1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP
  1. 5-HT2A
    The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) made CBD oil a little more federally illegal in a little-noticed bureaucratic maneuver this morning.

    Today’s Federal Register (Dec. 14, 2016) contains an item (21 CFR Part 1308) that establishes a new drug code for “marihuana extract.”

    “This code,” wrote DEA Acting Administrator Chuck Rosenberg, “will allow DEA and DEA-registered entities to track quantities of this material separately from quantities of marihuana.” The move, the Register entry explained, is meant to bring the US into compliance with international drug-control treaties.

    There is no major change in law brought about by the Register item. Rather, it serves to clarify and reinforce the DEA’s position on all cannabis extracts, including CBD oil. That position is: They are all federally illegal Schedule I substances. “Extracts of marihuana will continue to be treated as Schedule I controlled substances,” the notice says.

    CBD oil derived from hemp is now commonly available nationwide via web sites and mail order services. Those operations survive on the assumption that cannabidiol products below the legal threshold for THC percentage in hemp (0.3 percent or less) are technically legal.

    Not so, says the DEA.

    In the DEA comment on the entry, Rosenberg directly addressed the question: What if it’s only cannabidiol (CBD) and no other cannabinoids? The agency’s response: “For practical purposes, all extracts that contain CBD will also contain at least small amounts of other cannabinoids. However, if it were possible to produce from the cannabis plant an extract that contained only CBD and no other cannabinoids, such an extract would fall within the new drug code” and therefore remain federally illegal. In other words: The DEA is confident that it can find enough traces of other cannabinoids in your CBD oil to arrest and prosecute. And if they can’t, they still have the option of arresting and prosecuting based on the CBD oil itself.

    Is your CBD derived from hemp? Doesn’t matter to the DEA. The new extracts classification applies to all “extracts that have been derived from any plant of the genus Cannabis and which contain cannabinols and cannabidiols.” Hemp is not a separate genus. (Although it may be a separate species; lot of debate on that point.) Legally speaking, hemp is simply cannabis with no more than 0.3 percent THC content.

    The new rule seems to clarify the DEA’s position on hemp-derived CBD, which entered a legal gray area following Congress’ passage of the 2014 farm bill. That legislation allowed certain states to grow hemp in pilot projects, and blocked federal law enforcement authorities (ie, the DEA) from interfering with state agencies, hemp growers, and agricultural research.

    What DEA Administrator Rosenberg seems to be saying with this clarification is: You may be able to grow hemp. But if you try to extract CBD oil from it, the DEA considers that a federal crime.

    The rule did not contain any hint as to when the DEA will step into the 21st century and stop using the archaic version of the word “marihuana.”

    UPDATE 12/14/2016, 2:20pm PST:

    Although the DEA considers CBD oil to be a federally illegal Schedule I drug, there are temporary safeguards in place that protect patients in many states from federal prosecution over possession of the oil.

    The Rohrabacher-Farr amendment is the most important of those protections. Originally passed in 2014, the amendment to a Congressional appropriations bill prohibits the Justice Department from spending funds to interfere with the implementation of state medical cannabis laws. (It is silent on adult-use laws.) In August, the federal 9th US Circuit Court upheld Rohrabacher-Farr in the face of a challenge brought by federal prosecutors. Leafly has an explanation of that case here.

    The amendment is the chief piece of legislation preventing federal law enforcement officials from prosecuting patients for possessing CBD products in the 28 legal medical cannabis states, and the District of Columbia. In addition, 16 states have passed so-called CBD-only laws that allow patients and caregivers to possess non-psychoactive CBD products. Those CBD-only laws usually allow no legal avenue to produce or obtain the products, however.

    Rohrabacher-Farr must be renewed every year. If it’s not, its safeguards disappear. The amendment was most recently renewed last Friday, Dec. 9, as part of the continuing House resolution known as HR 2028, which funds the federal government through April 28, 2017. When that resolution expires next April, so does the protections afforded by Rohrabacher-Farr. Unless it’s renewed once again.

    Experts and industry react

    It’s unclear whether today’s action is a signal from the DEA to the incoming Trump administration, or just a bit of shelf-clearing before DEA Administrator Rosenberg rides into the sunset with the rest of the Obama administration. This rule, after all, finalizes a proposed rulemaking notice that first appeared more than five years ago, on July 5, 2011.

    Robert Hoban, a Colorado cannabis attorney and adjunct professor of law at the University of Denver, raised the notion that the rule itself may not be lawful. “This action is beyond the DEA’s authority,” Hoban told Leafly in an interview late this afternoon. “The DEA can only carry out the law, they cannot create it. Here they’re purporting to create an entirely new category called ‘marijuana extracts,’ and by doing so wrest control over all cannabinoids. They want to call all cannabinoids illegal. But they don’t have the authority to do that.”

    The new DEA rule, Hoban said, may threaten hundreds, possibly thousands, of jobs and growing businesses. Those business owners based their investments and careers on previous definitions of hemp and cannabidiol in the Controlled Substances Act and modified by federal courts. And that’s where this latest turn of events could end up. “We will see the federal government in court,” Hoban said.

    by Bruce Barcott

    December 14, 2016

    Source:
    https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/new-dea-rule-says-cbd-oil-really-truly-no-joke-illegal

Comments

  1. Alfa
    I would not be surprised if this is not just a signal to the incoming Trump administration, but also a preparation for the incoming new General Attorney Jeff Sessions. All early signs of whats to come point out that this administration is likely to be a very rough ride in regards to the drug war.
  2. Beenthere2Hippie
    CBD Oil Moved to Schedule I Drug, According to the DEA

    [IMGL=white]https://drugs-forum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=53403&stc=1&d=1481906756[/IMGL]United States’ Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) on Wednesday set new cannabis extract laws by amending the Schedule I Controlled Substances Act to include tighter regulations for marijuana extracts, including cannabidiol (CBD).

    In the new drug code titled “Establishment of a New Drug Code for Marihuana Extract,” the DEA says it is “creating a separate code number for marihuana extract with the following definition: ‘Meaning an extract containing one or more cannabinoids that has been derived from any plant of the genus Cannabis, other than the separated resin (whether crude or purified) obtained from the plant.’ Extracts of marihuana will continue to be treated as Schedule I controlled substances.”

    This means CBD and all other extracts derived from the cannabis plant (psychoactive or not) will come under Schedule 1 drugs, like heroin, LSD, marijuana, and ecstasy, and cannot cross state lines. Any person currently licensed to produce and handle marijuana extracts is required to apply for a modification of their registration by Jan. 13, 2017, the new document says.

    “For practical purposes, all extracts that contain CBD will also contain at least small amounts of other cannabinoids. However, if it were possible to produce from the cannabis plant an extract that contained only CBD and no other cannabinoids, such an extract would fall within the new drug code,” the DEA said.

    The declaration, which critics say was made silently to avoid criticism, was justified with the help of international treaties: “Under international drug control treaties administered by the United Nations, some differences exist between the regulatory controls pertaining to marihuana extract versus those for marihuana and tetrahydrocannabinols.”

    “The DEA has previously established separate code numbers for marihuana and for tetrahydrocannabinols, but not for marihuana extract,” the document’s summary read.

    Medicinal marijuana activists, however, are questioning the legality of the move.

    “This action is beyond the DEA’s authority,” Robert Hoban, a Colorado cannabis attorney and adjunct professor of law at the University of Denver, told Leafly. “The DEA can only carry out the law, they cannot create it. Here they’re purporting to create an entirely new category called ‘marijuana extracts,’ and by doing so wrest control over all cannabinoids. They want to call all cannabinoids illegal. But they don’t have the authority to do that.”

    Further, CBD oil is considered Schedule I as of yesterday, Dec. 15, 2016, according to the Inquisitr article from Eric Scott Pickard located here .



    By Sheerat Chaba - IBT/Dec. 15, 2016
    http://www.ibtimes.com/marijuana-le...ws-make-cbd-other-extracts-schedule-i-2460829
    Photo:
    Newshawk Crew
  3. dr ACE
    The drug laws in America are extremely confusing and blatantly hypocritical
  4. detoxin momma
    ^^^ yes they are!

    This just figures. Never have i found anything over the counter that can help my anxiety like CBD oil does!!
    This is bullshit!

    some of us don't have insurance, some of us can't get a prescription for benzos, CBD is the only thing available that even comes close.

    I guess *they* realize that now, and have to figure out how to make more money off it.

    I bet this is a sign of things to come, and not good things either.

    The talk in my local tavern last night was all about how long its going to take before Trump gets assassinated.
  5. aemetha
    For anyone interested in deciding for themselves if the DEA has exceeded its mandate, here's the text of the Controlled Substances Act as it directly references cannabis definitions and scheduling:

    From definitions:

    "(16) The term ''marihuana'' means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of such plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such plant, its seeds or resin. Such term does not include the mature stalks of such plant, fiber produced from such stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of such plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of such plant which is incapable of germination."

    From schedule I:

    "Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or preparation, which contains any quantity of the following hallucinogenic substances, or which contains any of their salts, isomers, and salts of isomers whenever the existence of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation:

    (1) 3,4-methylenedioxy amphetamine.
    (2) 5-methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxy amphetamine.
    (3) 3,4,5-trimethoxy amphetamine.
    (4) Bufotenine.
    (5) Diethyltryptamine.
    (6) Dimethyltryptamine.
    (7) 4-methyl-2,5-diamethoxyamphetamine.
    (8) Ibogaine.
    (9) Lysergic acid diethylamide.
    (10) Marihuana.
    (11) Mescaline.
    (12) Peyote.
    (13) N-ethyl-3-piperidyl benzilate.
    (14) N-methyl-3-piperidyl benzilate.
    (15) Psilocybin.
    (16) Psilocyn.
    (17) Tetrahydrocannabinols."
  6. tasteful
    I was under the impression that there is already at least one CBD based prescription medication available in the United States. A quick google search isn't showing much evidence for that though. Can anybody clarify?

    If such a drug exists in the United States, specifically calling out CBD as Schedule 1 is pretty stupid, as the DEA Schedule 1 criteria states:

    If a CBD medication exists, clearly there is a "accepted medical use".
  7. mess clean
    Once again, the reassurance that the DEA cannot create law, but only carry it out...unless, of course, they decide to go ahead and create law AND carry it out.

    Whatever happened to separation of powers? Whatever happened to checks and balances?

    What buttheads.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!