Detailed Instructions: In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.
Q: Besieged by litigation about its travel ban, its immigration agenda, its prohibition on transgender soldiers and numerous potential conflicts of interest, the presidency of Donald J. Trump has seemed at times like a high-stakes spinoff of “The People’s Court” with Mr. Trump in the starring role as defendant in chief. 
  
 On Wednesday, yet another courtroom battle promises to pull the White House into the legal spotlight as crucial arguments are heard in New York in a sweeping lawsuit that is challenging the administration’s marijuana policy by seeking to legalize pot under federal law. 
  
 When the suit was filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan in July, it appeared to be an intriguing, if limited, effort to help its five named plaintiffs — among them a former professional football player with a business selling pot-based pain relievers and a 12-year-old girl who treats her chronic epilepsy with medical marijuana. But the case was thrust into national relevance last month when Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued an order encouraging prosecutors to aggressively enforce the federal marijuana law, endangering the viability of the multibillion-dollar cannabis industry in states where it is legal. 
  
 In its 98-page complaint, the suit presents its case for legalization not only through a host of constitutional arguments, but also by way of a world-historical tour of marijuana use — from its first purported role 10,000 years ago in the production of Taiwanese pottery to the smoking habits of President Barack Obama in his younger days. It points out that the ancient Egyptians used the drug to treat eye sores and hemorrhoids, and Thomas Jefferson puffed it for his migraines. James Madison credited “sweet hemp” for giving him “insight to create a new and democratic nation,” the suit notes. ||||| Petitions to de- or reschedule cannabis at the federal level have been getting denied since 1972 and appeals haven’t helped as of yet either, but a new lawsuit is coming to New York City has immense promise. It will get the current administration’s attention at the very least. 
  
 There are five named plaintiffs, mostly with conditions that brought them to medical cannabis. At its heart is Alexis Bortell, a 12-year-old girl battling epilepsy. She uses medical marijuana to quell debilitating seizures. 
  
 And though the suit got a little attention from lawmakers, the story was catapulted into national attention after Attorney General Jeff Sessions came down with some harsh rhetoric around cannabis and the rescindment of the Obama-era Cole Memo, which protected legal cannabis from federal prosecution. 
  
 The 98-page complaint covers many constitutional arguments, and delves into the 10,000-year history of the plant with a focus on US policy in the last 100 or so years. It points out the racist issues of the current law and how it was meant to stigmatize outsiders of all kinds. 
  
 This is a dance that has been taking place for decades. This time around, however, 30 states and the District of Columbia have already legalized marijuana in some form, more Americans than ever approve of the plant, and the substance and quality of this new case could all work together and result in an unprecedented ruling. 
  
 Related Story: Jeff Sessions Using Psychological Warfare To Scare Banks Away From Marijuana 
  
 Who are we to deny a natural substance, especially when it’s safer than aspirin, peanuts or even going on a road trip? And aside from being safer, it’s a saver. For patients nationwide suffering from seizures, crippling PTSD, cancer related side effects, chronic pain and more. Cannabis fights the opioid epidemic and keeps patients off of addictive benzos. 
  
 The Wednesday hearing will mostly be listening to arguments to have the case dropped, with the added drama of cannabis activists descending upon the courtroom. And though court hearings and petitions have previously fallen on deaf ears, this may very well be the right time to have a contentious court case like this win. ||||| Alexis Bortell began suffering from severe, sometimes life-threatening seizures when she was 7 years old. She spent most school days in the nurse’s office recovering from her episodes, missing out on her education and the fun of being a kid. 
  
 Doctors in Texas, where Alexis and her family resided, offered different treatments, each one more drastic than the last. One doctor recommended a medication used in lethal injections, and another recommended a medication that could leave Bortell infertile. The most extreme solution came from a doctor who offered a lobotomy when Bortell was just 10 years old. 
  
 Her parents relocated to Colorado to give medical cannabis a shot. (At the time, Texas did not have a medical cannabis program that allowed Bortell’s parents to treat her. Questions remain as to whether that would be possible under the new state regulations.) 
  
 Now 12, Bortell enjoys a near-seizure-free life thanks to medical cannabis. She goes to school; works on her business ventures-OneLuv Organics, a hand-crafted goat-milk soap line, and Patches of Hope, where she grows food for the homeless-and has become the face of a lawsuit being brought against the Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions. 
  
 Bortell is a co-plaintiff in the suit along with fellow medical cannabis patients including former NFL lineman Marvin Washington, U.S. Army veteran Jose Belen, Jagger Cotte, and The Cannabis Cultural Association (CCA). 
  
 Alexis Bortell v. Jeff Sessions 
  
 Bortell and the other plaintiffs are set to appear Feb. 14 in New York’s 9th circuit. 
  
 “We will be opposing the government’s motion to dismiss our case,” says Lauren Rudick, the lawyer representing the plaintiffs in the suit. “We will argue that we have standing and have sufficiently stated multiple claims for relief.” 
  
 Rudick’s clients’ main argument is that the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) infringes on constitutional rights. For example, despite being the daughter of two veterans, Bortell cannot visit a military base to receive medical care and other free military services to which she is entitled; she cannot physically lobby her representatives in Washington; and she cannot visit a national park or go on a school trip with her classmates to a public or federal property without committing a felony. 
  
 The CCA is suing on behalf of minorities across the country who have been targeted by federal authorities for cannabis-related crimes. The CCA alleges “the Controlled Substances Act has been enforced against people of color exponentially more than Caucasians,” Rudick says. Washington, the former NFL player, is seeking to rectify that by suing for increased access to minority assistance and startup funding. 
  
 “People of color are grossly underrepresented in the cannabis space except when it comes to arrest/prosecution. It would help if people of color had access to federal funding, which would be available to minorities in any other (federally legal) businesses,” Rudick explains. 
  
 Belen, the Army veteran, hopes to change federal policy that prevents Veterans Affairs doctors from recommending medical cannabis to treat suicidal thoughts caused by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). 
  
 Yet these co-plaintiffs aren’t the only ones going after the U.S. government over its cannabis laws. Here’s a brief overview of other major cannabis cases currently in the hands of America’s judicial system. 
  
 The Hemp Industry Association is suing the U.S. DEA over hemp’s status as a Schedule I drug, which HIA says conflicts with the Farm Bill of 2014. © studio023 | Adobe Stock 
  
 C.A.H.C. v. IRS 
  
 Cannabis business owners are acutely aware of the restrictions placed on them and their businesses by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax code 280E. But one Colorado duo is fighting the IRS over what their lawyer calls an “absurd” double-taxation of their personal income. 
  
 The owners of Colorado Alternative Health Care (C.A.H.C.), a vertically integrated cannabis business in Palisade, Colo., are suing the IRS after the government agency determined the income declared in their W-2 is subject to taxation as S-Corp revenue due to 280E. 
  
 “What is happening here … is the same income is being reported on the individual tax report twice,” says Rachel Gillette, the attorney from the Denver-based Greenspoon Marder law firm representing C.A.H.C. “Basically … the same exact dollar is subject to tax twice merely because it’s subject to 280E.” 
  
 S corporations may pass business income to shareholders (i.e., “officers”) to avoid paying taxes. Those shareholders then report the income on their personal tax returns and are taxed at individual rates instead of corporate rates. This allows small companies and startups to avoid paying the large corporate rate. 
  
 “It’s the perfect illustration of the absurd results that happen when you apply an archaic law whose only purpose is to further punish people who are operating criminal enterprises, which is no longer the case in state-legal cannabis markets,” Gillette says. 
  
 Neither the owners of C.A.H.C. nor their attorney expect any significant change to 280E to result from this lawsuit—it is, after all, mostly about the owners’ personal income tax—but Gillette believes it can be “a crack in the glass.” 
  
 “[Hopefully this lawsuit] will show people the absurdity that results from punishing people playing by the rules. … And it could translate to some good savings for marijuana businesses.” 
  
 Gillette received a reply to her filing from the IRS in January. The agency dismissed her clients’ claims. Her next move is to reply to the IRS and await its response before a judge looks at the arguments presented by both parties and makes a ruling, although that could be more than a year from now. 
  
 Gillette says the industry’s best chance of being freed from 280E is if Congress makes a legislative fix. She is hopeful that will happen soon, since Sessions rang in the new year by rescinding the guidelines noted in the Cole Memos and other cannabis-friendly Obama-era policies. 
  
 HIA v. DEA 
  
 The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is being brought to court by the Hemp Industry Association (HIA). The HIA claims that the DEA’s scheduling of all cannabis extracts, including hemp-derived CBD, a non-psychoactive compound found in cannabis, goes against the Farm Bill that Congress passed in 2014. 
  
 That bill defined industrial hemp for the first time and described it as “all parts of the plant cannabis sativa l., so long as the dried materials of the plant is less than 0.3 percent THC,” says HIA lead counsel Patrick Goggin. 
  
 In January 2017, the DEA finalized a rule that would help the agency and the federal government stay compliant with United Nations drug treaties by assigning a four-digit drug code to all marijuana extracts. Therein lies the problem, Goggin says. 
  
 “They define [marijuana extracts] as one or more cannabinoids extracted from the plant genus cannabis,” he explains, meaning “there is no exception within the rule for industrial hemp pursuant to the Farm Bill, and their failure to carve out an exception means they are scheduling industrial hemp extracts” the same as cannabis extracts. The DEA’s interpretation essentially criminalizes interstate commerce, which the HIA believes the Farm Bill allows. 
  
 The HIA argues that hemp-derived extracts should be classified as nutraceuticals and natural products instead of drugs needing to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Its position is that the DEA is acting outside the purview of congressional intent by disregarding Congress’s definition of hemp in the Farm Bill. 
  
 The HIA will present oral arguments in an appellate hearing on Feb. 15 in the 9th U.S. Circuit court, but it could take several months before the judges issue a ruling. 
  
 With these lawsuits all hoping to make significant progress this year, it seems the federal authorities are going to be as busy defending themselves from cannabis businesses as they are trying to prosecute them. |||||
A:
Though there's no indication it'll be any more successful than the many complaints it follows, a federal lawsuit is challenging the Trump administration's policy of banning marijuana at the federal level—and is led by a 12-year-old girl. The case brought against the Justice Department by five plaintiffs—including Alexis Bortell, who uses medical marijuana to treat her epilepsy, and former NFL player Marvin Washington, who sells marijuana-based pain relievers—heads to a New York court on Wednesday, reports the New York Times. The case before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein has what Fresh Toast calls "immense promise" for pot advocates, as plaintiffs argue that current law classifying marijuana as among the most dangerous narcotics violates constitutional rights. Filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan in July, the suit gained increased attention after Jeff Sessions last month opened up the option for prosecutors to enforce federal law in states where marijuana has been decriminalized. The lawsuit claims the Schedule 1 drug has been used by everyone from Thomas Jefferson, who apparently found it eased his migraines, to ancient Egyptians, who used it to treat eye sores and hemorrhoids, and is only banned based on efforts to target hippies and black Americans after the 1960s. The Cannabis Cultural Association, another plaintiff in the suit, argues "the Controlled Substances Act has been enforced against people of color exponentially more than Caucasians," a lawyer tells the Cannabis Business Times. (An enterprising Girl Scout took advantage of her state's marijuana laws.)