The way it should work is the Secretary of Health Services looks at science and data, not legal issues. After that, the Attorney General looks at the legal issues. If the science and data results in a different conclusion than the legal analysis, then it's time to ask for the international treaties to be amended.
However, in the interim, the treaties do all contain exceptions for domestic law and constitutional process. Any state cannabis law is a constitutional process and a domestic law. Until the treaties are amended, there is still a safety valve in each of them to accommodate a constitutional change in domestic law.
Same for 21 USC 822(d) and 21 CFR 1307.03, allowing exceptions for manufacturers and dispensaries when no other option is appropriate.
Consider removing cannabis from the Single Convention as well. Here's a resolution on that topic:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-concurrent-resolution/81
The way it should work is the Secretary of Health Services looks at science and data, not legal issues. After that, the Attorney General looks at the legal issues. If the science and data results in a different conclusion than the legal analysis, then it's time to ask for the international treaties to be amended.
However, in the interim, the treaties do all contain exceptions for domestic law and constitutional process. Any state cannabis law is a constitutional process and a domestic law. Until the treaties are amended, there is still a safety valve in each of them to accommodate a constitutional change in domestic law.
Same for 21 USC 822(d) and 21 CFR 1307.03, allowing exceptions for manufacturers and dispensaries when no other option is appropriate.