The case CAS 2008/A/1577 involves the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) against Barney Reed, a U.S. table tennis player, concerning anti-doping violations related to marijuana use. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel addressed Reed's positive test for carboxy-THC, a marijuana metabolite, during a 2007 competition. This was his second doping offense, following a 2001 violation for an anabolic steroid. The panel ruled that the legality of marijuana under California's medical use laws was irrelevant to anti-doping regulations under the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC), which focuses solely on maintaining doping-free sports. The panel also clarified that medical justifications, including prescriptions, do not negate anti-doping violations, as athletes bear strict liability for prohibited substances in their systems.
Reed argued that his marijuana use was medically prescribed for chronic insomnia and anxiety, but the panel found this irrelevant to the violation. He had accepted a provisional suspension in 2007 and agreed to a maximum two-year ineligibility period, reserving the right to argue mitigating circumstances. The American Arbitration Association (AAA) Panel acknowledged Reed's medical condition but upheld the violation, reducing his sanction to 15 months due to "No Significant Fault or Negligence." However, USADA appealed, arguing that the AAA Panel erred in reducing the sanction, as the WADC mandates a minimum two-year penalty for mixed violations involving prohibited and specified substances. The CAS panel agreed, emphasizing that "exceptional circumstances" under Article 10.5 do not apply to such cases.
The panel highlighted Reed's negligence, as he continued marijuana use close to the competition despite prior knowledge of anti-doping rules. His failure to consult the USADA Hotline or seek a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) further undermined his defense. Expert testimony disputed the medical necessity of his marijuana use, noting his self-diagnosed conditions lacked formal validation. The panel imposed a two-year ineligibility period, retroactive to his provisional suspension start date in May 2007, and annulled all competitive results from March 2007 onward. The decision reinforced the WADC's strict liability principle and the importance of athlete diligence in complying with anti-doping regulations, regardless of external legal or medical considerations. The case underscores the balance between anti-doping enforcement and individual circumstances, ultimately prioritizing the integrity of sports competition.