Stocks & Bonds Slammed On Stagflation Scares & Tech Tumult

Stocks & Bonds Slammed On Stagflation Scares & Tech Tumult

A rebound in prices paid in the Services sector surveys combined with hawkish comments from Boston Fed’s Collins to send the dollar higher and stocks, bonds, bitcoin, and gold all lower. Oil prices bucked the trend.

Today’s price action is consistent with the market dynamic we’ve seen play out over the past few months, characterized by elevated sensitivity to economic data, with equity markets seemingly adopting a ‘bad news is good news’ view, rallying on weak growth data, and selling off on strong data – amid fears that too strong data will increase the risk of an additional rate hike.

Rate-hike expectations jumped hawkishly higher after Collins told business leaders in Boston that:

This phase of our policy cycle requires patience, and holistic data assessment, while we stay the course… And while we may be near, or even at, the peak for policy rates, further tightening could be warranted, depending on the incoming data.”

With Nov odds of a hike jumping from 30% to around 45%m back up to where they were post-Powell Jackson-Hole speech…

Source: Bloomberg

‘Soft’ (survey) data soared to its strongest since Jan 2022 today while ‘hard’ data slumped to its weakest since May 2023…

Source: Bloomberg

So ‘soft’ survey data is showing price pressures rebounding and ‘hard’ data shows growth is slowing – smells like stagflation to us.

All of which weighed on stocks, dragging them all lower with Nasdaq the ugliest horse in today’s glue factory (down around 1%), Small Caps were the least ugly but all majors indices are lower on the week (since Friday) with Russell 2000 hammered…

The S&P 500 closed back below its 50DMA (joining The Dow and Small Caps). Nasdaq found support at its 50DMA today…

The so-called ‘Magnificent 7’ stocks were slammed today – the biggest drop in a month (not helped by AAPL – hit by reports that China is banning iPhones from goct agencies; and pressure on the social media giants from EU regulatory designations)…

Source: Bloomberg

NVDA tumbled back to pre-earnings levels…

NVDA saw some modest 0-DTE call-buiying as it started to lose momentum but that was overhwlkemed by put-buying negative delataq flow into the bell…

Source: SpotGamma

0-DTE traders tried to fade the initial dump in AAPL too… then covered before a wave of 0-DTE put-buying sent the largest market cap companyt in the world dramatically lower…

Source: SpotGamma

Regional banks were dumped on the back of front-end yields rising (implying a lack of relief on the funding costs front)…

Treasuries were also dumped – especially at the shorter-end – helped by surging oil prices (2Y +7bps, 30Y unch)…

Source: Bloomberg

The yield curve (2s30s) flattened (inverted deeper), reversing all of the payrolls steepening…

Source: Bloomberg

The dollar extended recent gains – to its highest close since March…

Source: Bloomberg

Crypto was marginally lower on the day but Bitcoin saw some crazy (illiquid) moves intraday as it dived to run stops from last week’s payroll drop then ran stops at $26,000 then dived back down again…

Source: Bloomberg

Oil prices bucked the broad risk-off trend, rising for the 9th straight session to close at 10-month highs with WTI topping $88…

Gold prices tumbled with Spot falling down to its 200DMA and finding support…

The relative outperformance of oil over gold has pushed the number of barrels of Saudi Crude per ounce of gold down to around 20… where next?

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, as Goldman’s Brian Garrett noted this morning, it has been 91 days since the S&P 500 suffered a 1.5% loss or greater in a day

That’s unusual – it has happened only 5 times in the last 15 years. As we have discussed recently, Sep + Oct are seasonally-volatile months

…and, at the same time, Goldman’s index-trading desk highlights the “low-ness” of equity protection costs.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/06/2023 – 16:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/m2q0jLU Tyler Durden

ADL “Has Lost Its Way”; CEO Claims Musk Is ‘Inciting Violence Against Jewish People By Criticizing Us’

ADL “Has Lost Its Way”; CEO Claims Musk Is ‘Inciting Violence Against Jewish People By Criticizing Us’

The Musk vs ADL (and the censorship industrial complex) battle escalated further this morning with the X/Twitter owner highlighting a new article from Newsweek:

“The ADL taught me that nastygrams from Jew haters were just the price we pay for liberty, worthy of being filed and forgotten,” writes Ron Coleman in the op-ed.

“This is not Weimar Germany; it is America. We have a First Amendment, we have civil rights, we have a working democracy.

That is part of the good we have done.

“But” Coleman explains, “the ADL no longer believes this…”

“It has become part of a great online censorship machine that is being exposed day after day as an anti-free speech enterprise.”

The following clip suggests just that…

As Coleman concludes:

“The ADL’s efforts to censor Twitter confirms what we have known for years: Not only is today’s ADL not doing the world some good. It is doing something much worse. How much longer will we be allowed to say so?”

As InformationLiberation.com’s Chris Menahan detailed earlier, Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt on Tuesday responded to Twitter/X owner Elon Musk’s criticism of their aggressive pro-censorship ad boycott campaigns by accusing him of “engaging with a highly toxic antisemitic campaign” which will incite violence against Jewish people.

From Haaretz, “ADL Hits Back at Elon Musk for Engaging With ‘Highly Toxic Antisemitic Campaign’ “:

Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt on Tuesday issued his first public comments after an antisemitic social media campaign spearheaded by X chairman Elon Musk targeted his organization.

“It is profoundly disturbing that Elon Musk spent the weekend engaging with a highly toxic antisemitic campaign on his platform – a campaign started by an unrepentant bigot that then was heavily promoted by individuals such as white supremacist Nick Fuentes, Christian nationalist Andrew Torba, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and others,” Greenblatt said.

Musk had defended himself against allegations of antisemitism, all while he and several of his prominent far-right supporters accused the ADL of fomenting antisemitism in an act of explicit victim-blaming. Musk further threatened to take legal action against the Jewish anti-discrimination organization, accusing it of being behind the company’s $22 billion drop in value after advertisers fled en masse over the proliferation of hate speech on the platform following his takeover.

Greenblatt noted that the campaign “manifested in the real world when masked men marched in Florida on Saturday brazenly waving flags adorned with swastikas and chanting ‘Ban the ADL.’ “

“But to be clear, the real issue is neither ADL nor the threat of a frivolous lawsuit. This urgent matter is the safety of the Jewish people in the face of increasing, intensifying antisemitism,” he continued.

The ADL CEO charged Musk with engaging with and elevating these antisemites at a time of unprecedented spikes in antisemitism targeting Jewish institutions and private residential communities.

“And so, this behavior is not just alarming nor reckless. It is flat out dangerous and deeply irresponsible. We need responsible leaders to lead, to stop inflaming hatred and to step back from the brink before it’s too late,” Greenblatt added.

Musk can probably add this inflammatory rhetoric to his lawsuit against the ADL.

Without a doubt, the time when the most “unprecedented spikes in antisemitism targeting Jewish institutions” occurred was in 2017 after Trump’s election when over 245 bomb threats were called into Jewish community centers throughout America.

The ADL used the threats to harangue President Trump for “emboldening anti-Semites” and legislation was passed as a result of lobbying from the ADL to increase funding and security grants to Jewish groups.

It turned out nearly all of the JCC bomb threats were carried out by “18 year old” Israeli-American Michael Ron David Kadar, who was found to have a bitcoin wallet worth millions of shekels (a few copycat threats were called in by African-American Juan Thompson).

Zero photographs of Kadar’s face were ever released.

Kadar was found guilty in Israel in June 2018 for the bomb threats and sentenced to ten years in prison.

In 2019, evidence was dug up by geneticist Franklin Stahl, Ph.D., a member of the National Academy of Science, suggesting that Kadar’s Israeli mother, Dr. Tamar Kadar, who is a chemical weapons researcher at the Mossad-operated Israeli Institute for Biological Research, may have been the real culprit behind the calls.

Stahl reported that Kadar, who evidence indicates was actually 27 years old and not 18 years old at the time of his arrest, was nothing more than a fall guy.

Additionally, Kadar appears to have been freed from prison by Israel and allowed to travel back to America only to be arrested and jailed on a weapons charge in Illinois.

Kadar’s story completely fell off the map shortly after it was uncritically reported in 2017 and the ADL refused to remove his hoax calls from their list of “anti-Semitic incidents” for 2017.

The ADL never apologized to Trump or his supporters for smearing them for supposedly inciting these (hoax) bomb threats and never offered to give back the money they got from Congress due to hyping the threats.

“The new information does not change our view that the bomb threats against Jewish institutions were anti-Semitic and harmful to the communities targeted,” the ADL said in a press release after Kadar’s arrest.

“No matter who placed the calls or why the calls were placed, the outcome was the same: they instilled fear and disrupted communities across the country.”

This battle – between Musk and the activist censors – is far from over.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/06/2023 – 15:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/ji84pZa Tyler Durden

Goldman Clients Freaked Out By Tumbling Homebuilders; Here’s What Caused It

Goldman Clients Freaked Out By Tumbling Homebuilders; Here’s What Caused It

Over the weekend, when looking at the latest market dislocations, we told readers in our private twitter feed (which is open to subscribers) that long retailers (XRT)/short homebuilders (XHB) could be a “stellar convergence trade“…

… and no sooner did we tell readers that homebuilder luck may have run out now that 30Y mortgage rates are back to generational highs, than we saw the XHB tumble 4%, double the slide in the XRT, and a solid start to bets that the outperformance of homebuilders vs retailers is now over.

We were therefore not surprised to read in Goldman’s EOD wrap late last night, that the bank’s trading desk was “peppered with questions on weakness, notably within homebuilders with the group -6% on the day (2 sigma move lower).”

According to Goldman, the biggest catalyst for the hit to homebuilders, was the sharp resumption of Friday’s rate steepening (the US 10Y jumped +9bps to 4.27%, and flirting with YTD highs) which drove broader pockets of heavy weakness on long duration assets (R2K sold off -210bps). Goldman thinks this was a product of

  • 1) heavy IG corp supply
  • 2) crude rallying +1.3% on the back of Saudi 1M b/d production cut extension through December
  • 3) positioning as longs are unwound by HFs (similar to Friday, our rates desk saw steepening flows from levered accounts).

Goldman’s traders add that in addition to the aforementioned points on rising yields and crude, there was also a mixed (negative) “competitor note which highlighted that channel feedback across a range of building product categories/suppliers continues to highlight solid new construction momentum BUT with underwhelming remodel activity.”

And then there was offside positioning, which however is not as short as it once was as most got stopped out after better than expected earnings. Bottom line: “pressure on homebuilders is 90% rates/oil trade.”

The move in homebuilders was also discussed by Goldman trader Rich Privorotsky this morning, when he said that while the Tuesday drop was an outlier, it was also “odd how much they rallied into Labor day. I find homebuilders to be the poster boy of soft landing. Strong labor markets and higher for longer rates is ironically creating the perfect set of conditions that is a.) severely restricting existing home supply (can’t move if your new mortgages is 2-3x your old one) and b.)  the lack of recession means demand is good enough to sustain a need for new homes/household formation.”

However, echoing our caution (and in part, trade reco), Privorotsky notes that “the trade is very convex on the downside, if the economy slows enough rates will come down (mobility returns to housing market)…peculiarly lower prices could create more supply.”

It’s then that the XHB short – which is effectively a bet on a hardish landing/recession – will really pay off.

More in the full notes available to pro subs.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/06/2023 – 15:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/Nzr6q8B Tyler Durden

Ominous Beige Book Warns Consumers “Exhaust Savings” As Recession Mentions Soar To 5 Year High

Ominous Beige Book Warns Consumers “Exhaust Savings” As Recession Mentions Soar To 5 Year High

The Fed’s latest beige book released this afternoon was a rather boring affair, one signaling US economic growth was “modest” during July and August.

What was most interesting within this drab big picture, was the divergence within consumer spending, where according to the Beige Book, “consumer spending on tourism was stronger than expected, surging during what most contacts considered the last stage of pent-up demand for leisure travel from the pandemic era.” But, it’s the other side of the equation that was more concerning, as the Fed found that “other retail spending continued to slow, especially on non-essential items.”

And the punchline: “some Districts highlighted reports suggesting consumers may have exhausted their savings and are relying more on borrowing to support spending.” Bingo: this is precisely what we said last week in “US Consumers Paid For July Spending Spree By Burning Through $150BN In Savings“, and while the Fed is right that households have burned though savings, it is wrong that they have borrowing capacity to support spending: as we showed last month, households paid down credit card debt for the first time since the covid crash, a clear sign that US consumers are now hunkering down.

Here are some other details from the latest Beige Book:

  • New auto sales did expand in many Districts, but contacts noted this had more to do with better availability of inventory rather than increased consumer demand.
  • Manufacturing contacts in several Districts also noted that supply chain delays improved, and that they were better able to meet existing orders.
  • New orders were stable or declined in most Districts, and backlogs shortened as demand for manufactured goods waned.
  • One sector where supply did not become more available was single-family housing. Nearly all Districts reported the inventory of homes for sale remained constrained.
  • Accordingly, new construction activity picked up for single-family housing. But multiple Districts noted that construction of affordable housing units was increasingly challenged by higher financing costs and rising insurance premiums.
  • Bankers from different Districts had mixed experiences with growth in loan demand. Most indicated that consumer loan balances rose, and some Districts reported higher delinquencies on consumer credit lines.
  • Agriculture conditions were somewhat mixed, but reports of drought and higher input costs were widespread.
  • Energy activity was mostly unchanged during the final months of the summer

Turning to labor markets, the Beige Book noted that “job growth was subdued across the nation. Though hiring slowed, most Districts indicated imbalances persisted in the labor market as the availability of skilled workers and the number of applicants remained constrained. Worker retention improved in several Districts, but only in certain sectors such as manufacturing and transportation.” And the clearest sign yet that the wage party is over, “many contacts suggested “the second half of the year will be different” when describing wage growth.” For now, however, growth in labor cost pressures was elevated in most Districts (thanks to Biden’s explicit greenlighting of Labor union demands for double digit wage increases) often exceeding expectations during the first half of the year. “But nearly all Districts indicated businesses renewed their previously unfulfilled expectations that wage growth will slow broadly in the near term.”

Turning to prices, most Districts reported price growth slowed overall, decelerating faster in manufacturing and consumer-goods sectors. However, and as discussed here previously, “several Districts highlighted sharp increases in property insurance costs during the past few months.”

The worst news however is that the profit margin expansion is over as “contacts in several Districts indicated input price growth slowed less than selling prices, as businesses struggled to pass along cost pressures. As a result, profit margins reportedly fell in several Districts.

Turning to the specific regional Feds, we found these summaries notable:

  • Boston: Business activity expanded modestly on balance. New car inventories normalized further but used cars remained scarce.  Home sales fell further, resulting in a disappointing spring and summer season. Concerning the outlook, fewer contacts mentioned a recession as a looming risk and pricing pressures were expected to ease further.
  • New York: Regional economic activity held steady through the summer. Labor market conditions generally remained solid, with steady wage growth. Consumer spending grew steadily, while manufacturing activity declined. Home sales remained constrained due to low inventory and rising mortgage rates. Inflationary pressures picked up slightly after easing much of the past year.
  • Philadelphia: Business activity continued to decline slightly during the current Beige Book period. Although manufacturers indicated an uptick in August, consumer spending declined overall as did nonmanufacturing activity. Labor availability improved further, and employment edged up once more. Wage growth and inflation continued to subside. Sentiment was somewhat divided, but expectations generally grew more positive.
  • Cleveland: Economic activity was generally flat in the Fourth District, though conditions shifted notably in some industries. While consumer spending and demand for manufactured goods softened, freight activity stabilized, and nonresidential  construction activity increased. Contacts expected similar economic conditions to persist in the near term.
  • Richmond: The regional economy grew slightly in recent weeks. Consumer spending on retail and food service, as well as on travel and tourism, picked up modestly. Manufacturers noted a decrease in demand. Transportation volumes remained steady across freight modes. Residential real estate was constrained by limited inventory. Commercial real estate activity and lending declined. Employment increased moderately and price growth eased slightly.
  • Atlanta: Economic activity grew modestly. Labor markets improved, and wage pressures eased. Nonlabor costs moderated, on net. Retail sales were robust. New auto sales were strong. Domestic leisure travel slowed, while international and business travel rose. Housing demand was durable. Transportation activity slowed. Energy demand was strong. Agricultural conditions were mixed.
  • Chicago: Economic activity increased slightly. Employment increased moderately; business and consumer spending increased slightly; construction and real estate was flat; nonbusiness contacts saw little change in activity; and manufacturing decreased slightly. Prices and wages rose moderately, while financial conditions tightened moderately. Expectations for farm incomes in 2023 were little changed.
  • St. Louis: Economic conditions have remained unchanged since our previous report. Employers reported continued tight labor markets and easing wage growth. Businesses struggled to pass on price increases and reported continuing increases in  price sensitivity and weaker demand for high-end goods.
  • Minneapolis: Regional economic activity crept up on balance. Employment grew slightly, with hiring activity remaining healthy. Wage pressures were flat, while job seekers prioritized work-life balance. Prices increased moderately; firms were finding it harder to pass on higher costs. Consumer spending rose and auto sales benefited from improved inventory. Manufacturing and real estate activity fell; farm conditions weakened.
  • Kansas City: Economic activity across the District was stable over the last two months. Manufacturing production and sales at service businesses improved due to a greater ability to meet existing orders, as delays along supply chains were resolved. Job growth remained flat, but wage growth continued to exceed historical norms and businesses’ expectations. Contacts  renewed expectations for slower wage growth ahead. Prices grew at a moderate pace.
  • Dallas: Modest expansion continued, though activity was mixed across sectors. Solid growth was seen in the nonfinancial services sector, while retail sales were flat and activi-ty in the manufacturing, energy, and financial services sectors declined. Employment growth picked up slightly overall, and wage growth remained high. Price pressures remained elevated in the service sector. Outlooks were fairly stable, though uncertainty persists.
  • San Francisco: Economic activity strengthened slightly. Labor availability improved and wage pressures softened further. Price increases persisted, albeit at a slower pace. Retail sales rose slightly, on balance, and manufacturing activity was stable. Lending activity moderated in recent weeks. Local communities observed increased demand for support services, particularly in areas impacted by wildfires and other severe weather in Hawaii and California.

Finally, taking a visual approach to the data, we find that the mentions of inflation were the fewest since Jan 2022…

… although the chart above correlates perfectly, if with a 3 month lag, to the price of oil. So expect a jump in inflation mentions next month when the Beige Book participants realize that crude oil is at 2023 highs.

And while mentions of “slow” persisted at a far higher rate…

… what we found most interesting is that mentions of recession jumped to the highest level since at least 2018. Granted, some were in a favorable context, but the fact that there have been so many mentions of a word which as recently as 2020 and 2021 barely existed in the Beige Book vocabulary, tells you all you need to know about what the Fed is most worried about today.

More in the full Beige Book (link).

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/06/2023 – 15:08

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/VtzuR2s Tyler Durden

Free “2023 Supplement” for “Firearms Law and the Second Amendment”

If you would like to know what’s been going on with right to arms litigation in the past two years, you’re in luck. Published a few weeks ago is the 2023 Supplement to Firearms Law and the Second Amendment: Regulation, Rights, and Policy, coauthored by me and Nicholas Johnson (Fordham), George Mocsary (Wyoming, Director of the Firearms Research Center), Gregory Wallace (Campbell), and Donald Kilmer (Lincoln). In 330 pages, the supplement brings you up to date on the legal developments on the right to arms in 2022 and 2023.

The third edition of that textbook was published in late 2021. At 1,400 pages and $275, it’s a bargain when calculated on cost per word. But the supplement is absolutely free, even if you didn’t buy the main textbook.

Of course, the supplement examines in depth the U.S. Supreme Court’s monumental Bruen decision from June 2022. That case affirmed the right to bear arms in public for lawful self-defense. More broadly, Bruen instructed lower courts to decide Second Amendment cases the way that Court had decided District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008: based on the original meaning of the Second Amendment, rather than on judges’ personal evaluations of the costs and benefits of gun control. The 2023 Supplement catalogues the profusion of cases challenging many different laws on the ground that they are contrary to the Second Amendment’s original meaning.

Although Firearms Law and the Second Amendment and its 2023 Supplement were created for use in advanced law school courses, they are also a treatise meant to be useful to courts, practitioners, and interested laypersons. That is why the textbook has been cited in five U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals opinions (including by then-Judge Kavanaugh), by the Illinois Supreme Court, and five other cases from lower courts. The textbook has been cited in 91 briefs in the Westlaw database, including by Everytown for Gun Safety, and twice this August in United States government briefs in the Circuit Courts of Appeals.

Among the many topics in the 2023 Supplement are firearm bans aimed at young adults; various categories of prohibited persons under federal law (such as marijuana users); new federal ATF regulations against pistol braces and other devices; the incompetently-drafted 2022 congressional Bipartisan Safer Communities Act; litigation of some state governments’ “massive resistance” to accepting the right to licensed concealed carry; and international developments in Canada and elsewhere.

Starting with the first edition of Firearms Law in 2012, the textbook has been a cyclopedia of the legal history of the right to arms, including the broader social and technological context. That continues with the 2023 Supplement; the final section of the supplement is a detailed explanation of the evolution of firearms technology: in particular, how the kinds of guns—such as breechloading repeaters—that in the 1500s were only available to people like King Henry VIII became affordable for the 1800s to the average American.

As Dr. Seuss observed, “The more that you read the more things you will know.” So if you want to know more things, I invite you to read the 2023 Supplement to Firearms Law and the Second Amendment.

[This post will be cross-posted at the Firearms Research Center Forum, the weblog of the University of Wyoming’s new Firearms Research Center. I am a Senior Fellow at the Center. Contributors to the FRC Forum include “pro-gun” writers, such as me, and also gun control advocates such as law professors Dru Stevenson (South Texas) and Megan Walsh (Minnesota).]

 

 

 

The post Free "2023 Supplement" for "Firearms Law and the Second Amendment" appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/ON6B5Hq
via IFTTT

35 Years Ago, a Judge Said Marijuana Did Not Belong in Schedule I. HHS Finally Agrees.


Cannabis leaves | MIS Photography

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) last week recommended that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) move marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, the law’s most restrictive category, to Schedule III, which includes prescription drugs such as anabolic steroids and Tylenol with codeine. Thirty-five years ago today, Francis Young, the DEA’s chief administrative law judge, likewise concluded that marijuana did not belong in Schedule I, which also includes illegal drugs such as heroin, LSD, psilocybin, and MDMA.

Although Young’s conclusions ultimately were rejected by DEA Administrator John Lawn, his decision was a milestone in marijuana reform that highlighted the irrationality of the drug’s legal classification. It is worth another look now that the DEA, in response to the HHS recommendation, may finally acknowledge, after half a century of steadfast resistance, that marijuana does not meet the statutory criteria for Schedule I.

Young’s 1988 ruling came after 16 years of litigation that demonstrated how determined the DEA was to maintain the total prohibition of marijuana, no matter what the relevant evidence showed. In 1972, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and two other groups petitioned the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD), the DEA’s predecessor agency, asking it to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule V, the least restrictive category, or deschedule it entirely. The BNDD initially refused even to consider the petition, claiming that it would violate the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

Even if that might be true, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in 1974, “the point is not obvious or clear-cut, but requires a reflective consideration and analysis.” The appeals court said the BNDD’s position “should have been reflected in an action denying the petition on the merits.” As the D.C. Circuit saw it, the agency’s shortcut was inconsistent with “the kind of interchange and refinement of views that is the life-blood of a sound administrative process.”

On remand, Young noted, the DEA held a three-day hearing, after which an administrative law judge “found in NORML’s favor on several issues.” But the agency’s acting administrator “entered a final order denying NORML’s petition ‘in all respects.'”

NORML again appealed to the D.C. Circuit, which in 1977 told the DEA to try again. The appeals court questioned the DEA’s interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act and ordered it to seek a review of marijuana’s classification from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (now HHS), then follow the rule-making process required by the statute. In 1979, the department concluded that marijuana should stay in Schedule I, and 10 days later, without any further proceedings, the DEA again rejected NORML’s petition.

NORML once again asked the D.C. Circuit to intervene. In an unpublished 1980 order, the appeals court said that “reconsideration of all the issues in this case would be appropriate” and again remanded the matter to the DEA. So after three rebukes by the D.C. Circuit and another HHS review, the case finally landed in front of Young in 1986, 14 years after the original petition.

At this point, the issue had been narrowed to whether marijuana should be moved from Schedule I to Schedule II, which includes many prescription opioids, along with cocaine, amphetamines, Ritalin, and some barbiturates. In making that judgment, Young focused on two Schedule I criteria: The substance has no “currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States” and lacks “accepted safety” for use “under medical supervision.”

Based mainly on doctors’ practices and opinions, along with patients’ experiences, Young concluded that marijuana did have a “currently accepted medical use” as a treatment for the nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had implicitly recognized that fact in 1985 when it approved Marinol—a synthetic version of THC, marijuana’s main active ingredient—as an anti-emetic. But as Young noted, smoked marijuana had several advantages over Marinol: It did not require swallowing a capsule and keeping it down, an obvious challenge for people who are nauseated and vomiting; it did not entail metabolism of THC through the liver, which some patients found produced unpleasant psychoactive effects; it could deliver relief immediately; and it allowed patients to titrate their doses based on that immediate effect.

“The overwhelming preponderance of the evidence in this record establishes that marijuana has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States for nausea and vomiting resulting from chemotherapy treatments in some cancer patients,” Young wrote. “To conclude otherwise, on this record, would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious,” in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Young also ruled that marijuana had a “currently accepted medical use” as a treatment for spasticity caused by multiple sclerosis and other conditions. “It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious to find otherwise,” he said.

As for marijuana’s safety under medical supervision, Young noted that “marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man.” After reviewing the relevant research, he found that “there are simply no credible medical reports to suggest that consuming marijuana has caused a single death.” By contrast, it was well-established that both over-the-counter and FDA-approved prescription drugs could kill people when consumed in large doses. For aspirin, Young noted, the ratio of the lethal dose to the effective dose was about 20 to 1, while the ratio for many prescription drugs, such as Valium, was 10 to 1 or even lower. With marijuana, he said, that ratio “is impossible to quantify because it is so high.”

Based on “the facts established in this record,” Young said, “one must reasonably conclude that there is accepted safety for use of marijuana under medical supervision.” And again, “to conclude otherwise, on this record, would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious.”

The DEA, of course, had a long history, well illustrated by this case, of making “unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious” decisions. Unfazed by Young’s findings, Lawn decided that marijuana belonged in Schedule I because its medical use was not sufficiently accepted. He officially rejected NORML’s petition in 1992.

This time the D.C. Circuit upheld the DEA’s decision. In its final appeal, NORML argued that the DEA had shown bias by ignoring relevant evidence. The appeals court did not buy it.

“The need to remand a case several times is not evidence per se of agency prejudice,” the D.C. Circuit said in 1994. “Nor do we think the statements cited by petitioners show that the Administrator was unfair, especially when considered in the context of a reasonable preference for rigorous scientific proof over anecdotal evidence, even when reported by respected physicians.”

In the years since, that “anecdotal evidence” has been reinforced by research indicating that marijuana is effective at relieving various symptoms, including epileptic seizures and neuropathic pain as well as nausea and muscle spasms. But that additional evidence has not swayed the DEA, which has rejected every petition asking it to reschedule marijuana, most recently in 2020.

In rejecting that petition, the DEA noted its 2016 denial of a similar request, a decision that was based on a “scientific and medical evaluation” by HHS. While “DEA recognizes the possibility that drugs containing marijuana or its derivatives might, in the future, be proven to be safe and effective for the treatment of certain conditions and thus approved” by the FDA, it said in 2020, marijuana would remain in Schedule I until that happened.

That denial resulted in a lawsuit emphasizing that many states had approved marijuana as a medicine. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that the case was not ripe because the petitioners had “failed to exhaust their administrative remedies with the DEA.” But in a concurring opinion, one member of the three-judge panel acknowledged the force of the petitioners’ claims. “In an appropriate case,” 9th Circuit Judge Paul Watford, a Barack Obama appointee, wrote, the DEA “may well be obliged to initiate a reclassification proceeding for marijuana, given the strength of petitioners’ arguments that the agency has misinterpreted the controlling statute by concluding that marijuana ‘has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.'”

That obligation begins now in light of the HHS recommendation, which resulted from a review that President Joe Biden ordered last October. By urging the DEA to reschedule marijuana, HHS implicitly rejected the DEA’s position that “accepted medical use” requires FDA approval. And although the practical effects of moving marijuana to Schedule III would be relatively modest, leaving federal prohibition essentially untouched, it would be nice to see the DEA admit, for once, that it was wrong.

The post 35 Years Ago, a Judge Said Marijuana Did Not Belong in Schedule I. HHS Finally Agrees. appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/ZSR64fC
via IFTTT

Justice or Persecution? The Trump Dilemma


Donald Trump's Georgia mugshot | Illustration: Lex Villena

“Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election well deserves punishment from the standpoint of both retribution and deterrence,” wrote George Mason University Law Professor Ilya Somin following the four-count indictment filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith in early August. “For the head of state in a democracy, there are few more serious crimes than using fraud to try to stay in power after losing an election.”

Somin has also said that “some of the charges seem compelling” in the case against Trump in Fulton County, Georgia.

Critics of the indictments have pointed out the conspicuous timing of the scheduled trial date, accused Trump’s prosecutors of trying to “criminalize speech,” and suggested that the former president is being held to a double standard. Others worry the prosecution will inspire “ever more aggressive tit-for-tat investigations.”

Join Reason‘s Zach Weissmueller and Liz Wolfe for a live discussion about the political and social ramifications of the Trump indictments with Somin this Thursday at 12 p.m. Eastern on Reason‘s YouTube channel or Facebook page.

Sources referenced in this conversation:

Ilya Somin: “Retribution, Deterrence, and the Case for Prosecuting Trump for Conspiring to Overturn the 2020 Election” 

Ilya Somin: “The Georgia Case Against Trump” 

William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen on Trump’s presidential eligibility and the 14th Amendment 

The Washington Post: “FBI resisted opening probe into Trump’s involvement in Jan. 6 for more than a year

John Eastman’s memo for how to challenge the 2020 election results

    The post Justice or Persecution? The Trump Dilemma appeared first on Reason.com.

    from Latest https://ift.tt/ifcDZ0M
    via IFTTT

    Blinken To Unveil $1BN More In US Taxpayer Aid, Poses With Puppy, In Surprise Kyiv Visit

    Blinken To Unveil $1BN More In US Taxpayer Aid, Poses With Puppy, In Surprise Kyiv Visit

    US Secretary of State Antony Blinken made a surprise visit to Ukraine on Wednesday at a moment of waning Western faith in the ability of the counteroffensive to make any breakthroughs. It marks the highest level visit by an American official since last February President Biden visited Kyiv for the first time.

    Like with prior trips, Blinken came bearing gifts, announcing over $1 billion in new US aid – while Moscow has charged that Washington will fund Kyiv until the “last Ukrainian”. But Blinken’s message is: “We want to make sure that Ukraine has what it needs, not only to succeed in the counteroffensive, but has what it needs for the long term, to make sure that it has a strong deterrent,” he told reporters.

    Blinken poses with puppy: the US top diplomat holds a mine-detection dog during a visit to the children’s hospital in Kyiv on September 8. via Reuters

    The trip and announcement seems to confirm that the Zelensky government’s latest bold moves related to anti-corruption “house cleaning” was done at the behest of Washington and NATO, likely for the sake of PR and to keep US taxpayer dollars flowing into Kiev’s coffers.

    “I’m here first and foremost to demonstrate our ongoing and determined support for Ukraine as it deals with this aggression,” Blinken assured.

    To review of the immediate context, only in the past days and week

    • Ukraine’s government cracked down on corrupt army recruiters
    • Zelensky sacked his defense minister amid a long-running corruption probe related to overpriced contracts for military items
    • Zelensky in an interview said a presidential election during wartime is impossible, but hinted there could be a path forward if the West funds it

    Interestingly, the newly appointed defense minister to replace Oleksii Reznikov is a Tatar Muslim originally from Crimea (was he another diversity hire?) named Rustem Umerov, and he’s been swiftly approved by parliament. Umerov had previously been chairman of Ukraine’s State Property Fund.

    A meeting between Blinken and Zelensky is expected to happen Wednesday evening (local time). Like other Western leaders, Blinken flew into Eastern Europe and completed the final leg of the trip to Kyiv by train.

    Blinken’s trip is taking place just after a new major aerial assault by Russia reportedly killed at least 16 in the city of Kostiantynivka in eastern Ukraine, according to an update by Zelensky. On Telegram he condemned “The audacity of evil” and what he further called “The brazenness of wickedness. Utter inhumanity.”

    “At this moment, the attack by Russian terrorists has killed 16 people…a regular market. Shops. A pharmacy. People who did nothing wrong. Many wounded. Unfortunately, the number of casualties and injured may rise. My condolences to all who have lost loved ones!” Zelensky added in the written statement, “The Russian evil must be defeated as soon as possible.”

    As for the faltering counteroffensive, the NY Times has tried to paint a rosier picture than what’s been featured in the last months:

    Mr. Blinken was expected to meet with President Volodymyr Zelensky on Wednesday evening. His visit comes as the Ukrainian counteroffensive in the southeast has gained some traction after three months of grueling, bloody fighting. Ukrainian troops have broken through a main line of Russia’s defenses in one location, Ukraine’s Army has said, and are turning their attention to breaking through in another heavily defended patch of territory.

    The State Department official cited Ukraine’s “impressive progress” on the battlefield in recent weeks. But swift gains are unlikely, military analysts say…

    Meanwhile, it should be noted that many of the earliest pics of Blinken’s surprise visit to hit the web and news feeds featured him posing with a cute dog. Was this meant more for American public consumption? Per the NYT:

    Soon after arriving in Kyiv, Mr. Blinken was introduced to Patron, a mine-sniffing Jack Russell Terrier that is a much-loved mascot for Ukraine’s war effort. Mr. Blinken petted and held Patron, a video posted by RBK, a Ukrainian news outlet, showed.

    Cute doggy and US billions.

    Zelensky previewed what’s expected to be discussed during his meeting with Blinken, having said earlier, “All requests from the warriors will be addressed by senior generals, government officials and our international relations officials.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 09/06/2023 – 14:40

    via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/9r4nz8v Tyler Durden

    “The Curse Of Interesting Times”: Brent Breaks Out While Gas Gets Nervous

    “The Curse Of Interesting Times”: Brent Breaks Out While Gas Gets Nervous

    By Joe DeLaura, Senior Energy Strategist at Rabobank

    A surprise Saudi Arabian announcement at 9:00 AM ET, September 5, pushed Brent crude up over $90 for the first time since November and set a new high for the year. The extension of the current voluntary 1m barrel-per-day cut through December will continue to prop up a fundamentally strong market. Saudia Arabia will keep their output at about 9 million barrels a day, while a separate announcement by Russia also extended their export cuts of 300,000 bpd for the same duration.

    In contrast rig counts are falling in the US while production is ticking up strangely, mainly due to drilled-but incomplete wells being finished off. Front spreads are strongly backwardated as refineries run crude at high capacity to try and rebuild depleted downstream products inventories. It’s the perfect bull market from a real, physical world perspective.

    The major bearish case comes from worsening economic data from China and other large economies. China is shifting into a slower growth path. The post-Covid rebound was spearheaded by travel, pushing up jet fuel demand, but domestically, it is running out of steam. A deepening property slump and fading luxury goods buying underlie the weakness. The world’s primary producer of base metals and many vital industrial components in an era of rising interests does not bode well. Rising rates depress infrastructure spending and discourage capital investments. But this becomes a circular problem! If drilling and exploration for new oil and gas fields decreases and no solar, wind, or lithium-ion battery factories and semiconductor plants are built, then where will the new supply come from?

    Rising energy prices will beget further increases! You cannot solve an upstream supply crisis by destroying demand. You have to either shift demand elsewhere (renewables) or find more supply! But shifting demand elsewhere without  corresponding infrastructure does nothing to solve the real problem.

    We project that renewable fuels and electricity generation will affect demand in the around 2028 and the early 2030s, respectively. But it is not a lightswitch – a downshift means there is still usage of gas and oil until that point and even beyond. Yet we are not seeing the kind of production and supply growth to keep a lid on prices until that magical point is reached.

    Our current political and economic systems seem content to wait for a wizard to solve everything while they pull the ineffectual rates levers. “Someone else will solve the problem, we cannot act directly anymore,” sums up the statements coming from every Western government lately.

    Hedge accordingly.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 09/06/2023 – 14:25

    via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/4j7RSp6 Tyler Durden

    Biden DHS Advisory Member Sues To Keep Trump Off Ballot Using 14th Amendment

    Biden DHS Advisory Member Sues To Keep Trump Off Ballot Using 14th Amendment

    A watchdog group founded by an advisor to Biden’s Department of Homeland Security is suing to keep former President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot in Colorado, citing the 14th Amendment and Trump’s alleged role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

    In an amazing feat of coincidental timing (we’re sure), just days after Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) laid out an argument for disqualification on MSNBC, the group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), filed a lawsuit on Wednesday under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

    CREW is headed up by Noah Bookbinder, who was appointed to the DHS’s Advisory Council in March of 2022 by Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas (Another quid-pro-Joe?).

    “Having disqualified himself from public office by violating Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, Donald Trump must be removed from the ballot, according to a lawsuit filed today by six Republican and unaffiliated Colorado voters including former state, federal and local officials, represented by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the firms Tierney Lawrence Stiles LLC, KBN Law, LLC and Olson Grimsley Kawanabe Hinchcliff & Murray LLC,” the group said in a statement on their website.

    “Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, also known as the Disqualification Clause, bars any person from holding federal or state office who took an ‘oath…to support the Constitution of the United States’ and then has ‘engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” the statement continues. “On January 20, 2017, Donald Trump stood before the nation and took an oath to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.’ After losing the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump violated that oath by recruiting, inciting and encouraging a violent mob that attacked the Capitol on January 6, 2021 in a futile attempt to remain in office.”

    The new playbook is clear, folks. Let’s see if this shit will stick the wall.

    Yet as the Daily Caller notes, Fox News legal analyst Jonathan Turley and others have said that calls to use the 14th Amendment against Trump are not realistic.

    “I think it’s the most dangerous theory that has emerged in decades. I think it’s entirely unsupported by the text and the history of the 14th Amendment. This provision was written after the Civil War of an actual rebellion where hundreds of thousands of people died — there was an army on the other side. They had their own foreign policy,” Turley opined.

    But when has a ‘dangerous for democracy’ idea ever stopped the Democrats from destroying the #OrangeManBad.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 09/06/2023 – 14:05

    via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/KsTjbfS Tyler Durden