On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Courtroom denied certiorari in Canna Provisions, Inc. et al. v. Bondi, a high-profile lawsuit that challenged the constitutionality of the federal prohibition of intrastate (and never interstate) hashish exercise. The denial supplied no reasoning; nor was it accompanied by dissents or concurrences from any of the justices—all of which is typical. The upshot is that petitioner’s loss on the First Circuit Courtroom of Appeals is last. Relaxation in peace, Canna Provisions.
We now have been monitoring and writing about this case because it was filed two years in the past. We acknowledged the pedigree of David Boies and the legal professionals concerned, however in the end, the trouble left us uninspired. See:
Within the aftermath of the Supreme Courtroom’s denial on Monday, my colleague Jason Adelstone additionally offered this post mortem on LinkedIn:
This final result is unlucky however unsurprising given the basically flawed technique used to problem Gonzales v. Raich. There have been much more credible avenues for advancing this argument, most notably by means of sympathetic medical sufferers, relatively than company actors working within the adult-use market. From the outset, this case was designed for Supreme Courtroom overview. What the technique didn’t adequately account for, nonetheless, is the composition and conservatism of the present Courtroom. Possibly subsequent time the trade will assist a case that has an precise probability to prevail.
Whether or not there’s a “subsequent time,” or what that will seem like, is an open query—notably with rumors aswirl a couple of Trump government order on rescheduling marijuana. If marijuana lands on Schedule III, hashish companies would in the end get the truthful tax therapy sought by Canna Provisions, though banking, SBA loans and different facilities would nonetheless be impaired.
It might be considerably ironic if the Division of Justice in the end adopted a Trump directive to reschedule marijuana presently, given its posture final month within the Canna Provisions litigation. I explained:
[T]he DOJ declined to file a Supreme Courtroom temporary within the Canna Provisions case . . . . The DOJ’s place is curious, on condition that 1) the case strikes on the coronary heart of the federal authorities’s potential to implement federal legal guidelines, and a pair of) the federal authorities has been keen to weigh in on Supreme Courtroom hashish litigation, within the context of gun rights. Because it stands, the Courtroom will now determine whether or not to listen to this case with out government department enter.
And that’s precisely what occurred. It’s now time for everybody to maneuver on to the subsequent factor, which we’re advised may very well be an government order on rescheduling, introduced as quickly as tomorrow. As I explained in a Canna Provisions critique:
[M]arijuana reform is squarely a job for Congress or the chief department. Not the judiciary. We want Congress to behave, particularly within the context of stalled Schedule III proceedings, and we want broader reforms than what Canna Provisions seeks. These reforms embrace not simply interstate commerce, however decriminalization and ideally reparations of some type.
Schedule III won’t get us interstate commerce, and it actually wouldn’t carry decriminalization or reparations. But it surely’s a step in the correct route—particularly whereas Congress can not get organized on hashish reform, aside from hemp. I don’t count on that to vary previous to the 2026 midterms, which implies the most effective hope for now could be an government order. Canna Provisions, relaxation in peace.
