Arizona Tribune - Attorney General Rescheduling Order Claimed State Marijuana Controls Were Robust. Oklahoma Law Enforcement Tells a Different Story

WASHINGTON, D.C. / ACCESS Newswire / November 15, 2026 / MMJ International Holdings, Inc. ("MMJ"), a pharmaceutical cannabinoid developer pursuing U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-regulated treatments for Huntington's disease and multiple sclerosis, is raising serious questions about the factual foundation of the Attorney General's April 28, 2026 marijuana rescheduling order following new testimony from Oklahoma law enforcement officials describing extensive failures within that state's medical marijuana regulatory system.

The revelations, reported by NC Newsline on November 13, 2026, present a significant challenge to the federal government's characterization of state medical marijuana regulatory systems as sufficiently developed to prevent diversion, protect public safety, and support a new federal registration pathway.

MMJ is a petitioner in the pending consolidated marijuana rescheduling litigation before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The Attorney General's Claim: State Marijuana Systems Have Robust Controls

In the April 28, 2026 final order, published at 91 Federal Register 22714, the Attorney General asserted that state medical marijuana regulatory programs had matured into comprehensive systems capable of fulfilling important federal oversight objectives.

The order states:

"These state regimes have developed robust infrastructure for preventing diversion, ensuring product safety, maintaining records, and conducting facility inspections"

The Attorney General further represented that the operation of state systems had been reviewed and concluded that those systems, considered collectively, demonstrated the ability to protect public health and prevent diversion.

Those findings helped justify a new federal registration process under 21 CFR § 1301.13(k), allowing qualifying state-licensed medical marijuana operators to obtain federal registrations under a framework that relies substantially on existing state oversight.

MMJ now asks a fundamental question: What evidence supports those conclusions, and how did the federal government account for documented failures in state marijuana enforcement?

Oklahoma Narcotics Official Describes a Very Different Reality

According to a November 13, 2026 report by NC Newsline, Lieutenant Colonel Mitch Smith of the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs described substantial problems arising from Oklahoma's medical marijuana licensing program during testimony before North Carolina policymakers.

Among the concerns reported:

• Approximately 8,400 commercial marijuana growers operated in Oklahoma by 2021.
• The state initially imposed no cap on the number of commercial grow licenses or the amount of marijuana that could be cultivated.
• Excess production contributed to diversion into illicit markets.
• Investigators identified 27 groups from at least 16 countries allegedly operating illegally within Oklahoma.
• Enforcement officials reported recently seizing more than 50,000 illegal marijuana plants.
• Oklahoma allocates approximately $10 million annually to a marijuana enforcement unit consisting of 48 agents and analysts.

Lt. Colonel Smith also described problems involving straw ownership arrangements, abandoned cultivation facilities, pesticide contamination concerns, and the substantial resources required to investigate illegal operations.

These statements concern reported enforcement experiences and alleged illegal activity. They do not establish that all Oklahoma medical marijuana licensees are noncompliant.

Nevertheless, they raise important questions about the effectiveness of the state's regulatory framework and the adequacy of federal reliance on state-level controls.

State Licensing Is Not Proof of Federal Regulatory Compliance

"The Attorney General told the American public that state marijuana programs had developed robust systems to prevent diversion and protect public health. Oklahoma's own narcotics enforcement officials are describing serious failures in precisely those areas," said Duane Boise, President and Chief Executive Officer of MMJ International Holdings.

"MMJ is not opposed to marijuana derived medicine. We are opposed to replacing scientific evidence and enforceable federal safeguards with regulatory assumptions that have not been adequately demonstrated."

Boise continued:

"If the federal government reviewed these state programs, where is the supporting evidence? What inspections, diversion assessments, enforcement findings, and product-safety evaluations formed the basis for the Attorney General's conclusions? These are questions that deserve answers before state licensing is relied upon as the foundation for federal controlled-substance registration."

A Federal Registration Is Not FDA Drug Approval

MMJ emphasizes that the Attorney General's order does not confer FDA approval upon state medical marijuana products.

FDA approval ordinarily requires evidence of safety and efficacy for the proposed uses, appropriate manufacturing controls, and sufficient information about a drug's identity, strength, quality, and purity.

The Attorney General's order instead created a separate federal controlled-substance registration framework for qualifying state-licensed marijuana businesses.

Under 21 CFR § 1301.13(k), that framework permits reliance on certain state requirements concerning records, medical certifications, labeling, packaging, disposal, and physical security.

The distinction matters because state authorization to distribute marijuana does not independently demonstrate that a particular product has undergone FDA evaluation for safety and effectiveness.

"Patients deserve to know the difference between a state-authorized marijuana product and an FDA-approved pharmaceutical medicine," Boise said.

"A government-issued registration should not be confused with scientific validation of the product being sold."

The Legal Question Before the D.C. Circuit

MMJ International Holdings, MMJ BioPharma Cultivation, and MMJ BioPharma Labs are petitioners in consolidated federal litigation challenging aspects of the Attorney General's marijuana rescheduling order and associated regulations.

The proceedings include D.C. Circuit Case No. 26-1130.

MMJ's legal challenge raises questions concerning the Controlled Substances Act, federal registration requirements, international treaty obligations, and the scope of the Attorney General's authority.

The Oklahoma enforcement disclosures are relevant to the policy and evidentiary questions surrounding the order's reliance on state regulatory systems.

They also underscore the importance of examining whether the administrative record adequately supports the Attorney General's conclusions concerning diversion prevention, public health protections, and state regulatory effectiveness.

The reported testimony does not, standing alone, establish that the order is unlawful. Its significance to the pending litigation depends on the administrative record, applicable standards of judicial review, and whether the evidence can properly be considered by the court.

MMJ's Pharmaceutical Development Pathway

MMJ International Holdings has pursued a different approach to developing marijuana-derived medicines through the FDA's investigational new drug framework.

Its pharmaceutical development portfolio includes:

• FDA Investigational New Drug Application 137754 for Huntington's disease.
• FDA Investigational New Drug Application 140712 for multiple sclerosis.
• FDA Orphan Drug Designation for a THC/CBD combination intended to treat Huntington's disease.
• A standardized cannabinoid soft-gel formulation containing THC and CBD.
• Approximately 50,000 capsules manufactured under pharmaceutical current Good Manufacturing Practice conditions for investigational development.

Through its subsidiaries, MMJ has also pursued DEA authorizations supporting controlled-substance research, analytical testing, and pharmaceutical manufacturing.

These development activities do not mean that MMJ's investigational products have received FDA marketing approval.

They demonstrate the company's commitment to developing cannabinoid medicines through a pathway requiring scientific evaluation and federal regulatory oversight.

MMJ Calls for Transparency in Federal Marijuana Oversight

MMJ believes federal policymakers should make available the evidence supporting the Attorney General's findings regarding state medical marijuana controls.

That evidence should include, where available, state inspection findings, enforcement records, diversion assessments, product-testing deficiencies, and the methodology used to evaluate state regulatory performance.

"This is not a debate about whether marijuana should be researched or whether patients may benefit from cannabinoid medicines," Boise concluded.

"It is about whether the federal government followed the law, relied on adequate evidence, and maintained meaningful safeguards when establishing a new pathway for the manufacture and distribution of controlled substances. The public deserves answers, and so do the courts."

About MMJ International Holdings, Inc.

MMJ International Holdings, Inc. is a pharmaceutical development company focused on cannabinoid-based investigational medicines for serious neurological diseases, including Huntington's disease and multiple sclerosis.

Through MMJ BioPharma Cultivation, Inc. and MMJ BioPharma Labs, Inc., the company is pursuing the federal regulatory infrastructure necessary to support pharmaceutical cannabinoid research, analytical testing, cultivation, and manufacturing.

MMJ's mission is to advance cannabinoid medicines through scientific research, consistent pharmaceutical quality standards, and compliance with applicable FDA and DEA requirements.

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

Sources and Regulatory References

Attorney General's Final Order:
Schedules of Controlled Substances, 91 FR 22714-22723 (April 28, 2026).
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-04-28/pdf/2026-08176.pdf

Oklahoma Enforcement Report:
Clayton Henkel, Oklahoma law enforcement offers hard lessons as NC weighs cannabis legalization recommendations, NC Newsline, November 13, 2026.
https://ncnewsline.com/2026/11/13/oklahoma-law-enforcement-offers-hard-lessons-as-nc-weighs-cannabis-legalization-recommendations/

Federal Regulation:
21 CFR § 1301.13(k), Medical Marijuana Registrations.

Federal Litigation:
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Case No. 26-1130.

SOURCE: MMJ International Holdings

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

R.Chavez--AT