Marijuana Opponents Challenge Government’s New Medical Use Standard at DEA Rescheduling Hearing
At a DEA hearing, marijuana opponents challenged the government's new medical use standard, with officials admitting cannabis would not have passed the old test, sparking debate over federal rescheduling
Key Points
- 1DEA hearing opponents challenged the switch to a new two-part test for marijuana's medical use
- 2FDA official Dominic Chiapperino admitted cannabis would not have passed the prior five-part test
- 3A federal legal opinion deemed the old test too narrow, endorsing the new approach
- 4Testimony highlighted medical cannabis's benefits for pain patients and as an opioid alternative
- 5Rescheduling has already led to changes in federal rules and agency guidance
The second day of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) hearing on cannabis rescheduling saw opponents of marijuana reform sharply question the government’s shift to a new standard for determining accepted medical use. Attorneys representing states such as Idaho, Indiana, and Nebraska pressed government witness Dominic Chiapperino, director of the FDA’s controlled substance staff, over the agency’s 2023 move from a longstanding five-part test to a more flexible two-part analysis for medical utility. This new approach examines whether licensed healthcare providers widely use cannabis for medical purposes under state law and if credible scientific support exists for at least one such use
During cross-examination, Chiapperino admitted the switch to the two-part test occurred only two months before the most recent analysis that led to the rescheduling recommendation. He also acknowledged that marijuana would not have met the criteria under the previous five-part standard. This revelation prompted Kevin Sabet, president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, to call the admission 'truly extraordinary' and argue that, 'the government is asking to move marijuana out of Schedule I, but it did so using a brand new standard instead of a standard that it had applied for years.'
Federal legal context has shifted as well. In 2024, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel declared the traditional five-part test 'impermissibly narrow,' supporting the new two-part review as sufficient for establishing currently accepted medical use (CAMU), even if the drug lacks FDA approval. The DEA has since adopted this method for evaluating cannabis and other substances. Meanwhile, the hearing is proceeding under heavy scrutiny, with reform advocates criticizing the lack of livestreaming and the exclusion of pro-reform participants
Testimony during the hearing also highlighted the potential benefits of medical cannabis, particularly in pain management. Corey Burchman, a New Hampshire physician and government witness, testified that medical marijuana provided significant relief to chronic pain patients and served as an alternative to opioids. 'It is extremely helpful in chronic pain patients as a means of analgesia,' Burchman stated, noting that for some, cannabis allowed a full transition away from prescription painkillers
The rescheduling process has already produced tangible changes. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in April reclassified state-licensed medical cannabis and FDA-approved marijuana products to Schedule III, granting certain legal protections to certified patients under federal law. Agencies such as the IRS and ATF are now updating their guidance and forms to reflect these changes, while the Department of Transportation maintains stricter rules for safety-sensitive workers. The hearing, set to conclude by July 15, comes amid ongoing litigation and heightened political debate
OG Lab notes that the outcome of this hearing could significantly shape the regulatory and business landscape for cannabis nationwide. As the DEA navigates legal challenges and shifting standards, industry participants and patients alike should monitor these proceedings for further federal reforms and opportunities
