Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 MAY 2024

Cannabis Rescheduling: HHS Findings and Legal Implications

Sheppard
Sheppard
Contributor
Sheppard

Sheppard

Businesses turn to Sheppard to deliver sophisticated counsel to help clients move ahead. With more...

View firm profile
Explore more from Sheppard

On August 29, 2023, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) made a groundbreaking recommendation to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) – that cannabis should be rescheduled...

United StatesCannabis & Hemp
Julia Anderson
Julia Anderson
Author LinkedIn connections

On August 29, 2023, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) made a groundbreaking recommendation to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) – that cannabis should be rescheduled from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This recommendation was made pursuant to President Biden's request that the Secretary of HHS and the Attorney General initiate a process to review how cannabis is scheduled under federal law. In recent days, the unredacted 252-page analysis supporting the August recommendation was released pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act request. While the DEA is presently reviewing HHS's recommendation and has final authority to schedule a drug under the CSA, it is ultimately bound by HHS's recommendations on scientific and medical matters.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

See more popular content from

Article

The Intoxicating Hemp Products Ban Was Delayed A Month. Now What?

The House has passed a short-term funding bill postponing the federal ban on hemp-derived THC products from November 12th to December 11th. With comprehensive legislation unlikely before the new deadline and competing interests from cannabis sellers, alcohol producers, and state regulators creating policy gridlock, the future of intoxicating hemp products remains uncertain as midterm elections approach.
United StatesCannabis & Hemp
Harris Sliwoski
Harris Sliwoski
Article

"Marijuana" Rescheduling Delayed, Again. What It Could Mean, And What Comes Next

The DEA's marijuana rescheduling hearing has been unexpectedly stayed following a motion to admit a new GAO report examining agency scheduling procedures. With the proceeding on hold and the medical marijuana Schedule III order facing legal challenges in the D.C. Circuit, the cannabis industry's path to federal tax relief through rescheduling has become increasingly uncertain.
United StatesCannabis & Hemp
Harris Sliwoski
Harris Sliwoski
Article

IRC Section 280E And Cannabis Tax Planning: Recent Developments And Practical Considerations

The landscape surrounding Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code continues to evolve with President Trump's Executive Order on medical marijuana rescheduling, advancing litigation in New Mexico Top Organics v. Commissioner, and shifting regulatory signals. Cannabis taxpayers face critical decisions about taking "non-280E" positions on their tax returns while the IRS maintains its enforcement stance and the U.S. Tax Court case addressing common arguments remains pending.
United StatesCannabis & Hemp
Foley Hoag LLP
Foley Hoag LLP
Article

FDA Balances Peptide Policy With Enforcement Against Unlawful Peptide Sellers

Over the past year, industry has had a front row seat as the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA” or the “Agency”) decides just how much leeway it wants to afford the manufacture, marketing, and sale of peptide products, and just where it wants to draw the line. Despite the recent decision of FDA’s Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee (“PCAC”) to recommend a number of peptides for inclusion on the 503A bulks list process — a move that represents a potentially more permissive stance toward peptide regulation, at least in terms of what can and cannot be compounded under 503A...
United StatesFood, Drugs, Healthcare, Life Sciences
Sheppard
Sheppard
Article

OCC Issues Examiner Framework For Banks’ Use Of Artificial Intelligence

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has released a new framework for evaluating banks' deployment of artificial intelligence and agentic AI systems in their business operations. This guidance establishes how examiners will assess AI through existing risk management disciplines rather than creating separate regulatory requirements, with review intensity scaled to each use case's potential consequences and level of human oversight.
United StatesFinance and Banking
Sheppard
Sheppard
Article

Massachusetts Issues Guidance On Data Center Development Under Executive Order 658

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey has issued Executive Order 658, establishing comprehensive permitting and regulatory standards for data centers exceeding 25 MW of peak electricity demand. The Order mandates community benefits agreements, clean energy procurement protocols, and coordination across multiple state agencies to ensure responsible development that protects ratepayers, communities, and the environment. This action positions Massachusetts alongside other states implementing stricter oversight o
United StatesEnergy and Natural Resources
Sheppard
Sheppard
Article

The Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of DMCA CMI Removal Claim Against AI Code Generator – Output Is A New Work Not A Copy Of Training Data

There was a significant ruling in the Doe v. Github case involving training of AI code generator models on open source. The United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court ruling dismissing part of an action brought under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) by programmers against GitHub, Inc., and other defendants. The issues centered on whether defendants removed copyright management information (CMI) from content used to train the AI code generator models.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Sheppard
Sheppard