Anti-Cannabis Coalition Sues Trump Admin Over Medicare Hemp Coverage Plan
- A coalition of health advocacy and anti-cannabis groups sued the Trump Administration over Medicare coverage plans for hemp-derived CBD and THC products.
- The lawsuit challenges the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) plan to cover up to $500 annually for these products, citing lack of FDA approval and absence of a public comment process.
- The plaintiffs argue the plan violates the Social Security Act and federal administrative rules, asserting CMS lacks authority to approve Schedule I substances without congressional authorization.
- The suit seeks a temporary restraining order, injunction, and to permanently block the policy, citing risks to patient health and regulatory overreach.
A coalition of health advocacy organizations and anti-cannabis groups on Monday sued the Trump Administration over its plan to allow Medicare coverage for hemp-derived CBD and THC products. The plaintiffs include Smart Approaches to Marijuana, Cannabis Industry Victims Educating Litigators, North Carolinians Against Legalizing Marijuana, Cannabis Impact Prevention Coalition, LLC, Cannabis Industry Victims Seeking Justice, Drug Free America Foundation, Save Our Society From Drugs, Drug Watch International, Hillsborough County Anti-Drug Alliance, Illinois Family Institute, and North Carolina resident and SAM donor, David Evans.
The lawsuit was filed as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is set to begin covering CBD and THC products as a Substance Access Beneficiary Engagement Incentive (BEI). The filing names CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as defendants.
Under the proposed BEI, patients enrolled in certain federal health insurance programs could have up to $500 worth of hemp-derived products covered annually. The lawsuit claims the plan violates administrative rules because the CBD and THC products covered under the program have not received Food and Drug Administration approval, and because CMS didn’t publish a notice of proposed rulemaking, which prevented public comment.
The complaint further alleges the program would violate the Social Security Act, which “does not allow CMS to sanction the possession and use of illegal and dangerous Schedule I substances by Medicare patients without clear congressional authorization.”
“CMS’s action represents an unprecedented and unlawful assertion of binding decision-making authority that will profoundly affect the health of elderly Americans. “CMS took this action without the guardrails imposed by the administrative process, without any reasoned explanation, in conflict with the agency’s own recent APA-compliant determination, and without statutory authority.” — Smart Approaches to Marijuana, et. al vs. U.S. HHS, CMS
The filing claims that Evans would also be personally injured by the CMS changes because he’s a Medicare recipient who was not allowed to submit a public comment on the BEI and whose “healthcare relationship” with CMS is altered by the plan.
The lawsuit contends that there is a “research gap” on cannabis and hemp products for medical purposes and alleges that “commercially available CBD products are pervasively contaminated and mislabeled.”
The lawsuit seeks a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, stay of agency action amid the judicial review, and asks the court to vacate the BEI, declare it unlawful, and permanently enjoin the implementation of the policy.