Legal Cases > North Dakota 
add this
 
General
 
FAQs
Vote Hemp Report
Industry Standards
Archives
Links
Newsletter

Legal Cases

Political
 
Voter Guide
Legislation
Lobbying

Resources
 
HIA
TestPledge
Hempstores
Download Center
Search Site
Site Map


Advanced Search
 

Enter Your Email:
What you will receive
 
North Dakota Case
 

QUICK CLICK GUIDE: Click on the links below (please read the Background first)

Background on the North Dakota Hemp Farming Controversy - Read this first.

Court Documents - Read all the legal filings and documents related to the North Dakota hemp farming controversy.

Send a Pre-Written Email, Fax or Letter - Let Congress know how you feel about hemp.


Please see our Press Releases Page for Vote Hemp's press releases on North Dakota.

Please also see our North Dakota State Page for an archive of the legislative history of industrial hemp in North Dakota.

General questions on hemp are answered in our FAQs.

More detailed information is in our Download Center.

Please click here for the North Dakota Department of Agriculture's hemp farming page.


Contribute to the Vote Hemp Farmer Fund - We need your support for the industry's legal efforts.

Sign Up for the Vote Hemp Action Alert Email List - Stay informed about the hemp industry and hemp legislation.

Buy Hemp Food Products - Buy products from certified TestPledge companies to support hemp industry development. Vote with your wallet.



Video - Monson v DEA Press Conference - November 14, 2007


On June 18, 2007 the two North Dakota farmers granted state hemp farming licenses, Rep. David Monson and Wayne Hauge, filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota in an effort to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) obstruction of commercial hemp farming in the United States. If successful, the legal action would result in licensed hemp farmers receiving assurances that no federal agency could hold them criminally liable under the Controlled Substances Act. Vote Hemp's grassroots supporters are funding the legal action.

Please click here to listen to a recording of the June 18, 2007 teleconference discussing the filing case of Monson vs DEA. Participants were: Rep. David Monson, North Dakota House assistant majority leader, farmer; Wayne Hauge, Seed breeder, licensed hemp farmer; Roger Johnson, North Dakota agriculture commissioner; Tim Purdon, Vogel Law Firm, Bismarck, attorney for the plaintiffs; Joe Sandler, legal counsel for VoteHemp.com; Eric Steenstra, president, VoteHemp.com. (mp3 file 13MB)


On May 18, 2010, North Dakota's Speaker of the House, David Monson, and North Dakota farmer Wayne Hauge filed a legal action against the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The DEA has delayed the approval of the farmers' applications for federal licenses to grow industrial hemp for more than 3 years. Both farmers have recieved state liscenses to grow hemp for the past four growing seasons under North Dakota's industrial hemp program. Monson and Hauge are seeking federal registrations that would enable them to cultivate oilseed and fiber varieties as farmers in Canada and Europe already do.

For over a decade, North Dakotans have tried to implement non-drug industrial hemp farming under a state licensing program. Even though the state does not require farmers to obtain permission from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to grow hemp, Monson and Hauge have done so to ensure their farms will not be raided by federal drug control agents.

Petition for Review (PDF file 152k)
     David Monson v. Drug Enforcement Administration - United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - May 18, 2010

Petition for Review (PDF file 160k)
     Wayne Hauge v. Drug Enforcement Administration - United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - May 18, 2010


Opinion - U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 07-3837
     District of North Dakota - Bismarck
[PUBLISHED] [Bowman, Author, with Melloy and Smith, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Controlled Substances Act. District court did not err in concluding the cannabis plants plaintiffs proposed to cultivate fell within the Controlled Substances Act's definition of marijuana and that their planned cultivation of industrial hemp under North Dakota state law was subject to federal regulation under the Controlled Substances Act; plaintiffs had standing to challenge the Act because they established they were targets of DEA action and showed actual injury sufficient to confer standing; their claims were ripe for review, and the district court did not err in finding that further efforts to exhaust the DEA's administrative procedures would be futile; Congress has the authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate marijuana that is grown on a large scale for the undeniably commercial purpose of generating products for sale in interstate commerce; Congress's decision to regulate the manufacture of all marijuana plants - regardless of the grower's ultimate purpose - was a rational means of achieving the congressional purpose of controlling the supply and demand for controlled substances and state law restrictions, such as prohibiting the plant from leaving the farmer's property, did not place the cultivation beyond Congress's reach.
Click here to download the opinion (PDF file 52k)
     United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit - December 22, 2009

Oral Arguments - 07-3837 (mp3 file 7.8MB)
     United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit - November 12, 2008

Documents For Case 07-3837 David Monson v. Drug Enforcement
     United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota in Civil Case No. 4:07-cr042 (PDF file 960k)
     Filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit - February 19, 2008

Order Granting Defendants' Motion To Dismiss (PDF file 92k)
     Order by the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - November 29, 2007

Transcript of Proceeding (PDF file 1000k)
     Taken at United States Courthouse, Bismarck, North Dakota before the Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, United States District Judge - November 14, 2007

Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgement (PDF file 352k)
     Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - October 26, 2007

Brief Of Amicus Curiae (PDF file 3.1MB)
     North Dakota State University In Support Of Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion For Summary Judgement And In Opposition To Defendants' Motion To Dismiss. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - October 25, 2007

Motion By Amicus Curiae (PDF file 832k)
     North Dakota State University For Leave To File Brief In Support Of Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion For Summary Judgement And In Opposition To Defendants' Motion To Dismiss. Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - October 25, 2007

Brief in Opposition to Defendants' Rule 12(b) Motion to Dismiss and Drug Enforcement Administration In Support of Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (PDF file 164k)
     Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - September 19, 2007

Also included with the September 19, 2007 filing were: Exhibit A: Affidavit of David Monson (PDF file 704k); Exhibit B: Affidavit of Wayne Hauge (PDF file 664k); Exhibit C: Affidavit of Dr. T. Randall Fortenberry (PDF file 1.6MB); Exhibit D: Declaration of Gero Leson (PDF file 196k); Exhibit E: Affidavit of Burton Johnson (PDF file 964k).

Defendants' Motion To Dismiss and Defendants' Statement Of Material Facts Not In Dispute (PDF file 1.5MB)
     Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - August 20, 2007

North Dakota State University letter to DEA (PDF file 176k)
     The letter is in support of the Application of David C. Monson as a Manufacturer of Controlled Substances. The letter is signed by Associate Professor Burton Johnson, Ph.D. and Dean and Director Kenneth Grafton - July 27, 2007

Civil Action - Complaint for Declatory Judgement (PDF file 120k)
     Filed in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota - June 18, 2007


 

 
 
 
votehemp logo