Nevada Judge Orders Cannabis Removed From State’s List of Controlled Substances

A Nevada judge has ruled that the Nevada State Board of Pharmacy does not have the authority to regulate cannabis and ordered marijuana removed from the state’s list of controlled substances.

A Clark County, Nevada judge ruled on Wednesday that the state pharmacy board does not have the authority to regulate cannabis and cannabis derivatives under state law and ordered the agency to remove marijuana from the state’s list of controlled substances. In the decision, Clark County District Court Judge Joe Hardy wrote that if the Nevada State Board of Pharmacy “designates a substance as a ‘controlled substance’ but the designation falls outside the authority delegated by the ​​Legislature, the designation is invalid.”

The ruling stems from a case brought against the pharmacy board by the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada (ACLUNV) on behalf of Antoine Poole and the Cannabis Equity and Inclusion Community, an organization that assists entrepreneurs in launching businesses in Nevada’s legal cannabis industry. ACLUNV attorneys argued that the Schedule 1 classification of cannabis was unconstitutional because voters had legalized medical marijuana with the passage of a constitutional amendment in 1998. Last month, Hardy ruled that the Schedule 1 classification was unconstitutional.

“The constitutional right to use marijuana upon the advice of a physician does establish that marijuana has an accepted medical use and treatment in the United States,” Hardy ruled in a September decision cited by the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

The new ruling this week is focused on the pharmacy board’s authority to regulate cannabis. ACLUNV attorneys argued that despite the legalization of medical marijuana and the availability of regulated medicinal cannabis in Nevada since 2000, the pharmacy board continued to list cannabis similarly to illicit substances including heroin and methamphetamine. Lawyers for the pharmacy board countered that the listing was warranted because of the continued listing of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance under federal law, an assertion rejected by the plaintiffs’ counsel.

“The notion that a state agency is able to engage in unlawful actions because it’s happening at the federal government – it’s just not the way it works,” Athar Haseebullah, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada (ACLU), said on July 15 after the first hearing in the case. “They don’t work for the feds. We didn’t sue the DEA here. We sued the State Board of Pharmacy because this is a state action.”

In his ruling, Hardy wrote that “the Board exceeded its authority when it placed, or failed to remove marijuana, cannabis, and cannabis derivatives on its list as Schedule I substances.”

Advocates Applaud Nevada Judge’s Ruling

After the ruling, ACLUNV noted that the decision means the pharmacy board does not have the authority to regulate cannabis under any schedule. Legal director Chris Peterson praised the judge’s ruling, saying that there has “been an ongoing inconsistency with how Nevada categorizes cannabis.” 

“For some people, it’s a medicine or a good time on a Friday night, and for some people it was a felony,” Peterson said in a statement from the civil rights organization. “We’re glad that we’ve now resolved this inconsistency to prevent further injustice, and we’ll continue our work to ensure that the promise of cannabis decriminalization is realized in Nevada.”

Shawn Hauser, a partner at the cannabis and psychedelics law firm Vicente Sederberg LLP, said that Hardy’s ruling “is a positive development in cannabis reform, in line with recognition by federal lawmakers and the public that cannabis has known medicinal value, can be safely regulated, and is not properly classified as a schedule 1 controlled substance that has no accepted medical use.” 

“Like Colorado, Nevada legalized cannabis through its constitution and developed a robust state regulatory system governing cannabis businesses,” Hauser said. “This case is important precedent confirming that state agencies cannot take action in conflict with state constitutional and statutory provisions, despite the illegality of cannabis under federal law.”

Ashley Dodson, the president and co-founder of Cannabis Equity and Inclusion Community, said that the court’s ruling on Wednesday will help foster social equity in Nevada’s regulated cannabis industry.

“Cannabis has been legal in Nevada for decades, but that hasn’t stopped law enforcement from treating Black and Brown people like criminals. We’re grateful for the ACLU of Nevada for taking this case on and for Judge Hardy for hearing it with fairness and dignity,” Dodson said in a statement. “As far as social equity is concerned, we’ve seen businesses act strategically to keep Black and Brown people out of the unlicensed market by preventing pathways to ownership. CEIC is hopeful that as the last loopholes allowing for the criminalization of cannabis fall by the wayside, we can get back to our original mission of assisting the communities harmed the most by the failed War on Drugs find a way into the industry.”

1 comment
  1. does this mean we can grow it without the law being concerned?, NV law says you cannot grow if you live within 25 miles of a dispensary, and even then, no more than 12 plants

Leave a Reply

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

Related Posts