Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Hemp Ruling

Hemp Ruling

Ratings: (0)|Views: 28 |Likes:
Published by WICKED MERCY

More info:

Published by: WICKED MERCY on Mar 06, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/21/2013

pdf

text

original

 
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
 
H
EMP
I
NDUSTRIES
A
SSOCIATION
;A
LL
-O
NE
-G
OD
-F
AITH
, I
NC
., dba Dr.Bronner’s Magic Soaps; A
TLAS
C
ORPORATION
; N
ATURE
S
P
ATH
F
OODS
USA I
NC
.; H
EMP
O
IL
C
ANADA
, I
NC
.; H
EMPZELS
, I
NC
.;No. 03-71366K
ENEX
L
TD
.; T
IERRA
M
ADRE
, LLC;DEA No.
R
UTH
S
H
EMP
F
OODS
, I
NC
.; O
RGANIC
Fed. Reg. DEA-C
ONSUMERS
A
SSOCIATION
,205F
Petitioners,
v.D
RUG
E
NFORCEMENT
A
DMINISTRATION
,
 Respondent.
 
H
EMP
I
NDUSTRIES
A
SSOCIATION
;A
LL
-O
NE
-G
OD
-F
AITH
, I
NC
., dba Dr.Bronner’s Magic Soaps; A
TLAS
C
ORPORATION
; N
ATURE
S
P
ATH
F
OODS
USA I
NC
.; H
EMP
O
IL
No. 03-71603C
ANADA
, I
NC
.; H
EMPZELS
, I
NC
.;DEA No.K
ENEX
L
TD
.; T
IERRA
M
ADRE
, LLC;Fed. Reg. DEA-
R
UTH
S
H
EMP
F
OODS
, I
NC
.; O
RGANIC
206FC
ONSUMERS
A
SSOCIATION
,
Petitioners,
OPINIONv.D
RUG
E
NFORCEMENT
A
DMINISTRATION
,
 Respondent.
1787
 
On Petition for Review of an Order of theDrug Enforcement AgencyArgued and SubmittedSeptember 17, 2003—San Francisco, CaliforniaFiled February 6, 2004Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Chief Judge, Betty B. Fletcher,and Alex Kozinski, Circuit Judges.Opinion by Judge B. Fletcher
1788H
EMP
I
NDUSTRIES
A
SSOC
. v. DEA
 
COUNSEL
Joseph E. Sandler, Sandler Reiff & Young, Washington, D.C.and Patrick Goggin, San Francisco, California, for thepetitioners-appellants.Daniel Dormont, Senior Attorney, Drug Enforcement Admin-istration, Washington, D.C., for the respondent-appellee.
OPINION
B. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge:Appellants manufacture, distribute, or sell comestible itemscontaining oil or sterilized seeds from “hemp” — a species of plant within the genus
Cannabis
. They challenge two DrugEnforcement Administration (“DEA”) regulations that, takentogether, would ban the sale or possession of such items evenif they contain only non-psychoactive trace amounts of tetrahydrocannabinols (“THC”). The DEA asserts that natural,as well as synthetic, THC is included in Schedule I of theControlled Substances Act (“CSA”). We have previously heldthat the definition of “THC” in Schedule I refers only to syn-thetic THC, and that any THC occurring naturally within
Cannabis
is banned only if it falls within the Schedule I defi-nition of “marijuana.”
1
We reiterate that ruling here: in accor- 
1
The Act spells this as “marihuana.” We employ the modern spellinghere.
1790H
EMP
I
NDUSTRIES
A
SSOC
. v. DEA

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->