Medical Advocates: Dentistry, Pharmacy, Physicians "Leaving No Stone Unturned , No Subject Untouched, No Ass UnKicked"
THE NEUMANN PHARMACY APPEALS COURT RULING: DISMANTLING THE DEA’S ADMINISTRATIVE COURT SYSTEM AND WHY THE FLORIDA STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY MEMBERS MUST STEP DOWN AND RESIGN FOR FAILING TO PROTECT PHARMACISTS & PHARMACIES FROM THE BOARD’S OWN FALSE MISINTERPRETATION OF CONTROL SUBSTANCE LAWS: BEYOND THE RED FLAG
On February 13, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its landmark decision in Neumann’s Pharmacy v. Drug Enforcement Administration. Written by Judge Don Willett, the ruling addressed a fundamental principle of administrative law: while the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) holds broad authority to protect the public from drug diversion, it cannot “quietly rewrite” existing federal regulations during enforcement actions
Fifth Circuit blocks the DEA pharmacy shutdown
The Neumann Legal Finding and Summaryre-reported in youarewithinthenorms.com
NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., INC., SPIRIT OF REV. IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER R. CLEMENT BS., MS, MBA. HARVEY JENKINS, MD, PH.D., IN THE SPIRIT OF C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., M.B.A., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., EVELYN J. CLEMENT, IN THE SPIRIT OFWALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGSWORTH, IN THE SPIRIT OF FOREST TENNANT, MD., RENEE BLARE, RPH, DR. TERENCE SASAKI, MD LESLY POMPY MD., CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, IN THE SPIRIT OFWILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., IN THE SPIRIT OFRICHARD KAUL, MD., IN THE SPIRIT OF LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, AISHA GARDNER, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NJOKU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the DEA’s deregistration order and remanded the case to the DEA, rejecting the pharmacy’s request for dismissal of the charges. Consequently, the DEA retains administrative authority to redetermine the pharmacy’s status, but it is legally bound to apply the higher “actual, subjective knowledge” standard rather than its traditional “should have known” negligence standard.
For decades, DEA had said a pharmacist violates the regulation when the pharmacist “knows or has reason to know” that a prescription was not issued for a legitimate medical purpose. The problem is that the regulation does not say that. The Fifth Circuit held that DEA’s interpretation could not be squared with the text. The pharmacist must know of the prescription’s invalidity. ‘ The court’s ruling systematicallydismantled the DEA’s traditional “reason to know” enforcement model and established several critical legal precedents.’
The Dispute Over “Unresolved” Red Flags. The DEA’s primary enforcement theory was that a pharmacy violates federal regulations and state law if it repeatedly fills controlled substance prescriptions with these warning signs without adequately resolving and documenting the resolution of those red flags. Under this theory, the DEA Administrator initially stripped the Louisiana pharmacy of its federal registration to dispense controlled substances
Jurisprudence on Pharmacy Registration and Regulatory Misinterpretation
In the Neumann’s case, neither the DEA Administrator nor the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) had made this predicate finding. Instead, they focused entirely on how the pharmacy handled the prescriptions and the presence of unresolved red flags. The Fifth Circuit held that by skipping this predicate step, the DEA had fundamentally misapplied its own regulation
A Louisiana pharmacy owned by a licensed pharmacist was investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration after allegations arose that the pharmacy was filling prescriptions for itself and for patients with “red flags” indicating possible misuse or diversion of controlled substances. The DEA’s investigation focused on several prescriptions, including combinations of opioids and benzodiazepines for various patients, out-of-pocket payments for controlled substances, and a prescription filled by the pharmacist herself written by her physician father, which violated state law prohibiting physicians from prescribing controlled substances to immediate family.
This legal summary examines a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding the DEA’s revocation of a Louisiana pharmacy’s federal registration. The agency initially penalized the business for allegedly ignoring “red flags” related to opioid prescriptions and violating state laws concerning family medical practices. However, the appellate court vacated the order, ruling that the DEA misinterpreted both federal regulations and state statutes. The court clarified that federal law requires proof that a pharmacist knowingly filled invalid prescriptions, rather than just failing to meet a standard of care.
Following an agency hearing before an administrative law judge, the DEA’s Administrator adopted the ALJ’s recommendation and revoked the pharmacy’s federal registration to dispense controlled substances. The Administrator concluded that the pharmacy had violated federal regulations and Louisiana law by filling prescriptions without adequately resolving red flags and by filling a prescription written in violation of state law. The pharmacy petitioned for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
The Fifth Circuit found that the DEA misinterpreted and misapplied its own regulations and state law. The court held that 21 C.F.R. § 1306.04(a) requires a pharmacist to “knowingly” fill an invalid prescription, which the DEA had not shown, and that a violation of the state-law standard of care is not, by itself, a violation of federal regulations. The court also held that the Louisiana law at issue did not apply to pharmacies. Because the DEA’s order rested on erroneous interpretations of governing regulations and state law, the Fifth Circuit vacated the deregistration order and remanded the matter for further proceedings.
Notes:
Diagram explaining the Anand-Borel-Clement (ABC) Pharmacological Trinity, illustrating the synergy between opioids and benzodiazepines for enhanced therapeutic outcomes.
THE ANAND-BOREL-CLEMENT (ABC) PHARMACOLOGICAL TRINITY CONCEPT
Anand-Borel-Clement (ABC) Pharmacological Trinity Concept: While opioids target G-protein-coupled receptors to block pain signals, benzodiazepines enhance GABAergic inhibition to provide necessary sedation and muscle relaxation. This synergistic approach allows for lower medication doses, which effectively reduces adverse side effects while extending the duration of relief. Beyond clinical mechanics, the text uses a theological metaphor of the Holy Trinity to illustrate how these distinct agents work in dynamic communion to heal the patient. Ultimately, the goal of this integrated therapy is to restore the individual’s quality of life, enabling them to return to employment, mobility, and social connection.
The Pharmacological Trinity of Chronic Pain
The Holy Trinity of pharmacological pain care is consistent with Pope Leo XIV’s teachings. On the Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity, June 15, 2025, Pope Leo XIV described the Trinity as a dynamic communion of love—Father, Son, Daughter, and Holy Spirit—that invites humanity into a relationship with God. Celebrating the Mass for the Jubilee of Sport, he emphasized that the divine life is a “dance of mutual love” and a model of unity.
Pain, Pope, and Mammals: Remember, This Holiday Season, Pain has been around since the beginning of time and is nearly ubiquitous across all life forms. One could be a Dog, a Cat, a horse, a Bear, A Grizzly Bear, a Polar bear, or A Chicago bear. Pain is real. Donate to support You Are Within The Norms
JUST CRANKY ANALYSIS ALSO AFFIRMED AND NOTED
The text in both Clement’s Dispositive Motion to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals Case: No. 21-1262 (per curiae affirmed) and the Supreme Court of the United States of America Petition for writ Case: No. 22-6000 (docketed Not Granted cert.) emphasizes that pharmacists should only be held liable for knowingly filling illegitimate prescriptions, asserting that the DEA’s use of “red flags” unfairly replaces professional discretion with broad suspicion. Clement contended that the federal government is improperly intruding upon state powers to regulate medicine, thereby creating a climate of fear that harms patient care and stifles innovation in pain management.(see Court Filings below)
YOUAREWITHINTHENORMS.COM, BENJAMIN CLEMENTINE “THE NEMESIS” LONDON, ENGLAND 2015
THE NORMS
REFERENCES:
December 19, 2025
DEA AGENT ILLEGALLY DESTROYING PRONTO PHARMACY, TAMPA, FL., SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM DURING RAID (08-29-2019). THIS VIDEO IS THE ONE THE UNITED STATES JUSTICE DEPARTMENT CALLED ATTORNEY DALE SISCO AND WANTED IT TO BE REMOVED FROM THE YWTN BLOG. THE DEA AND DOJ ARE NOT GETTING AWAY WITH THIS CORRUPTION. IF ONE DOESN’T FIGHT BACK, THEN ONE CAN’T EXPECT TO WIN WHEN ONE FIGHTS WITH DETERMINATION TO WIN. THAT CHANGES THE RULE OF THE BALL GAME. THEN GOD WILL HELP YOU TO ACCOMPLISH YOUR GOALS
SEE ARTICLE PUBLISHED ON X BY JUST CRANKY
How one adverb defeated the DEA, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Neumann’s Pharmacy vs. D.E.A.
When Federal Law Enforcement Practices Medicine: Dispositive Motion United States Court of Appeals for The District of Columbia, Norman Clement, Pronto Pharmacy vs D.E.A.
from youarewithinththenorms article, December 19, 2025: UNDERSTANDING D.E.A.’S OVERLY VAGUE UNCONSTITUTIONAL PHARMACIST CORRESPONDING RESPONSIBILITY REGULATION: AN AGENCY GONE ROGUE “NOW DICTATING MEDICAL PROTOCOLS” ‘AN ISSUE THAT HAS NO LEFT OR RIGHT.’
..Law enforcement agencies have raided and arrested medical personnel for filling legally prescribed medications, particularly controlled medications of patients being treated for acute and chronic paindiseases.“
