Portland, Oregon, meanwhile, are mounting a push to have local lawmakers pass a resolution decriminalizing the cultivation, gifting and ceremonial use of a wide range of psychedelics.
In a setback for advocates, the U.S. House of Representatives recently voted against a proposal from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) that would have removed a spending bill rider that advocates say has restricted federal funds for research into Schedule I drugs, including psychedelics such as psilocybin, MDMA and ibogaine. However, it picked up considerably more votes this round than when the congresswoman first introduced it in 2019.
Report provisions of separate, House-passed spending legislation also touch on the need to expand cannabis and psychedelics research. The panel urged the National Institute On Drug Abuse (NIDA) to support expanded marijuana studies, for example
It further says that federal health agencies should pursue research into the therapeutic potential of psychedelics for military veterans suffering from a host of mental health conditions.
When it comes to broader drug policy reform, Oregon voters also approved an initiative in November to decriminalize possession of all drugs. This year, the Maine House of Representatives passed a drug decriminalization bill, but it later died in the Senate.
In May, lawmakers in Congress filed the first-ever legislation to federally decriminalize possession of illicit substances.
Photo courtesy of Wikimedia/Mushroom Observer
Politics
Marijuana Isn’t Exactly On Virginia’s Ballot Next Month, But Legalization’s Fate Is, Advocates Say
Marijuana legalization advocates in Virginia are urging voters to get to the polls next month to elect politicians who will support the marijuana legalization policy passed by lawmakers last session.
Some elements of the new law, for example those allowing personal possession and home cultivation of cannabis, took effect on July 1. Other aspects, however—most notably establishing a regulated retail cannabis market—don’t kick in until 2024 and will require further approval in the coming year from state lawmakers and the governor.
Under the final deal agreed to by lawmakers last session, nearly all of the legal cannabis sales provisions of the law are subject to reenactment by the legislature in the 2022 session.
Depending on who voters choose as governor, and which party ends up controlling the legislature during the election, the new government could drastically roll back planned reforms or undo them completely, said Jenn Michelle Pedini, development director for the advocacy group NORML and executive director of the group’s Virginia Chapter.
At one point, the state Senate wanted the voters themselves to directly weigh in on the policy change. A provision in the body’s version of the legislation would have put a legalization referendum on the state ballot, but it was removed from the final bill before passage.
But advocates say that even though there won’t be a legalization question on the ballot next month, the fate of the policy will ultimately be decided by voters in the coming general election.
“Legalization really is on the ballot in November,” Pedini told Marijuana Moment on Friday. “Why? Because nothing will have more of an impact on the future of cannabis legalization in Virginia than how Virginians vote in the general election.”
#Legalization really *is* on the ballot in #Virginia, just not as a referendum. Who makes up the next General Assembly is who determines if retails sales and licensing are expedited or if the issue is DOA in the 2022 session. Make a plan and #VOTE! https://t.co/Be9pcerQGR pic.twitter.com/qYe7k6D3go
— Virginia NORML (@VANORML) October 1, 2021
NORML typically supports politicians who favor full legalization of cannabis. In Virginia, those tend to be Democrats. “The legalization votes in 2021 were entirely along party lines,” Pedini said. “Everything seems to be about partisan antics right now, and there’s no reason to believe that will change for the 2022 session.”
The most consequential race on the marijuana front is the contest for governor. NORML has given the race’s Democratic candidate, former Gov. Terry McAuliffe, an A grade, noting his public statements calling for legalization.
The Republican candidate, Glenn Youngkin, a private equity executive, has a D grade from NORML, which notes Youngkin supports only limited cannabis decriminalization.
The incoming governor would have the opportunity to veto or make amendments to any marijuana bills that reach his desk. A hostile governor could torpedo legalization completely, and it’s unlikely Democrats, even if they do maintain their legislative majority, could muster the supermajority of votes needed to override any veto from Youngkin.
“Based on the 2021 votes, it would appear that there would not be the supermajority required to reject a veto,” Pedini said. “That’s the reality.”
The balance of power in the state House of Delegates, where all members are also up for election this year, could also determine what happens with marijuana. If Republicans gain control of the chamber, Pedini said, it’s possible the legalization measure might never be enacted.
“There doesn’t appear to be a path forward without a majority in both chambers,” they said.
Other races on next month’s ballot could also be consequential, and the question of legalization has become a wedge issue between Democratic and Republican candidates despite bipartisan support among voters.
The Democratic candidate for attorney general, incumbent Mark Herring, has called for cannabis legalization in the commonwealth, earning him an A+ grade from the advocacy organization. GOP challenger Jason Miyares, meanwhile, earned a D grade for his limited support for medical marijuana.
In the race for lieutenant governor, NORML also gave the Democrat a strong edge. Haya Ayala, currently a state delegate, earned an A+ rating for her advocacy, including her cosponsorship of a bill last session that would’ve legalized cannabis for adult use. Republican Winsome Earle Sears, a former member of the House of Delegates, received a D grade from NORML.
In Virginia, the lieutenant governor presides over the Senate. Earlier this year the office’s current occupant actually broke a tie to advance a legalization vote to passage, highlighting the importance of next month’s race.
Some of the GOP candidates have challenged the idea they’d put a wrench in legalization plans. Youngkin’s gubernatorial campaign tweeted in July that he “will not seek to repeal it,” adding that the candidate’s focus is “on building a rip-roaring economy” and improving education and public safety.
False.
Glenn Youngkin will not seek to repeal it; his focus will be on building a rip-roaring economy with more jobs and better wages, restoring excellence in education, and reestablishing Virginia’s commitment to public safety.
— Team Youngkin (@TeamYoungkin) July 2, 2021
Virginia NORML also released a local voter guide with information about candidates for city and county positions and their responses to questions about legalization.
Over the last session, current Gov. Ralph Northam (D) strongly advocated for cannabis reform, and lawmakers sent bills to enact legalization to his desk in February. In March, the governor formally submitted substitute language to the bills—including speeding up the timetable for legalizing possession and home cultivation—and in April both chambers approved the proposed changes as suggested.
On July 1, public possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by adults 21 and over became legal, along with personal cultivation of up to four cannabis plants. Private sharing of up to an ounce of cannabis between adults is also legal, as long as no remuneration is involved.
Photo courtesy of Philip Steffan
Politics
Congresswoman Previews Hemp Bill To Ease Regulatory Restrictions And End Felony Ban For Licensees
Hemp may now be federally legal, but congressional lawmakers are still seeking changes to laws governing the crop. And Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME) recently previewed forthcoming legislation to ease restrictions on the burgeoning industry while also eliminating a ban on participation in the market by people with felony drug convictions.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has been placed in charge with regulating hemp since the crop was legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill. But some of the rules that the agency set for hemp businesses have been met with criticism, with stakeholders arguing that they unduly burden the market.
Pingree hasn’t yet released the text of her reform legislation—which is being titled the Hemp Advancement Act—but she did preview some key provisions during a recent meeting with U.S. Hemp Roundtable stakeholders.
The congresswoman said the bill, which will be released “in the coming weeks,” will eliminate a policy that precludes people with felony drug convictions in the past 10 years from receiving a hemp business license.
“This provision disproportionately excludes communities of color from participating in this emerging market—and, frankly, it just has no place in our public policy,” Pingree said, adding that she was “shocked when I first realized that there was a prohibition on someone with a felony drug charge” from entering the industry.
The bill will also seek to increase the THC threshold for hemp and hemp extracts during the production process to avoid possible problems for businesses. Hemp is defined under federal statute as containing no more than 0.3 percent THC, but that amount can temporarily increase during manufacturing, so Pingree’s measure would provide relevant safeguards.
The congresswoman said her intention with the bill is to “make the [USDA] rules more workable for growers and processors.”
Further, the proposal would remove a controversial USDA requirement that hemp be tested only at labs that are registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration. Stakeholders have been pushing for that reform, contending that the limitation would create a bottlenecking of hemp testing that could hold the industry back.
“There are currently zero DEA registered labs in Maine, and frankly there’s only one in all of New England,” Pingree said. “So that just does not work.”
Beyond her forthcoming bill, additional issues with the existing hemp regulations could be addressed in the next version of the large-scale agricultural legislation that’s expected in 2023, the congresswoman said.
“Congress often follows public opinion. We have been, at a federal level, following the activity of the states, so I think there’s going to be a lot of recognition of this,” she said. “I think the next Farm Bill is a place for us to really scrub some of those issues out.”
Earlier this year, Reps. Kurt Schrader (D-OR) and Morgan Griffith (R-VA) filed a separate bill aimed at allowing hemp and CBD derived from the crop to be marketed and sold as dietary supplements. That’s been another major source of controversy, as the current lack of regulations from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is viewed as a central barrier for the hemp industry’s growth.
In the Senate, Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) filed a bill that would similarly exempt “hemp, hemp-derived cannabidiol, or a substance containing any other ingredient derived from hemp” from certain restrictions that have blocked the emergence of legal consumable hemp products while the FDA has slow-walked regulations.
Paul also introduced separate legislation in March that would triple the concentration of THC that hemp could legally contain while addressing multiple other concerns the industry has expressed about the federal regulations.
Lawmakers have pressured FDA to adopt regulations that would provide for such marketing since hemp was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill. But so far, the agency has simply offered enforcement discretion guidance for these products while it continues to craft formal rules.
Meanwhile, USDA is closely following—and working to support—the hemp industry through other services.
Last month, for example, the agency announced that it is teaming up with university researchers to figure out the best ways to keep weeds (not the marijuana kind) out of hemp during the production process.
USDA also announced recently that it is moving forward with a large-scale survey to gain insight into the hemp market.
After requesting permission from the White House earlier this year to conduct the survey of about 20,000 hemp farmers, the agency’s National Agricultural Statistics Service recently said that the forms are being finalized to be filled out via mail or online.
USDA is asking questions about plans for outdoor hemp production, acreage for operations, primary and secondary uses for the crop and what kinds of prices producers are able to bring in. The questionnaire lists preparations such as smokeable hemp, extracts like CBD, grain for human consumption, fiber and seeds as areas the department is interested in learning about.
Last year, USDA announced plans to distribute a separate national survey to gain insights from thousands of hemp businesses that could inform its approach to regulating the industry.
That survey is being completed in partnership with National Association of State Departments of Agriculture and the University of Kentucky. The department said it wanted to learn about “current production costs, production practices, and marketing practices” for hemp.
There’s still much to learn about the burgeoning market, even as USDA continues to approve state regulatory plans for the crop. Most recently, the agency approved a hemp plan submitted by Colorado, where officials have consistently insisted that the state intends to be a leader in the space.
While USDA’s final rule for hemp took effect on March 22, the agency is evidently still interested in gathering information to further inform its regulatory approach going forward. Industry stakeholders say the release of the final rule is a positive step forward that will provide businesses with needed guidance, but they’ve also pointed to a number of policies that they hope to revise as the market matures such as USDA’s hemp testing requirements.
The federal Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy expressed a similar sentiment in a blog post in February, writing that it is “pleased with some of the changes that [USDA] has made to the rule, as they offer more certainty and are less burdensome to small farmers,” but “some concerns remained unaddressed in the final rule.”
USDA announced in April that it is teaming up with a chemical manufacturing company on a two-year project that could significantly expand the hemp-based cosmetics market.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Energy announced in August that it is sponsoring a project to develop hemp fiber insulation that’s designed to be better for the environment and public health than conventional preparations are.
Activists in Nebraska on Friday unveiled the language of a pair of initiatives to legalize medical marijuana in the state. Supporters now have until July of next year to gather thousands of voter signatures to put the measures on the 2022 ballot.
The petitioning drive to qualify the two initiatives will begin Saturday in Lincoln, near a University of Nebraska football game at Memorial Stadium, where advocates say they plan to “take advantage of the crowds” to “kick off the effort.”
Together, the two initiatives from Medical Marijuana (NMM) would protect qualified patients from legal consequences for cannabis and regulate businesses that produce, distribute and sell marijuana products to those patients. Advocates say they’re done waiting for lawmakers to act on the issue and will instead take the issue directly to voters.
“It is frustrating that politicians have ignored the will of the people and denied my son and thousands of other patients the compassion they deserve,” said Nicole Hochstein, NMM’s volunteer coordinator for Cedar County and the mother of an 11-year-old child diagnosed with epilepsy. “But this ballot campaign provides hope to families like ours. We are seeing democracy in action today.”
Repeated pushes to legalize through the state’s unicameral legislature have fizzled, most recently in May following a Republican-led filibuster. And in 2019, the state’s attorney general argued in an opinion that efforts to legalize medical marijuana would be preempted by federal law and “would be, therefore, unconstitutional.”
Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana announced the new ballot campaign just hours after the most recent legislative effort failed. The group revealed in August that it would pursue the policy change through the a two-initiative campaign, and early last month it submitted the proposed ballot measures to state officials for initial approval. Language of the two initiatives, however, were not made public until Friday.
This is Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana’s second time pursuing the ballot for cannabis reform. While they collected enough signatures to qualify a medical marijuana legalization measure for the 2020 ballot, the state Supreme Court invalidated it on the grounds that it violated the state’s single-subject rule, which limits the scope of citizen initiatives. That’s why the current campaign has split the proposal into two measures, which advocates hope to qualify and pass as a package.
The proposed initiatives work together, with one removing legal penalties around cannabis for any qualified patients and the other establishing a new agency, the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, to register and regulate businesses that provide cannabis to patients.
Under the first measure, the Medical Cannabis Patient Protection Act, patients would be defined as anyone with a physician’s recommendation to use cannabis for therapeutic purposes, though people under 18 would also need written permission from a parent or legal guardian. It would declare that under both state and local law, patients would be allowed to “use, possess, and acquire an allowable amount of cannabis and cannabis accessories for the alleviation of a medical condition, its symptoms, or side effects of the condition’s treatment.” Designated caretakers could also possess and acquire cannabis for patients.
The proposal would set the “allowable amount” of marijuana at up to five ounces, not including the weight of non-cannabis ingredients in infused food, beverages, topicals or other products. It does not appear to contain any provision that would enable patients to grow their own cannabis.
The second measure, the Medical Cannabis Regulation Act, would set up a state system to oversee the medical marijuana market itself. It would establish the Medical Cannabis Commission, which would adopt rules, regulations and standards by July 2023. The body would be required to begin granting registrations—effectively licenses to engage in cannabis activity—by October of that year.
New 2022 petition sheets — hot off the press! Excited to launch our signature drive this weekend! pic.twitter.com/UpOI52rm27
— Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana (@NebraskaMJ) September 30, 2021
While regulatory details would be set by the commission, the proposed initiative says that cannabis products would include edible products, ointments and tinctures, among others. It also specifically mentions product delivery.
The measure would make it legal for registered cannabis businesses, along with their employees and agents, to “possess, manufacture, distribute, deliver, and dispense cannabis for medical purposes, provided such conduct complies with applicable rules and regulations adopted and promulgated by the Nebraska Medical Marijuana Commission.” It does not include any mention of taxes or fees.
The Commission would consist of the three members of the Nebraska Liquor Control Commission and up to two additional members appointed by the governor and confirmed by a majority of lawmakers.
In a video streamed to Facebook this week, the group outlined how Nebraska’s initiative process works and encouraged supporters to get involved.
State Sen. Anna Wishart (D), who’s been working with NMM on the effort and is scheduled to join the signature-gathering effort in Lincoln on Saturday, said in a statement that the proposal is “fundamentally about having compassion for people who are suffering.”
“I have talked personally about this issue with voters from dozens of counties across Nebraska, including some of the most rural parts of the state,” Wishart said. “There is an outpouring of grassroots support for this issue—regardless of someone’s political background or views on other issues.”
She and fellow Democratic Sen. Adam Morfeld said late last year that they would also work to put the question of legalizing marijuana for adult use before voters in 2022, but it’s not clear whether or not a recreational measure is still in the works.
Crista Eggers, signature drive director for Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, told Marijuana Moment in June that the plan was to “hit the ground running on a mass scale” beginning this summer to gather signatures.
The group previously floated the idea of adding a short constitutional amendment into the mix that would simply declare people “in the state of Nebraska shall have the right to cannabis in all its forms for medical purposes.” But that plan was shelved in favor of the new twin measures.
Under last year’s blocked Nebraska medical cannabis initiative, physicians would have been able to recommend marijuana to patients suffering from debilitating medical conditions. Those patients would then have been allowed to possess, purchase and “discreetly” cultivate marijuana for personal use.
Each of the two newly unveiled ballot measures will need 87,000 signatures of support from registered voters to qualify for the 2022 ballot. By comparison, when Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana qualified its prior measure for the ballot—only to be thwarted by the court—they submitted nearly 200,000 signatures.
Looking ahead to 2022, Nebraska isn’t the only state where voters could see cannabis reform on the ballot.
Florida activists recently filed a ballot measure to legalize marijuana for adult use.
South Dakota marijuana activists are now ramping up for a signature gathering effort to put marijuana legalization on the 2022 ballot as the state Supreme Court continues to consider a case on the fate of the legal cannabis measure that voters approved last year.
New Hampshire lawmakers are pursuing a new strategy to legalize marijuana in the state that involves putting a proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot for voters to decide on in 2022.
Lawmakers in Maryland are also crafting legislation to place a marijuana legalization referendum on the 2022 ballot after the House speaker called for the move.
Ohio activists recently cleared a final hurdle to begin collecting signatures for a 2022 ballot initiative to legalize marijuana in the state.
Missouri voters may see a multiple marijuana initiatives on the state’s ballot next year, with a new group filing an adult-use legalization proposal that could compete with separate reform measures that are already in the works.
Arkansas advocates are collecting signatures to place adult-use marijuana legalization on the ballot.
Activists in Idaho are working to advance separate measures to legalize possession of recreational marijuana and to create a system of legal medical cannabis sales. State officials recently cleared activists to begin collecting signatures for a revised initiative to legalize possession of marijuana that they hope to place before voters on the 2022 ballot. Meanwhile, a separate campaign to legalize medical cannabis in the state is also underway, with advocates actively collecting signatures to qualify that measure for next year’s ballot.
After a House-passed bill to legalize marijuana in North Dakota was rejected by the Senate in March, some senators hatched a plan to advance the issue by referring it to voters on the 2022 ballot. While their resolution advanced through a key committee, the full Senate blocked it. However, activists with the group North Dakota Cannabis Caucus are collecting signatures to qualify a constitutional amendment to legalize cannabis for the 2022 ballot.
Oklahoma advocates are pushing two separate initiatives to legalize marijuana for adult use and overhaul the state’s existing medical cannabis program.
Wyoming’s attorney general recently issued ballot summaries for proposed initiatives to legalize medical marijuana and decriminalize cannabis possession, freeing up activists to collect signatures to qualify for the 2022 ballot.
And it’s not just marijuana measures that reform activists are seeking to qualify for state ballots next year. A California campaign was recently cleared to begin collecting signatures for an initiative to legalize psilocybin. And advocates in Washington State have announced plans to put a proposal to decriminalize all drug before voters.
Read the full text of the Nebraska medical cannabis ballot measures below:
Bill To Federally Legalize Marijuana Approved By Key House Committee
