IRAC Case Briefs: 43.3 Craker V. Drug Enforcement Administration (Course: Legal And Regulatory – Case Study Example
Craker v Drug Enforcement Administration Issue A of Massachusetts Dr. Lyle Craker, had an application to the Drug Enforcement Administration to for permission to register for marijuana manufacture for clinical research. His argument was that there was a need for a second source of the plant material to facilitate research into medical uses of marijuana. That was to ensure enough supply of marijuana whose quality was research grade to facilitate medical applications. Although the recommendation of the administrative law judge was that Dr. Craker be granted his application, The DEA Deputy Administrator denied his application stating that the professor failed to prove measures to ensure there would be no diversion of the marijuana and the inadequacy of supply or competition (Cross and Miller 134).
The National Institute on Drug Abuse administers the contract to grow marijuana for purposes of research. Bidding for the contract is open every five years and those interested in the contract may bid at such times. The National Center for Natural Products Research is the only institution with registration from the DEA for the manufacture of marijuana.
The court observed that Dr. Craker failed to show that he could provide marijuana for less than what NIDA provided. It also noted that he could bid for the contract during renewal. There was also no demonstration by Dr. Craker of the inadequacy of the current supply of marijuana as the amount in the possession of NIDA far exceeded the current and future research demands.
The court denied Craker’s petition as it found the interpretation of the CSA permissible, and there was sufficient evidence to support the reasonability of her findings.
Cross, Frank B. and Miller, Roger L. The Legal Environment of Business: Text and Cases 9th Edition. Boston: Cengage Learning, 2014.