A coalition of 22 state attorneys general is calling on Congress to address “the glaring vagueness” that has led to legal cannabis products being sold over the counter across the country …

A coalition of 22 state attorneys general is calling on Congress to address “the glaring vagueness” that has led to legal cannabis products being sold over the counter across the country — including sometimes from vending machines or online.

A letter dated March 20 addresses the consequences of Republican lawmakers’ choice to legalize hemp production in the 2018 omnibus Farm Bill — a decision that perhaps inadvertently led to a multibillion-dollar market in intoxicating cannabis products that are arguably federally legal.

Now, the attorneys general want Congress to shutter the market it helped create. In the new Farm Bill, they want the legislature to enshrine in statute the idea that intoxicating cannabis is not federally legal — contrary to what the law currently states.

  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    46·
    8 months ago

    Again, no. Biden can order a review (which he has), but he cannot tell them what or how to decide.

    Right, I already said that. What you are ignoring is that he has the power or fire the person who makes the actual decision.

    If your boss let it be known that he wanted a certain result, and your career depended on it… Even if he can’t by strict definition order you to do it so, they are still implicitly controlling the outcome.

    There’s a legally-defined process they have to follow in reaching their determination, and that process was laid out by congress when they passed the Controlled Substances Act.

    A legally defined process that’s already been carried out? The rescheduling process has virtually been complete, everything but the actual rule making and rescheduling that is.

    The DEA can’t simply ignore that because the president tells them to. That would be against the law.

    And what aspect of the law is conflicting with the DEAs ability to initiate rule making or rescheduling? They’ve e already received recommendations for rescheduling it to level 3 from HHS.

    he fires the head of the DEA for refusing to break the law at his command, the president can be impeached for abuse of power

    What law? Rescheduling is entirely within the scope of practice for the head of the DEA. Maybe if they hadn’t already received a letter from HHS, but that’s already completed. The next legitimate move would be for the DEA to announce new rules/rescheduling.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        35·
        8 months ago

        Wow, practically everything you said is wrong, and it illustrates how you really don’t understand how this works.

        Lol, I own and operate a CBD based company. I am well aware of the laws.

        The Controlled Substances Act

        And how does rescheduling conflict with the controlled substance act? They’ve already done their due diligence, as I said you may have had a point prior to the HHS recommendation, but according to the controlled substance act setting new rules/rescheduling is the next step.

        The FDA has made its recommendation, and now the DEA has to make a recommendation for final approval.

        It’s not the food in drug administration, its the department of health and human services that makes the recommendation. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about.

        And, no, just because Biden has the power to fire the head of the DEA doesn’t mean he has the legal authority to force them to come to a determination he favors. That’s just ridiculous.

        He can just fire them if he doesn’t and hire someone he knows will follow orders. You’re just being pedantic.

        That’s the process as laid out by the Controlled Substances Act, a law passed by Congress, which lays out, in very specific detail, the process for this. And no matter what you insist, the president cannot shortcut this process nor force a decision either way.

        First of all, the initial process of drug scheduling is laid out by the controlled substance act, but not how the rules are changed or modified. That’s handled under the purview of the administrative procedure act. According to both of these bodies the only thing left for them to do is have the DEA actually rewrite the rules, or reschedule.

        The only reason the head of the DEA hasn’t done so already (she has made pro cannabis rescheduling remarks) is because the executive is holding off for a bigger impact for the election.

        And no matter what you insist, the president cannot shortcut this process nor force a decision either way.

        Lol, what short cut? The job is done, it’s just waiting for a signature. You don’t even know what the process is, what agencies are involved, or even the difference between rule making and law making. Stop pretending that you have any kind of actual experience in this field.