Benzinga – by Maureen Meehan, Benzinga Editor.
Congressional members Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) and Rep. Ben Cline (R-VA) are demanding answers from DEA administrator Anne Milgram about why she did not sign the recent White House proposal to reschedule cannabis rather than having it approved by Attorney General Merrick Garland, thus breaking with “decades of precedent.”
What Happened: Shortly after President Joe Biden announced plans on April 30 to reclassify cannabis as a Schedule III substance, the Department of Justice (DOJ) followed with an announcement that AG Garland had formally initiated the rescheduling process with the submission of a legal review. This break in precedent is fueling speculation that the DEA or Milgram disagree with the rescheduling decision.
Where Is The DEA?
In their letter sent to Milgram, reported Marijuana Moment (MM), Reps. Clyde and Cline also expressed “grave concern” about her “refusal to respond to questions from multiple members” regarding cannabis scheduling earlier this month at a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing. At that meeting, Milgram told lawmakers that it would be “inappropriate” for her to comment on the agency’s recent marijuana rescheduling determination because the rule-making process was “ongoing.”
The Congress members took Milgram to task for that comment, saying “you were legally compelled to testify and answer questions related to marijuana reclassification despite your refusal and your incorrect legal interpretation of the APA [Administrative Procedure Act].”
I’m demanding that DEA Administrator Milgram answer questions related to the Biden Administration’s recent marijuana reclassification—including why AG Garland broke precedent by signing the order rather than Milgram.
Americans deserve transparency on this serious matter. pic.twitter.com/7MMPsgxP9h
— Rep. Andrew Clyde (@Rep_Clyde) May 22, 2024
Then They Got Demanding
“Accordingly, we expect to receive answers to the questions asked by members during the hearing,” they said, adding that they also expect Milgram to respond to any written Questions for the Record (QFRs) from subcommittee members related to the issue, noted MM’s Kyle Jaeger.
In their letter, Reps Clyde and Cline asked Milgram to explain why she has not signed the rescheduling notice and whether the Department of Justice provided justification for this unusual step. They requested answers by June 5, to review before the subcommittee’s budget markup session.
Photo: Benzinga edit with images by US Government, U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency via Wikimedia Commons and Cambridge Jenkins IV on Unsplash
Related story: DEA Vs. Dept Of Justice Over Cannabis Rescheduling: Too Many Cooks In The Kitchen?
© 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.
