 has determined that protections preventing the removal of Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) are unconstitutional and will no longer defend them in court, a move that could have significant implications for cannabis research. ){kind=link}
The US Department of Justice determined that protective measures preventing removal of Administrative Law Judges were unconstitutional. It will no longer defend those protections in court.
This decision is expected to help MMJ International Holdings’ case. MMJ International Holdings sued the DEA in response to what it considered unjustified delays with its applications to begin clinical trials for marijuana treatments of Multiple Sclerosis (MS), and Huntington’s Diseases (HD).
A legal fight is ongoing to determine whether Presidents can fire government officials with no cause.
Recently, two government officials, Cathy Harris and Hampton Dellinger (Office of the Special Counsel head) sued Donald Trump for firing them without cause. Dellinger was ruled to be in the right by a federal judge, but Trump now wants that decision overturned.
ALJs are impartial judges within federal agencies who oversee legal disputes involving government regulations, and were previously protected from being fired without ‘good cause’, with their removal requiring approval from a separate government body, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).
DOJ now claims that the removal restrictions are interfering with President Obama’s ability to enforce laws properly. DOJ chief of staff Chad Mizelle has stated that ALJs are exercising too much power without any checks and balances. The executive branch must be more accountable towards the president and to the public.
The article suggests that, in relation to MJJ’s ongoing legal fight, these ALJ protective measures contribute to bureaucratic irrationality, making it almost impossible to hold agencies, like the DEA, accountable for their delays.
This change undermines the DEA’s defense against MMJ’s lawsuit. In that case, the company argues that too many regulatory obstacles have prevented it from conducting cannabis research.
Duane B. Boise CEO MMJ International Holdings said that the DOJ decision to cease defending ALJ protections for removal weakens DEA’s position. This strategic shift strengthens our argument that DEA delays stem from unconstitutional administration practices.
The lawsuit is challenging the DEA’s long application process which, historically, has prevented researchers from obtaining legally sanctioned marijuana. MMJ’s victory could lead to a faster approval of cannabis-related applications for researchers, as well as eliminating bottlenecks in bureaucratic processes that slow progress.
US Department of Justice has determined that the protections that prevent removal of Administrative Law Judges are unconstitutional. They will not defend these in court. This could have significant consequences for cannabis research.
This ruling will strengthen the case of MMJ International Holdings. The company sued the DEA for what they called unfair delays in its clinical trial application to begin cannabis treatment trials to treat Multiple Sclerosis and Huntington’s Disease.
A legal fight is ongoing to determine whether Presidents can dismiss government officials for no reason.
Cathy Harris, Chair of the Merit Systems Protection Board and Hampton Dellinger, Director of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), both sued Donald Trump recently after he fired them for no reason. Dellinger won a federal court ruling, but Trump has asked the Supreme Court for an overturning of that decision.
ALJs are impartial judges within federal agencies who oversee legal disputes involving government regulations, and were previously protected from being fired without ‘good cause’, with their removal requiring approval from a separate government body, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).
DOJ now asserts that these restrictions on removal interfere with the authority of president to ensure law enforcement. DOJ chief of staff Chad Mizelle has stated that ALJs are exercising too much power without any checks and balances. The executive branch must be more accountable towards the president and to the public.
It is suggested that the ALJs’ protections are a factor in bureaucratic laziness, which makes it difficult to hold agencies such as the DEA responsible for any delays.
The DEA has lost its defense of MMJ in the lawsuit. MMJ claims that the excessive regulations have hampered the ability to do cannabis research.
Duane B. Boise CEO MMJ International Holdings said that the DOJ decision to cease defending ALJ protections for removal weakens DEA’s position. This shift in strategy reinforces the argument that DEA delay is rooted on unconstitutional administrative procedures.
The suit challenges the DEA’s lengthy application process that has traditionally prevented researchers from obtaining cannabis with federal sanction. MMJ’s victory could lead to a faster approval of cannabis-related applications for researchers, and eliminate bureaucratic barriers that have held back progress.
Cannabis Law Resources for Poland
Discover essential legal information about the cultivation of cannabis, its sale, and regulations governing medical products in Poland. These guides will help you understand the legal requirements, such as certifications and permissions.
-
Polish News Registration and Interests of Cannabis Businesses
-
Permissions for Cannabis Sales in Poland
-
Authorization for Importing or Manufacturing Medical Products
-
Permission for Manufacturing or Importing Medical Products
-
Certificate of Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)
-
Registration of Medical Products in Poland