American Marconi Wireless News - DEA's Diversion Division - Patterns of MMJ's Marijuana Court Case Obstruction, Bias, and Corruption

WASHINGTON, DC / ACCESS Newswire / April 3, 2025 / The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is currently under intense scrutiny following allegations of systematic obstruction and corruption within its Diversion Control Division. Central figures in these allegations include Anne Milgram, past DEA Administrator, Thomas Prevoznik Deputy Administrator and Matthew Strait Policy Administrator, and other senior officials within the division, whose actions are now being questioned in light of ongoing legal challenges and accusations from industry stakeholders.

Background of Allegations

The Diversion Control Division, responsible for regulating controlled pharmaceuticals and processing MMJ BioPharma Cultivations API Bulk Manufacturing Application, has been accused of deliberately delaying and obstructing the approval processes for companies attempting to conduct legitimate medical research. Duane Boise CEO of MMJ International Holdings, specifically, has pointed to these obstructionist tactics in its lawsuit against the DEA, highlighting the agency's failure to process its applications for cannabis research intended for treatments of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and Huntington's Disease (HD).

Specific DEA Allegations Against Thomas Prevoznik and Matthew Strait

Thomas Prevoznik and Matthew Strait have been implicated in what appears to be a broader pattern of behavior that critics label as both obstructive and corrupt. These allegations include:

• Unjustified Delays: MMJ International Holdings claims that these officials have been instrumental in the multi-year delays of their application to cultivate pharmaceutical-grade marijuana, necessary for their ongoing clinical trials.

• Manipulative Practices: Accusations extend to manipulative legal and administrative practices aimed at stalling or derailing the approval processes. This includes alleged misinterpretations of regulatory requirements and the arbitrary application of standards not uniformly imposed.

Judicial Reactions and Legal Implications

The actions of Prevoznik, Strait, and other DEA officials have not only drawn criticism from the companies affected but have also led to judicial rebuke. Recent court proceedings have spotlighted the possible defiance of judicial orders by DEA administrators, as highlighted in the case where DEA Administrator Anne Milgram was accused of instructing attorneys to disregard a court order. This incident has raised serious questions about the integrity of the DEA's regulatory processes and the legality of its internal directives.

Systemic Issues Within the DEA

The allegations against Prevoznik and Strait are symptomatic of what many critics describe as a systemic issue within the DEA's Diversion Control Division. This includes:

• Cultural Resistance to Cannabis Research: Despite changing laws and societal attitudes towards cannabis, elements within the DEA reportedly maintain a prohibitionist stance that is increasingly at odds with federal and state policies.

• Conflicts of Interest: The DEA's role in both policing illegal drug use and regulating pharmaceutical research creates inherent conflicts of interest, particularly when it comes to substances like cannabis, where the agency's enforcement priorities may unduly influence its regulatory decisions.

President Trump Calls for Reform

In response to these ongoing issues, there are growing calls for substantial reforms within the DEA, particularly concerning its handling of cannabis research. Proposals include:

• Restructuring the Diversion Control Division: Advocates suggest restructuring the division to better separate its enforcement and regulatory functions.

• Enhanced Oversight and Transparency: Increasing oversight from independent bodies or federal courts and improving transparency in the regulatory processes.

Future Outlook

As legal proceedings continue and more details emerge, the actions of Thomas Prevoznik, Matthew Strait, and other associated DEA officials will remain under a microscope. The outcome of these cases could lead to significant changes in how the DEA manages its responsibilities and could influence broader federal policies regarding drug enforcement and pharmaceutical research.

The ongoing scrutiny of the DEA's Diversion Control Division highlights a critical moment in U.S. drug policy, particularly concerning the balance between enforcement and facilitating medical advancements. Stakeholders across the pharmaceutical and legal landscapes are closely monitoring these developments, recognizing their potential to reshape the future of drug research and regulation in the United States.

MMJ is represented by attorney Megan Sheehan.

CONTACT:
Madison Hisey
[email protected]
203-231-8583

SOURCE: MMJ International Holdings

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

M.Fischer--AMWN