Washington, D.C. — November 19, 2024

In a shocking development, allegations of statutory violations have emerged in the ongoing rulemaking process to consider rescheduling marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. According to a newly filed legal document, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) allegedly engaged in “unlawful” communications with the prohibitionist group Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), raising serious concerns about the integrity of the process.

The filing, submitted by unnamed legal representatives, accuses the DEA of breaching statutory guidelines by holding improper communications with SAM, a well-known anti-cannabis advocacy group. SAM is among the 11 organizations granted standing to participate in the hearings on cannabis rescheduling, which could determine whether marijuana is moved from its current Schedule 1 classification to Schedule 3.

The Allegations

The legal document claims that DEA officials had unauthorized interactions with SAM during key stages of the rulemaking process, potentially influencing the agency’s decisions in favor of anti-rescheduling arguments. If proven, these communications would constitute a serious breach of administrative law, which mandates transparency and fairness in public rulemaking processes.

The allegations come on the heels of DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge John Mulrooney’s controversial decision to exclude nearly all pro-cannabis advocates from participating in the hearings, while granting full standing to all anti-rescheduling groups. Critics now argue that the entire process has been compromised.

Reaction from Advocates

“This is a clear violation of due process and underscores the DEA’s bias against cannabis reform,” said a spokesperson for a leading cannabis advocacy group. “The agency is not only ignoring the will of the people but also breaking the law to preserve an outdated and harmful status quo.”

SAM’s Role in the Controversy

SAM, a prominent opponent of cannabis legalization, has consistently argued against rescheduling on the grounds that it could lead to increased drug abuse and societal harm. The group’s involvement in the hearings has already been criticized by advocates who view it as overly influential. The new allegations of improper communications could further erode public confidence in the DEA’s neutrality.

Implications for Rescheduling

If the claims of statutory violations are substantiated, they could jeopardize the entire rescheduling process, potentially leading to legal challenges and delays. Observers note that the allegations could also undermine the DEA’s credibility as an impartial arbiter in the cannabis debate.

What’s Next?

The legal filing is expected to trigger an investigation into the DEA’s conduct. Advocates are calling for a suspension of the hearings until the allegations are fully addressed. Meanwhile, calls for transparency and oversight in the rescheduling process are growing louder.

With marijuana reform already a contentious issue, this latest development adds a new layer of complexity to an already divisive debate.

This story is developing. Stay tuned for updates.