Skip to content
MMJ Gazette
  Tuesday 5 August 2025
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Authors
  • Home
  • News
  • CBD
  • Cannabis
  • Drugs
  • Marijuana
  • Tobacco
  • Law
Trending
August 4, 2025Cannabis Businesses Face Tightrope Act as Rules Shift State to State August 3, 2025Cannabis Dispensaries Rethink Retail: Design That Sells, Not Just Serves August 2, 2025Legal Weed’s Tax Nightmare: How Cannabis Firms Are Pushing Back Against 280E August 2, 2025Kentucky Gears Up for First Legal Medical Marijuana Sales by Autumn July 31, 2025Hemp THC Ban Pulled from Senate Bill After McConnell–Paul Face-Off July 30, 2025Oklahoma’s Marijuana Legalisation Fight Is Back—And It’s Getting Personal July 30, 2025Starting a Cannabis Business? Here’s What You Really Need to Know First July 29, 2025New York’s Legal Weed Market Nears $1.5 Billion, But How Many Shops Can It Really Handle? July 29, 2025Texas Lawmaker Pushes Cannabis Legalisation Bill During Heated Hemp Debate July 28, 2025Cannabis Shops Are Getting a Makeover – and Sales Are Going Up
MMJ Gazette
MMJ Gazette
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Authors
MMJ Gazette
  Marijuana  Marijuana Rescheduling Judge Blasts DEA for ‘Unprecedented, Astonishing’ Behavior
MarijuanaNews

Marijuana Rescheduling Judge Blasts DEA for ‘Unprecedented, Astonishing’ Behavior

Lars BeckersLars Beckers—January 14, 20250
FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedInTumblrRedditVKWhatsAppEmail

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has landed in hot water for its failure to comply with explicit directives from its own administrative law judge in the ongoing marijuana rescheduling hearings. Chief Administrative Law Judge John Mulrooney II minced no words in a scathing critique of the agency’s conduct, calling its actions “unprecedented and astonishing.”

DEA Faces Backlash for Defying Judge’s Orders

Judge Mulrooney issued a strong rebuke against the DEA on Monday, citing its non-compliance with an earlier directive. Specifically, the agency had been instructed to provide physical copies of its proposed testimony and evidence. Instead, the DEA submitted a compact disc containing the required materials, defying clear instructions.

Mulrooney’s criticism, documented in a court order, highlighted the deliberate nature of the defiance. He described the action as a blatant disregard for the tribunal’s authority, further emphasizing that such behavior is without precedent. The ruling also leaves open the possibility of sanctions against the DEA for its conduct.

For context, the hearings pertain to the Biden administration’s proposal to reclassify cannabis under federal law. Rescheduling marijuana could have significant implications for its regulation and availability across the United States.

Allegations of Bias Add Fuel to the Fire

In a separate but related matter, the DEA has also been accused of bias in its handling of the rescheduling process. A Jan. 6 filing from Hemp for Victory and Village Farms International alleges that the agency displayed favoritism by excluding Colorado from participation in the hearings while facilitating the involvement of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.

The DEA countered these allegations on Monday, arguing that Judge Mulrooney lacks the authority to disqualify the agency from the proceedings. It further asserted that there is insufficient evidence to support claims of bias.

The agency’s legal counsel, S. Taylor Johnson, defended the DEA’s actions, stating that its request for additional information from Tennessee’s investigators does not constitute impermissible conduct. Critics, however, remain skeptical, questioning whether the agency’s actions are intentionally slowing the rescheduling process.

Slow-Walking the Rescheduling Process?

Observers of the hearings are voicing concerns about potential delays in the rescheduling process. The hearings, which began in January, are set to continue until March. At the conclusion of the proceedings, Judge Mulrooney will issue a recommendation. However, the final decision rests with the incoming DEA administrator, who will serve under the next presidential administration.

This timeline has raised questions about whether the DEA is deliberately “slow-walking” the process to delay significant changes to federal cannabis policy. Advocates and industry stakeholders argue that such delays undermine public confidence in the agency’s ability to handle the rescheduling process transparently and efficiently.

Key Moments and Future Implications

Timeline of Recent Events:

  • January 6, 2025: Allegations of bias against the DEA emerge in a formal filing.
  • January 21, 2025: Scheduled resumption of hearings.
  • March 2025: Conclusion of the hearings and issuance of Judge Mulrooney’s recommendation.

Implications:

Should cannabis be rescheduled, it would mark a historic shift in U.S. drug policy. This decision could open the door to increased research, revised criminal justice policies, and expanded access to cannabis for medical and potentially recreational use.

However, the current controversy raises concerns about whether procedural irregularities and accusations of bias could undermine public trust in the process.

FacebookTwitterPinterestLinkedInTumblrRedditVKWhatsAppEmail

Lars Beckers

Lars Beckers is a distinguished senior content writer at MMJ Gazette, bringing a wealth of experience and expertise to the realm of medical marijuana and cannabis-related content. With a deep understanding of the industry and a passion for sharing knowledge, Lars's articles offer readers comprehensive insights and engaging narratives in the dynamic world of cannabis. Known for his meticulous research, clarity of expression, and commitment to delivering high-quality content, Lars brings a seasoned perspective to his work, educating and informing audiences on the latest trends and developments in the field.

Cannabis Industry Relief Efforts Ramp Up as Los Angeles Wildfires Devastate Communities
Canadian Cannabis Retailer High Tide Enters German Market with Strategic Acquisition
Related posts
  • Related posts
  • More from author
Cannabis

Cannabis Businesses Face Tightrope Act as Rules Shift State to State

August 4, 20250
Cannabis

Cannabis Dispensaries Rethink Retail: Design That Sells, Not Just Serves

August 3, 20250
Marijuana

Legal Weed’s Tax Nightmare: How Cannabis Firms Are Pushing Back Against 280E

August 2, 20250
Load more
Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SEARCH
PROMOTIONS
RECENT POSTS
  • Cannabis Businesses Face Tightrope Act as Rules Shift State to State
  • Cannabis Dispensaries Rethink Retail: Design That Sells, Not Just Serves
  • Legal Weed’s Tax Nightmare: How Cannabis Firms Are Pushing Back Against 280E
  • Kentucky Gears Up for First Legal Medical Marijuana Sales by Autumn
  • Hemp THC Ban Pulled from Senate Bill After McConnell–Paul Face-Off
  • Oklahoma’s Marijuana Legalisation Fight Is Back—And It’s Getting Personal
  • Starting a Cannabis Business? Here’s What You Really Need to Know First
  • New York’s Legal Weed Market Nears $1.5 Billion, But How Many Shops Can It Really Handle?
  • Texas Lawmaker Pushes Cannabis Legalisation Bill During Heated Hemp Debate
  • Cannabis Shops Are Getting a Makeover – and Sales Are Going Up
    © MMJ Gazette. 2024
    • About
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Authors