The one dissenting argument wasn't even ruling for ASA, et al. but ruling that they didn't even qualify to be there under Article III. The Court opinion was that they qualified to be there under Article III but still failed to prove that the DEA was arbitrary, capricious and such.

Article III means the plaintiff must prove harm and causation. The court ruled that one party did, the medical Veteran from Oregon. The dissenting ruling argued that he did not meet this definition because the VA does not deny medical benefits to medical cannabis users in the free states.

I'm not an attorney this is just what I learned from reading this. The idea that anyone could find no evidence of medical use is beyond me. Also, the fact that the DOJ/DEA/DHHS/DeptofRedundancyDept/etc. and all these other alphabet of Article III executive branch agencies can write legislation under the CSA and this not be unconstitutional is beyond me. Not to mention the fact that the DEA pyramid depends on the very laws it is writing for its annual funding from Congress. How can this be legal?

Best of luck with the appeal. If you guys need a medical Veteran from a non medical cannabis state then I have a friend that is perfect. He was told he would lose his VA benefits if he tested positive to cannabis but needs both to help deal with the pain from his injuries he sustained while in the service. I believe this satisfy all the elements of the Article III qualification needed to argue in federal appeals court.



================================================
Opinion for the Court filed by Senior Circuit Judge
EDWARDS.

Under the Administrative Procedure Act, a court may set
aside an agency??s final decision only if it is ??arbitrary,
capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in
accordance with law.?

Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge HENDERSON.

KAREN LECRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge, dissenting
----------------------------------------------------
To press their claim, the petitioners must establish that at
least one of them has standing. ..
Article III standing has three elements: ??(1) injury-in-fact, (2)
causation, and (3) redressability.?