Father of Five Faces 108 Months in Prison: Is the DEA Overstepping Constitutional Boundaries?
In a case that strikes at the heart of constitutional governance, Ryan Brandstrom, a father of five, faces prosecution for possession or distribution of Adderall, a Schedule II controlled substance. This legal battle is not just about his personal freedom but about challenging a system where executive agencies like the DEA and FDA have overstepped their bounds, merging legislative and executive powers in defiance of the U.S. Constitution's separation of powers.
The ordeal began with a raid in December 2023 and an ambush in August 2024, leading to charges against Brandstrom. The classification of amphetamine as Schedule II in 1971 by the DEA, with FDA input, under the Controlled Substances Act, was compounded in 2001 when penalties for amphetamine were aligned with those for methamphetamine, despite their distinct characteristics. This was driven by flawed reasoning regarding chemical similarity and trafficking patterns, ignoring Adderall's lack of methamphetamine's neurotoxicity.
This alignment was based on flawed reasoning: claims of chemical similarity and similar trafficking patterns, which are unfounded as Adderall lacks methamphetamine's neurotoxicity and is primarily diverted from prescriptions, not produced by cartels.
Brandstrom, facing a staggering 108-month sentence, stands as a rare individual challenging this regime. His case highlights a disturbing trend where the judiciary has passively endorsed executive overreach, failing to act as the necessary check on power. This prosecution, rooted in an unconstitutional framework, threatens democratic accountability, showcasing the fragility of our constitutional protections when agencies like the DEA and FDA play lawmaker, enforcer, and judge.
This case is a stark reminder of the fragility of our constitutional protections when agencies like the DEA and FDA are allowed to play lawmaker, enforcer, and judge, all at once.
TOP STORIES
