Tranquility
Well-Known Member
Right. What he CAN do (once elected) is get the DOJ (through the DEA) to drop cannabis off the controlled substance list, making it easier for states to overturn their own prohibitions and pardon their "offenders" if that is what they choose to do.
Illinois is about to do just that without the Federal "permission".
Illinois can deal with Illinois violators of its laws in any manner they determine. Their choice is irrelevant to other governmental agencies. aka federalism. Scheduling is not relevant to the laws they can make, although it may be relevant to the money they get for enforcing federal law. That's one real issue, how to keep the sweet, sweet federal law enforcement dollars coming in while...specifically not enforcing federal law.
The *theory* of a president being able to determine scheduling for any drug has not been tested. It is a little attenuated because the law has specific requirements for the Attorney General and FDA to follow to change scheduling. In the theory of a unitary president, the president is in charge of the entire executive branch and can order or fire anyone there if they don't follow his orders. From listening to the news, threatening to fire subordinates because they don't do what the president wants, should be cause for impeachment. Even if it is found he/she/xe could do it, it would have to be under multiple procedures under different regulatory acts that require certain findings to be able to change things.
That's where things get real fun. Like Trump's issue regarding immigration, Yang just put himself in a bad place regarding actually getting things accomplished. By Trump's campaign statements on immigration, opponents to his policies argued his official justifications in creating immigration regulations differed from what is actual intent was when he made statements on immigration during the campaign. In other words, the campaign statements need to be taken as the intent and not the official hearings and reports.
The same, if it comes up at all, will happen to Yang. It will be said he made up his mind on the matter before the findings, thus showing the findings were not used in coming to a decision on scheduling. Depending on the judge, that's apparently enough to stop the regulations or changes to being put into effect. The key questions are, can opponents find some drug-warrior judge somewhere to get a holding that determines the facts on review? And, when the sole federal judge they find in drug-warrior land holds against the government, what will the Supreme Court hold?
This will be the same battle as the immigration one except the immigration one had to deal with the president's express powers to do what he proposed that were in the law itself; while on descheduling, the law is far more ambiguous.