No. 18-1582

Bryan A. Krumm, CNP v. Drug Enforcement Administration

Lower Court: District of Columbia
Docketed: 2019-06-26
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: administrative-law cannabis-scheduling controlled-substances controlled-substances-act dea federalism mandamus-relief medical-marijuana medical-use scheduling witness-testimony
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can the Attorney General and DEA continue Schedule 1 placement of Cannabis now that it has 'accepted medical use' in 33 States, the District of Columbia and the National Academies of Sciences?

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Can the Attorney General and DEA continue Schedule 1 placement of Cannabis now that it has “accepted medical use” in 33 States, the District of y Columbia and the National Academies of Sciences? 2. Did the Court of Appeals err by granting deference to DEA’s decision to limit witness testimony in spite of an ongoing pattern of witness tampering? 3. Did the Court of Appeals err by denying Krumm’s Motion for Writ of Mandamus ordering the DEA to exempt Cannabis from federal control under the CSA? :

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-02
Waiver of right of respondent DEA to respond filed.
2019-04-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 26, 2019)

Attorneys

Bryan Krumm
Bryan A. Krumm — Petitioner
Bryan A. Krumm — Petitioner
DEA
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent