The National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.

Circuit rejected a request from the National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association, or NDASA, and MMJ International Holdings to put the Trump administration's cannabis rescheduling move off.

on hold while litigation challenging the reform indeed continues.

The court ruled on Wednesday that petitioners had not satisfied the stringent requirements necessary for a stay.

That's a good thing and that is significant.

NDASA and MMJ International had argued that rescheduling could increase marijuana use and financially benefit cannabis companies through the elimination of 280 But the DOJ, they pushed back, arguing that these challengers have what the DOJ described as, quote, pocketbook interest served by keeping marijuana in Schedule 1.

So careful what you ask for here, because it appears the roles have been reversed.

Now, an important distinction, this does not end the lawsuits challenging rescheduling.

Don't forget just Sam.

It's also the National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association, the NDASA, or somebody you really don't want to bring home on Thanksgiving or to any party at all.

And that just said that they are not going to join Schedule three from being a thing.

And they will also allow for cannabis industry attorneys motion for leave to participate as amicus curiae be granted.

Okay, so this story, this is another important hurdle that's now been cleared.

So first up, the request came from the National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association, better known as the NDASA, along with MMJ International Holdings and its subsidiaries.

So these groups asked the court to issue a stay that would effectively freeze the rescheduling process while their lawsuits challenging the reform were being considered.

But according again to Marijuana Moment, the court rejected that request, finding that the petitioners had not met the high legal standard required to justify a stay.

So the broader administrative proceeding is addressing marijuana's federal scheduling status more comprehensively.

So opponents are still fighting.

That includes SAM, NDASA, and several states.

They continue to argue that the federal government changed the way it determines whether marijuana has an accepted medical use and that the new standard is legally flawed.