NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., IN THE SPIRIT OF REV. C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., MBA., WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NDJOU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
REASONS FOR GRANTING THE PETITION
This article by Professor Michael Krause presents many very important intervening circumstances of a substantial or controlling effect of substantial grounds not previously presented its in good faith, consistent with Rule 44.2, and further calls upon this Court to grant this petition for rehearing and further moves to grant certiorari.
PETITION FOR REHEARING
Under Supreme Court Rule 44.2, Norman Clement respectfully petitions for rehearing of the Court’s decision issued on December 5, 2022, Norman Clement vs. United States Drug Enforcement Administration Case 22-6000 moves this Court to grant this petition for rehearing and consider his case with merits on the grounds of intervening circumstances of a substantial or controlling effect or to other substantial grounds not previously presented Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 44.2, This petition for rehearing is filed within 25 days of this Court’s decision in this case.
Here, Law Professor Krause and the Wall Streets Journal’s Editorial Board identifies DEA clearly promulgates rules and guidelines Congress under the CSA nor the Courts has ever authorized to this Agency. Similarly, the actions of Pronto Pharmacy LLC, of Tampa, Florida, filled valid prescriptions written by providers, who were licensed by states and registered with the DEA.
The DEA failed to show absolutely NO proof these prescriptions, written by licensed practitioners and filled at Pronto Pharmacy LLC., for patients having been diagnosed with a disease condition are illegitimate. Neither the DEA found any prescription medications were being diverted for non-medical use.
Thus blaming Pronto Pharmacy and its owner Norman J Clement is a travesty, in the same manner, to blame Walmart for complying with state law.” Most importantly, DEA Diversion investigator Richard James Albert failed to be thorough in your investigation, further having testified he interviewed no medical practitioners, no patients, and essentially conducted no investigations.
These findings more than support significant intervening circumstances of substantial controlling effects on grounds not previously presented to grant this petition for rehearing. (1),(2)
A. ALL PRESCRIPTIONS FILED BY PRONTO PHARMACY WERE VALID IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW
Pronto Pharmacy LLC filled all control medications in were dispensed according to CSA guidelines, and all prescriptions filled by Pronto Pharmacy were legally written by licensed medical/dental practitioners. Similarly to Pronto Pharmacy, Walmart Drugs came under attack by the DOJ-DEA for filling valid prescriptions.
According to Michael Krause Law Professor at the George Mason University, Scalia Law School, stated in an article on December 27, 2021, published in the Wall Street Journal titled, A Case Against Walmart Mocks Justice, The federal government sues the chain for filling valid prescriptions in compliance with state law he wrote:
“Alcohol sales to adults are legal in all 50 states, and some substantial percentage of legally purchased alcohol is consumed by alcoholics, to their and society’s detriment. Imagine a federal lawsuit against a grocery chain for selling beer to adults without protecting alcoholics from buying it. Such a case would be groundless: No federal law limits beer sales to adults in this way.
The Justice Department last week announced a similarly groundless civil suit against Walmart. The complaint alleges that the chain’s 5,000-plus pharmacies fueled the opioid crisis by “unlawfully” filling prescriptions.
Like the hypothetical beer case, this case against Walmart mocks the rule of law. State laws require pharmacists to fill prescriptions that have been validly written by qualified medical practitioners. Pharmacists lack the expertise to second-guess doctors’ judgments about the appropriate necessity of medication and the proper dosing for a particular patient. To write a prescription for a controlled substance—which includes all opioids—a physician must be qualified by the Drug Enforcement Administration, and Walmart complies with that federal rule. While most notably, Law Professor emeritus Mr. Krause further pointed out in his December 27, 2021, Wall Street Journal published article:
“When Walmart pharmacists have hesitated to fill legally written opioid prescriptions, they have often been subjected to state sanctions. The president of the Texas Medical Board threatened to issue “cease and desist orders” against pharmacists who “change amounts of opioids prescribed” or “override” a physician’s judgment on the grounds that doing so constitutes practicing medicine without a license.
Wisconsin’s Board of Pharmacy threatened disciplinary action against a Walmart pharmacy because it “informed a local clinic that the Pharmacy would no longer fill controlled substance prescriptions from that clinic due to concerns of overprescribing.” Complaints against Walmart and its pharmacists for refusing to fill opioid prescriptions have been filed with or pursued by pharmacy boards in Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and West Virginia.“
Law Professor Krause pointed out: ” Under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause when there’s a contradiction between valid federal and state law, the former prevails. But there’s no federal law requiring that Walmart pharmacists refuse to fill prescriptions that state law requires them to fill. The Controlled Substances Act creates only two circumstances in which pharmacists commit a federal crime by filling facially valid prescriptions for controlled substances.“
First, if they “knowingly fill” a prescription that wasn’t issued by a doctor “in the usual course of professional treatment”—for instance, if a doctor hands out his entire Rx pad without examining any patient.
Second, if they fill a prescription outside the “usual course of” pharmacy practice—for instance, if a “pill mill” dispenses opioids without checking the DEA number of the prescribing doctor, not only isn’t Walmart being sued for such infractions, it has adopted innovative opioid-stewardship programs and worked with law enforcement agencies, including the DEA to root out corrupt doctors.”
Law Professor Krause also points out: “The Justice Department alleges Walmart isn’t rigorous enough in checking facially valid opioid prescriptions written by DEA-authorized physicians. If this is a problem, let the DEA propose specific regulations requiring pharmacies to conduct increased diligence before filling any opioid prescriptions. Before being adopted, the costs and benefits of such regulations would be subjected to public scrutiny.
These rules would require pharmacies to violate state law, and if adopted, they would be enforceable under the Supremacy Clause. Until this happens, it’s a travesty to blame Walmart for complying with state law.” (1)
In an article, “Scapegoating Walmart,” as written/published on December 29, 2020, by the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, which was in a stark rebuke of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit filed in federal court in Delaware claims that; Walmart “failed to detect and report at least hundreds of thousands of suspicious orders” and that as a pharmacy it “unlawfully filled thousands upon thousands of invalid controlled-substance prescriptions.”
These actions enabled opioid abuse and “helped fuel a national crisis,” the feds say; “The complaint further alleges:
“Violations of the Controlled Substances Act and its accompanying regulations, but it is really a 160-page exercise in scapegoating a company because it is well-known and has deep pockets. Walmart doesn’t push pills on opioid addicts. Its pharmacists fill valid prescriptions written by doctors who are licensed by their states and registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).” (2)
DEA’S CORRUPTION, LIED TO CONGRESS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
$10, $15, $20, $25,$50, $75, 175, $500. OR MORE TO CASH APP:$docnorm
ZELLE 3135103378 or Donate to the “Pharmacist For Healthcare Legal Defense Fund,”
D. THE Controlled Substances Act “and its implementing regulations do not include the concept of red flags AND RAISE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES BASED ON A LACK OF LEGAL STANDING
Here, again the Wall Streets Journal’s Editorial Board identifies DEA clearly promulgating rules and guidelines Congress under the CSA nor Courts have ever authorized to any law enforcement agency to regulate the practice of medicine. Similarly, in the actions of Pronto Pharmacy LLC, of Tampa Florida, filled, valid prescriptions written by providers, who were licensed by states and registered with the DEA and Controlled Substances Act “and whose implementing regulations do not include the concept of red flags, let alone identify any particular factors as a “red flag.”:
As further reported December 29, 2020,the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board in a stark rebuke of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) actions against Walmart. Walmart’s lawsuit filed in federal court in Delaware claims that:
“ the DEA has suggested that some combinations of opioids never have a legitimate medical purpose and should never be filled. Yet the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services continues to cover these opioid combinations and wants such prescriptions to be evaluated based on individual medical circumstances. Walmart filed a pre-emptive suit in October (2020) seeking clarity about the standards for handling prescriptions, but it has received no answers.
The DOJ complaint also includes: more than 190 mentions of “red flags” about suspicious opioid prescriptions. It claims Walmart often didn’t adequately resolve them and sometimes knowingly filled illegitimate prescriptions despite the warnings. Walmart noted in its then lawsuit that the Controlled Substances Act “and its implementing regulations do not include the concept of red flags, let alone identify any particular factors as a red flag.”
“The feds try to side-step this problem by claiming that, under the Controlled Substances Act and regulations, “the pharmacist’s conduct must adhere to the usual course of his or her professional practice as a pharmacist.” The complaint argues that catching and resolving “red flags” for opioid prescriptions is “a well-recognized responsibility of a pharmacist in the professional practice of pharmacy,” so “failing to fulfill this responsibility” is a violation of the federal law.” However, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board further points out:
” All of this raises constitutional issues based on a lack of legal standing. A negligence claim like the one alleged here is supposed to have a specific party claiming a specific injury caused by someone specific. Those are typically claims by one private party against another. The government can sue for violations of law, not because someone was negligent. The government’s claims of Controlled Substances Act violations are so general that they seem contrived to add some violation of the law. (1)
” In effect, DOJ is asking the federal court to overrule state law in favor of informal federal guidance and a vague notion of pharmaceutical best practices. This harassment was typical of the Obama era, but it’s especially disappointing from the Trump Justice Department. The Biden Administration will be happy to run with this prosecutorial abuse.”(1)
Most observably, none of the Walmart stores were subjected to their Control Substances Registration being immediately suspended. Walmart eventually settled with DOJ-DEA with payments of billions of dollars in fines.
This again raises constitutional issues, and these facts raised by Walmart and the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board just by themselves are more than convincing intervening circumstances of a substantial effect having a controlling effect of substantial grounds not previously presented and merit review from the Justices of the Supreme Court of The United States granting Norman J. Clement’s petition for rehearing and to further grant certiorari.
E. 75% INCREASE IN SUICIDE AMONG RURAL VETERANS RELATIVE TO CIVILIANS BETWEEN 2013 AND 2018, WRITINGS PUBLISHED IN WASHINGTON POST
For over a decade, policymakers and public health officials have incorrectly blamed the worsening overdose crisis on doctors prescribing opioids to their patients in pain. During this time, physicians have been pressured to reduce opioid prescribing, only to see the overdose rate more than double since 2010 — even as opioid prescribing was cut nearly in half.
In early August 2022, a study showed that tapering chronic pain patients off opioids led to a dramatic increase in mental health crises, suicide attempts, and overdoses. It is not surprising, then, that we now learn this anti-opioid policy has had a devastating effect on America’s veterans.
RETIRE DETROIT POLICE SARGENT LATE WALTER R. CLEMENT (ALS)
Indeed, a recent study investigated the results of the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI), a poorly conceived plan implemented in 2013 by the Veterans Health Administration to discourage opioid prescribing and dependence. OSI “succeeded” in that it caused opioid prescribing to drop 41% between 2012 to 2017 and 64% by 2020.
“But as with chronic pain patients in the general population, the curtailment had a big impact on veterans’ mental health, especially rural veterans who are more likely to get health care through the VA. The researchers found a 75% increase in suicides among rural veterans relative to civilians between the start of the OSI and 2018. Writing in the Washington Post, the study’s authors found the increase in suicides among urban veterans was “also disturbing, although less dramatic,” increasing one-third over that of civilians. Perhaps, a true measure of the damage caused by OSI is that a 33% increase in suicides over five years is considered “less dramatic.”
HOWARD ADELGLASS MD, FACING 25 YEARS FEDERAL PRISON (SENTENCING MARCH 2023) NEW YORK, NY
And it was avoidable. In 2011 researchers at the Department of Veterans Affairs and the University of Michigan Medical School followed 150,000 chronic non-cancer pain patients treated with prescription opioids over five years in the VHA system and found the overdose rate to be 0.04%.
The DEA has been waging a campaign of disinformation to sway the public to the point that prescribed narcotic analgesic medications are indeed drugs, dangerous drugs whose dosages are red flags indicating abuse and trafficking contributing to the so-called Opioid crisis around America. Notably, DEA’s evidence always realizes upon execration on the numbers of “pills” and street language such as “pill mills,” “Holy Grails,” and “Cocktails,” not on medical disease states or clinical conditions.
AUSA WAYNE F. PRATT, SE MICHIGAN
Prosecutors have found these forms of distortion and redefinition of medical procedures effectively sell juries. Further, Judges often instruct the juries to ignore any clinical presentation or will not allow such testimony on the record. By 2006, federal regulatory agencies perceived what they called an “opioid crisis” and mistakenly attributed it to doctors “overprescribing” opioids and generating a grow- ing population of opioid addicts.
HARVEY JENKINS MD MPH, PH.D. FACING 30 YEARS IN PRISON IN TULSA OKLAHOMA
This formed the basis for an even more massive intrusion of federal and state power into the privacy of medical records, patient-doctor confidentiality, and the very way in which doctors are allowed to use scientific and professional knowledge to practice medicine.
Medical decision-making came increasingly under the purview of law enforcement, sparking a new wave of arrests and prosecutions. Patients who had their pain controlled with long-term opioid treatment are being denied treatment or involuntarily tapered off their pain control, as doctors fear arrest and an end to their medical careers.
BOB SHEARIN, CHRONIC PAIN PATIENT
A growing population of “pain refugees” has emerged, with some patients turning in desperation to the black market for opioids and some even turning to suicide. As prescribing rates continue to plunge, overdoses from the non-medical use of opioids are skyrocketing- ing, now largely caused by illicit fentanyl. These guidelines were disastrous for chronic pain patients. Many were driven to buy illegal drugs on the street, which were laced with poisonous fentanyl. In 2021 this led to 100,000 deaths in the United States.
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN
$10, $15, $20, $25,$50, $75, 175, $500. OR MORE TO CASH APP:$docnorm
ZELLE 3135103378 or Donate to the “Pharmacist For Healthcare Legal Defense Fund,”
LOW HANGING FRUIT
- “A Case Against Walmart Mocks Justice” Wall Street Journal December 27, 2021; The federal government sues the chain for filling valid prescriptions in compliance with state law see: https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-case-against-walmart-mocks-justice-11609103413
2. “ Scapegoating Walmart”
The feds seek billions in penalties for filling valid opioid prescriptions see: https://www.wsj.com/articles/scapegoating-walmart-11609285742
3. THE FORM: RICHARD JAMES ALBERT DEA DIVERSION INVESTIGATOR AND THE DIVERSION OF THE TRUTH see: https://youarewithinthenorms.com/2021/01/04/the-form-richard-james-albert-dea-investigator-and-the-diversion-of-the-truth/
4. The MEDD myth: the impact of pseudoscience on pain research and prescribing-guideline development: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4809343/
5. Schatman’s youtube video Myth of Morphine Milligram Equivalent Daily dose: (http://youtu.be/mhlHoNsftXk)
6. CATO INSTITUTE: Cops Practicing Medicine, The Parallel Histories of Drug War l and Drug War ll by Trevor Burrus and Jeffrey A. Singer MD., https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/2022-11/singer-burrus-cops-practicing-medicine.pdf