Federal Judge Rejects Bid To Block Medicare Cannabis Pilot Program

A legal battle over the Trump administration’s Medicare-linked CBD program has reached an epilogue, as a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit challenging it for lack of legal standing.

Judge Trevor N. McFadden, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, rejected the case brought by cannabis prohibitionist group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, MMJ International Holdings, its subsidiaries, and the other plaintiffs on Friday.

Judge McFadden concluded that the plaintiffs did not meet the basic standing requirements to proceed in federal court. The court concluded plaintiff’s alleged injuries were “too distant from the policy to support federal jurisdiction.”

The lawsuit was first filed in April by Burke Law Group earlier this year on behalf of multiple plaintiffs targeting the U.S. government agency and a controversial healthcare program seeking to change the way cannabinoid products are reaching patients nationwide.

The program, dubbed the Substance Access Beneficiary Engagement Incentive (BEI), was set up by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and aimed to bring select cannabinoid consumer products into Medicare while bypassing the standard FDA drug approval pathway, according to the press release.

The pilot was introduced on April 1, led by CMS Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz. The move was seen as a major milestone, being the first time a federal health insurance program extended coverage to products related to cannabis.

SAM, alongside other plaintiffs, quickly took action to challenge it, arguing that the program harms their interests, stating that they have already invested millions of dollars into developing cannabinoid-based drugs.

According to the April 24 Reply Brief filed with the court, the plaintiffs have requested the court to block the BEI program; pause the program, while the case is reviewed; and allow the lawsuit to proceed despite the government’s motion to dismiss.

However, Judge McFadden ruled that the plaintiffs did not clear the minimum legal bar needed to pursue their claims in federal court.

“At the outset, the Court notes that it need not tackle the bulk of questions that Plaintiffs raise in their motions,” McFadden wrote, reported The Marijuana Herald. “That is because Plaintiffs’ case suffers from a fatal flaw: the failure to establish Article III standing to bring their claims. The Court addresses only this jurisdictional hole and will dismiss the entire suit and deny Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction as moot.”