“Legalization of marijuana, or even simply reclassification of marijuana, is still a contentious issue in this country.”
Eleven-year-old Alexis Bortell is one of several plaintiffs involved in a lawsuit against the federal government and Jeff Sessions challenging the classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug. She is one of two children plaintiffs involved with the case and she is also joined by ex-NFL player Marvin Washington, an Iraq war veteran, and a non-profit organization.
Bortell moved to Colorado from Texas after suffering from untreatable seizures for several years, in the hopes that medical cannabis would prove to be the solution to her problem. And it was. She has not had a single seizure in almost three years now. Hers is just one of many stories of people, especially children, who have been able to stop or reduce their seizures with the use of medical marijuana.
Currently, marijuana is classed as a Schedule I drug on a federal level, and despite many recent attempts to have that classification changed, no one has had any luck yet. By classifying it as a Schedule I drug, the federal government is saying that marijuana is one of the most dangerous drugs available (even more dangerous than morphine, which is a Schedule II drug) with absolutely no medical benefits.
Keeping this classification means that the federal government is saying that all people who claim to have been helped by medical marijuana are either lying or mistaken, that the effect of marijuana is a placebo effect.
The lawsuit challenges this, claiming that the federal government does not and has never believed that cannabis actually meets the requirements for a Schedule I substance, and that the federal government has admitted repeatedly in writing and implementation of national policy that marijuana does have medical uses.
Hers is just one of many stories of people, especially children, who have been able to stop or reduce their seizures with the use of medical marijuana.
Since marijuana is still classed as a Schedule I drug, Bortell and others like her who have found relief with medical marijuana are limited in their abilities to travel to states where they cannot access marijuana for medical purposes. They cannot bring their medicine with them when visiting family and friends.
For Bortell, this means she cannot visit her grandparents in Texas for more than a few hours before heading back home on a plane before she misses a dose of her medication. An overnight visit would mean risking jail time if she brings her medication, or a seizure if she does not. Neither of those things are risks she is willing to take.
“I just want kids like me to be able to do what normal kids are able to do,” she said to an ABC news team from Dallas.
The lawsuit is ultimately challenging the constitutionality of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) as it pertains to marijuana and does not seek to nullify the law. Rather than seeking monetary compensation for their injuries the Plaintiffs wish to to put a permanent injunction against enforcement of the law. This method of seeking relief has been successful in helping enact change on a federal level before, but it is not without its complications.
The case claims the law violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, protections guaranteed by the First Amendment, and the fundamental Right to Travel. It also claims that Congress extended the breadth of legislative power by enacting the CSA.
The arguments are as follows. By recognizing that marijuana does not meet all of the requirements of a Schedule I classification, the federal government has violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by enacting a law that is irrational and thus unconstitutional. The First Amendment violation stems from the claim by the Plaintiffs that the law was enacted during the Nixon administration as a way to prosecute and incarcerate African Americans and war protestors legally, since arresting someone for legally protesting or the color of their skin is obviously illegal.
The claim is that Nixon determined that these groups used marijuana and the CSA was passed specifically to target them. The Right to Travel is violated because people like Bortell cannot travel through states that restrict marijuana or via plane without leaving their medication behind. Finally, Congress extended their power illegally by enacting the CSA because the law attempts to regulate intra-state activity that does not impact the national economy.
This is not the first time that a lawsuit has attempted to change the federal classification of marijuana, however it is the first of its kind to make the arguments that are central behind the case, namely the violation of constitutional rights. It will be interesting to see if the plaintiffs manage to succeed in winning over the judge on any of the presented arguments, and which ones they succeed in. Legalization of marijuana, or even simply reclassification of marijuana, is still a contentious issue in this country.
When Obama was in office, he took a general hands-off approach to the issue that allowed individual states to exercise their rights on the issue. Jeff Sessions has openly stated that he is against marijuana legalization, but has thus far taken no action to change federal policies.
Senator Corey Booker introduced a bill at the beginning of August that proposes major overhauls to federal enforcement of marijuana laws. Several states are currently working out the intricacies of their new recreational marijuana laws, while others are adapting their laws to account for changing laws in neighboring states. The future of marijuana is still very uncertain.
For children like Alexis Bortell, who just wants to spend the night at her grandparent’s house safely and legally, changing the law would significantly change their lives. Whether you agree with full legalization of marijuana or not, it’s hard to say no to such a simple request from a little girl.
