Back to top
Share

DC Circuit Orders Supplemental Briefing in Landmark Federal Medical Marijuana Case

Sam Sabzehzar 2012-10-29 0 comments

Just hours after the U.S. Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit heard oral arguments in the federal landmark case Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration, the court ordered supplemental briefing on the issue of “standing.”

By Joe Elford  |  Published by Americans For Safe Access

Michael Krawitz (center) speaking at a press conference after the Appellate Court heard oral arguments in Americans for Safe Access v. DEA. (Photo credit: MedicalMarijuana411.com)

Just hours after the U.S. Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit heard oral arguments in the federal landmark case Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration, the court ordered supplemental briefing on the issue of “standing.”

In a rare move for a case that has been covered by the Associated Press, Reuters, CNNBloomberg NewsLos Angeles TimesSan Francisco ChronicleHuffington Post, and others, the request for additional briefing indicates that the court is taking the issue of medical marijuana very seriously.

The Court’s order asks the petitioners to provide the court with details about how plaintiff Michael Krawitz, a U.S. Air Force veteran, sustained harm as a result of the federal government’s refusal to recognize the therapeutic value of marijuana.

During ASA’s oral arguments, Americans for Safe Access (ASA) Chief Counsel Joe Elford argued that Krawitz had been denied medical services and treatment from Veterans Administration physicians because of his status as a medical marijuana patient.

Specifically, the court ordered ASA to file a brief not to exceed five pages in order to “clarify and amplify the assertions made [by] Michael Krawitz regarding his individual standing,” and “more fully explain precisely the nature of the injury that gives him standing.”

If ASA can reasonably show that Krawitz has been harmed by a federal policy that holds marijuana has no medical value, the country’s largest medical marijuana advocacy group may also get the court to rule on the merits of the case — whether the scientific evidence of medical efficacy is ample enough to reclassify marijuana from its current status as a Schedule I substance.

We remain hopeful that the science on medical marijuana will prevail over politics in order to overcome the decades-long effort by the federal government to keep marijuana out of the reach of millions of Americans who would benefit from its use.