Petition for Administrative Action — October 2019

https://iowamedicalmarijuana.org/cases/olsen-dea-2019.html

Peti­tion for Fed­er­al Exemp­tion
Sat­ur­day, Sep­tem­ber 21, 2019

BEFORE THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH

Peti­tion by Carl Olsen for agency action relat­ed to Iowa Code Chap­ter 124E

PETITION FOR AGENCY ACTION

The peti­tion­er asks the depart­ment to obtain fed­er­al exemp­tion for the med­ical use of cannabis as set forth in the Iowa Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Act, Iowa Code Chap­ter 124E.  The activ­i­ties cov­ered by the act include: (1) license hold­ers (cul­ti­va­tion, man­u­fac­tur­ing and dis­pens­ing of approved med­ical cannabis prod­ucts); (2) card hold­ers (patients and care­givers who obtain the approved med­ical cannabis prod­ucts); and (3) gov­ern­ment offi­cials who imple­ment and admin­is­ter the act.

The appli­ca­tion for fed­er­al exemp­tion can be found at 21 C.F.R. §1307.03.

There is an exist­ing fed­er­al exemp­tion for the reli­gious use of pey­ote at 21 C.F.R. §1307.31.  Pey­ote and cannabis are both fed­er­al Sched­ule 1 Con­trolled Sub­stances.  The pey­ote plant is list­ed at 21 C.F.R. §1308.11(d)(26).  The cannabis plant is list­ed at 21 C.F.R. §1308.11(d)(23).

Tetrahy­dro­cannabi­nols nat­u­ral­ly con­tained in the cannabis plant are list­ed at 21 C.F.R. §1308.11(d)(31).  Tetrahy­dro­cannabi­nols are found in Sched­ule III pre­scrip­tion sub­stances list­ed at 21 C.F.R. §1308.13(g)(1).  See Fed­er­al Reg­is­ter, Vol. 64, No. 127, Fri­day, July 2, 1999, at page 35928.  And see, Iowa Code §124.208(9)(b).

Cannabis extracts nat­u­ral­ly con­tained in the cannabis plant are list­ed at 21 C.F.R. §1308.11(d)(58).  Cannabis extracts are found in Sched­ule V pre­scrip­tion sub­stances list­ed at 21 C.F.R. §1308.15(f)(1).  See Fed­er­al Reg­is­ter, Vol. 83, No. 189, Sep­tem­ber 28, 2018, at page 48950.  And see, 657 Iowa Admin­is­tra­tive Code 10.39(4) (May 22, 2019) (amend­ing Iowa Code §124.212 by adding a new sub­sec­tion “6”).

This mat­ter has been reviewed by the Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board and the depart­ment staff on August 2, 2019.  The Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board approved the petitioner’s request by roll call vote.  The vote was unan­i­mous.  The peti­tion and sup­port­ing doc­u­men­ta­tion are attached to this peti­tion in an appen­dix.  The min­utes from the August 2, 2019, meet­ing have not been pub­lished yet but will be pro­vid­ed on or before the next meet­ing of the Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board on Novem­ber 1, 2019.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

A total of 47 states have enact­ed leg­is­la­tion accept­ing the med­ical use of cannabis.  All 47 of these states have thus far opt­ed not to claim fed­er­al exemp­tion like the exist­ing exemp­tion for the reli­gious use of pey­ote.  This makes the med­ical use of cannabis pro­hib­i­tive­ly expen­sive and dif­fi­cult to reg­u­late.

The pey­ote exemp­tion proves that con­sis­ten­cy with fed­er­al law is accom­plished by fed­er­al exemp­tion.  Because fed­er­al exemp­tion already exists for a Sched­ule 1 con­trolled sub­stance, and because a process for obtain­ing fed­er­al exemp­tion already exists, the action request­ed in this peti­tion is entire­ly con­sis­tent with fed­er­al drug law and is the only pos­si­ble means of obtain­ing con­sis­ten­cy with fed­er­al drug law.  Fed­er­al exemp­tion is con­sti­tu­tion­al­ly avail­able and con­sti­tu­tion­al­ly required.

Since the cre­ation of the fed­er­al drug law in 1970, noth­ing in Sched­ule 1 oth­er than cannabis has been accept­ed for med­ical use in any state, includ­ing pey­ote (pey­ote is not used for med­ical pur­pos­es in any state).  Fed­er­al Sched­ule 1 is only for sub­stances that have no accept­ed med­ical use in the Unit­ed States.  If not for fed­er­al exemp­tion, place­ment of cannabis in fed­er­al Sched­ule 1 would be uncon­sti­tu­tion­al.

While this cer­tain­ly rais­es doubts about the con­tin­ued valid­i­ty of the place­ment of cannabis in fed­er­al Sched­ule 1, any pos­i­tive con­flict between state and fed­er­al drug law is eas­i­ly rec­on­ciled by exemp­tion of state autho­rized med­ical use of cannabis.

In the absence of any express lan­guage in Iowa Code Chap­ter 124E stat­ing a leg­isla­tive intent to cre­ate pos­i­tive con­flict with fed­er­al drug law, the act must be assumed to be con­sis­tent with fed­er­al drug law and action must be tak­en to obtain fed­er­al acknowl­edg­ment that Iowa Code Chap­ter 124E is con­sis­tent with fed­er­al drug law.

TIMELINE AND DESCRIPTION OF EXHIBITS IN THE APPENDIX

Decem­ber 22, 1981

Exhib­it #1 – “Pey­ote Exemp­tion for Native Amer­i­can Church,” Mem­o­ran­dum Opin­ion for the Chief Coun­sel, Drug Enforce­ment Admin­is­tra­tion.  On page 6 of the mem­o­ran­dum it says the leg­isla­tive intent was to vest dis­cre­tion in the fed­er­al admin­is­tra­tive agency to deter­mine which sub­stances were to be brought under con­trol.  On page 16 of the mem­o­ran­dum it says the exemp­tion should not be viewed as hav­ing a reli­gious pur­pose.

May 12, 2017

Iowa Code Chap­ter 124E cre­at­ed an exemp­tion from Iowa Code Chap­ter 124 and Iowa Code Chap­ter 453B for med­ical use of cannabis and cannabis extracts.  Iowa Code Chap­ter 124E, 2017 Iowa Acts Chap­ter 162, House File 524.  See specif­i­cal­ly Iowa Code §124E.11(4) cre­at­ing the exemp­tion.

Sep­tem­ber 15, 2017

Exhib­it #2 – Petitioner’s Com­ments on Pro­posed Amend­ments to 641 Iowa Admin­is­tra­tive Code 154.15 to 154.65 respond­ing to the House Speaker’s alle­ga­tions on Sep­tem­ber 10, 2017, that Iowa Code Chap­ter 124E autho­rizes fed­er­al crim­i­nal activ­i­ty.

Octo­ber 13, 2017

Exhib­it #3 – Petitioner’s Com­ments on Pro­posed Amend­ments to 641 Iowa Admin­is­tra­tive Code 154.15 to 154.65 thank­ing the depart­ment for pre­ci­sion in draft­ing the “Own­er Cer­ti­fi­ca­tion” form.

Jan­u­ary 20, 2019

Exhib­it #4 – Petitioner’s Pro­posed Leg­is­la­tion cre­at­ing a new Iowa Code §124E.12(10) stat­ing that state autho­rized use of cannabis is exempt from fed­er­al sched­ul­ing.

Feb­ru­ary 1, 2019

Exhib­it #5 – Petitioner’s Com­ments to the Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board ask­ing if the activ­i­ty autho­rized by Iowa Code Chap­ter 124E vio­lates fed­er­al law.

Feb­ru­ary 13, 2019

Exhib­it #6 – Leg­isla­tive Ser­vices Agency’s ver­sion of Petitioner’s Jan­u­ary 20, 2019, pro­posed amend­ment cre­at­ing a new Iowa Code §124E.20.

March 5, 2019

Exhib­it #7 – Sen­ate Judi­cia­ry Committee’s vote 14–1 in favor of adopt­ing the Leg­isla­tive Ser­vices Agency’s ver­sion of Petitioner’s pro­posed amend­ment.

March 6, 2019

Exhib­it #8 – Petitioner’s pro­posed amend­ment as it appeared in Sen­ate Judi­cia­ry Com­mit­tee bill, Sen­ate File 501.

June 14, 2019

Exhib­it #9 – Petitioner’s Request for Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board to sup­port fed­er­al exemp­tion.

July 21, 2019

Exhib­it #10 – Petitioner’s Sup­ple­men­tal Request for Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board to sup­port fed­er­al exemp­tion.

August 11, 2019

Exhib­it #11 – Cedar Rapids Gazette Edi­to­r­i­al regard­ing the August 2, 2019, unan­i­mous vote of the Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board.

Sep­tem­ber 4, 2019

Exhib­it #12 – Des Moines Reg­is­ter Guest Edi­to­r­i­al regard­ing the August 2, 2019 unan­i­mous vote of the Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board.

Thank you

Signed this 21st day of Sep­tem­ber, 2019.

Carl Olsen
130 E Auro­ra Ave
Des Moines, IA 50313–3654
515–343-9933
carl@carl-olsen.com

cc:

Lucas Nel­son, Med­Pharm, Iowa
Sen­a­tor Rich Tay­lor
Sen­a­tor Brad Zaun
Sen­a­tor Jack Whitver
Sen­a­tor Charles Schnei­der
Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Lin­da Upmey­er
Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Jarad Klein