article thumbnail

I Have Some Thoughts on This Biden Cannabis Play

Canna Law Blog

Based upon it’s “scientific and medical evaluation”, the FDA found marijuana supremely dangerous and formally recommended that the plant remain in schedule I. For anyone also wondering what effect re-scheduling would have on state-level industry, check out this old chestnut from 2016. I won’t repeat why that result would be bad.

article thumbnail

Foolproof Way to Get Your Florida Medical Marijuana Recommendation and Card

FloridaMarijuana.net

Luckily, the trepidation of getting caught with medical marijuana has an easy solution nowadays. The initial payment will cover the medical evaluation, and three different recommendations for medical cannabis, which will last for seven months.

Marijuana 189
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Document: Barr Responses To QFR’s: CLR Digs Out The Relevant Q’s & A’s

Cannabis Law Report

To expand the number of manufacturers, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) submitted a notice in the Federal Register on August 11, 2016, soliciting applications for licenses to manufacture marijuana for research purposes. Both DOJ and HHS agreed to conduct a medical and scientific evaluation of CBD independent of marijuana in 2015.

article thumbnail

Three Myths and Three Facts on the HUGE Marijuana Rescheduling Recommendation

Canna Law Blog

As an HHS spokesperson explained: “While HHS’s scientific and medical evaluation is binding on DEA, the scheduling recommendation is not. For a fuller analysis, check out this old chestnut from 2016. But would moving marijuana to Schedule III make the risk of federal enforcement even more unlikely?

DEA 117
article thumbnail

Further Consideration of the STATES Act

Cannabis Law Report

The Attorney General forwards the request to the Health and Human Services Secretary and requests a scientific and medical evaluation and recommendation, as specified by 23 USC 811(b-c). 2122 ) (relating to prohibitions governing atomic weapons), or section 104(a) of the North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act of 2016 ? [3]

Banking 45