A new scheduling category could bring in a host of challenges for a poorly understood area of drug policy, especially after legislative processes. The legislative process would undoubtedly alter the proposed language. It unlikely a new scheduling category would be created that doesn’t follow the same logic as the existing schedules. For example, would all drugs and substances that are not scheduled, then have to then undergo an assessment or be automatically included under the definition of a schedule VI drug (i.e., products related to alcohol, tobacco, OTC, and even prescription drugs like epidiolex)? This could open the door to scheduling unscheduled products. Advocates are making the argument that this approach would mean the DEA, FDA, NIDA, and federal agencies would not be involved...
Yep, it could be written better, like saying DEA has no authority to remove anything Congress places in Schedule VI and that it clearly supersedes anything in the international treaties. It could have further clarity, but that would fix most of your objections to it. My main problem with it is it does not include an application under 21 C.F.R. 1307.03 (21 U.S.C. 822(d)) for an immediate federal exemption. Why wait for Congress to act?
A new scheduling category could bring in a host of challenges for a poorly understood area of drug policy, especially after legislative processes. The legislative process would undoubtedly alter the proposed language. It unlikely a new scheduling category would be created that doesn’t follow the same logic as the existing schedules. For example, would all drugs and substances that are not scheduled, then have to then undergo an assessment or be automatically included under the definition of a schedule VI drug (i.e., products related to alcohol, tobacco, OTC, and even prescription drugs like epidiolex)? This could open the door to scheduling unscheduled products. Advocates are making the argument that this approach would mean the DEA, FDA, NIDA, and federal agencies would not be involved...
Yep, it could be written better, like saying DEA has no authority to remove anything Congress places in Schedule VI and that it clearly supersedes anything in the international treaties. It could have further clarity, but that would fix most of your objections to it. My main problem with it is it does not include an application under 21 C.F.R. 1307.03 (21 U.S.C. 822(d)) for an immediate federal exemption. Why wait for Congress to act?