Pubdate: Tue, 01 Jul 2003
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Copyright: 2003 Hearst Communications Inc.
Contact:  http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/388
Author: Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/hemp.htm (Hemp)

COURT CITES PROCEDURAL ERRORS, REJECTS DEA BAN ON HEMP FOOD

The Bush administration failed to give proper public notice before 
announcing a ban on food products containing hemp, which contains a tiny 
amount of the active ingredient in marijuana, a federal appeals court ruled 
Monday.

In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco 
declared the Drug Enforcement Administration's short-lived ban illegal on 
procedural grounds.

The issue is not settled, however. The DEA has issued an identical ban in 
separate regulations that were circulated to the public before adoption.

The DEA ban was scheduled to take effect in April, but was blocked by the 
appeals court after the hemp industry sued a second time. The industry 
contends the regulations were not authorized by federal drug laws. Monday's 
ruling allows the products to be sold until the second lawsuit is decided.

Hemp seeds and oil are rich in essential fatty acids but contain traces of 
THC, the active substance in marijuana. Until recently, hemp seeds and oil 
were excluded from the definition of marijuana by U.S. drug laws enacted in 
1937 because the amounts were regarded as too small to have any 
psychological effect.

But the DEA announced a ban on food products containing hemp in October 
2001, saying THC made them unsafe for consumption. The ban, which was 
issued without advance notice, does not affect nonfood products like 
clothing and paper. The appeals court put the ban on hold in March 2002 
while it considered a challenge from hemp producers.

The DEA argued that public notice was not required because it was merely 
interpreting its own rules. But in Monday's ruling, Judge Betty Fletcher 
said the October 2001 regulation was not just an interpretation but a 
reversal of a previous DEA rule that allowed hemp in food products. Such 
"legislative" regulations require public notice and an opportunity to 
comment, Fletcher said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom