Feds To Weigh 40,000 Marijuana Rescheduling Comments From Governors, Lawmakers, Health Experts And Advocates

Tens of thousands of people and organizations weighed in on the federal government’s marijuana rescheduling proposal ahead of the close of public comment on Monday night. That includes governors, members of Congress, medical professionals and advocacy groups on either side of the legalization debate, among many others.

Some, including a coalition of reform groups, called the recommendation to move cannabis to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) insufficient to address issues such as the state–federal conflict between marijuana laws and criminal justice matters related to prohibition. Others criticized the Biden administration plan as a political move they claimed is unsupported by scientific evidence. Additional commentators said Schedule III is an appropriate classification for cannabis.

In all, more than 40,000 submissions had been filed on the issue as of Monday evening. The 60-day public comment period kicked off in May, shortly after the president and the Justice Department (DOJ) confirmed the marijuana rescheduling plan.

DOJ officials have said they’ll take all public comments submitted by the deadline into consideration as they weighs the reform, but they’ve said they’re especially interested in hearing about the “unique economic impacts” of rescheduling, noting that state-level legalization has created a “multibillion dollar industry” that stands to benefit from possible federal tax relief under the reform.

Stakeholders across the political spectrum—both inside and outside of the marijuana industry—have submitted comments on the implications of rescheduling on state laws, enforcement, research, access to cannabinoid medicines, international treaties and more.

Now that the comment period is closed, there may be an administrative hearing to receive additional input before the rule is potentially finalized and formally adopted.

Read excerpts of some of the submitted comments below:

Politicians and lawmakers

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D)

I’ve always questioned having marijuana labeled as a Schedule 1 controlled substance, as demonstrated in 2012 when I asked DEA Administrator Leonhart about restrictive scheduling, over a decade before the current rescheduling process began.

Colorado has had a medical marijuana program in place for almost a quarter of a century, going back to 2000. And we are the first state in the nation to have regulated use for adults over the age of 21, since 2014. During that time, we have learned a lot.

Our data shows that regulation works and is most certainly a preferable option over the failed notion of prohibition. Seizures are in decline, arrests are in decline, fewer people are incarcerated for cannabis.

We’ve learned we need more data and research on the perils of driving under the influence of potentially impairing and intoxicating substances for not just cannabis, but all substances including alcohol. But those realizations would not have come to be without the legalization and regulation of cannabis as we have done here in Colorado.

Importantly, YOUTH USE HAS NOT INCREASED POST LEGALIZATION. Colorado youth continue to use cannabis at lower rates than their peers nationally. While we acknowledge harms associated with illicit use, the overwhelming conclusions demonstrate that legalization is contributing to decreased youth use, not the opposite.

Our medical program has expanded, allowing recommendations for medical marijuana to be made by a wide array of professions and allowing recommendations for both disabling and debilitating conditions including anything for which an opioid may be prescribed. The value of this cannot be overstated.

This industry has contributed to well over 40,000 jobs of just those directly involved in the industry, not to mention the tens of thousands of professionals in ancillary industries that support the cannabis industry such as construction, security, financial institutions, accounting, legal, janitorial, etc.

Our Department of Revenue has collected over $2.7 billion tax dollars since 2014, providing money for building schools, investing in early childhood and higher education, affordable housing, public safety, investing in infrastructure, the list goes on and on…

Colorado has led the way to demonstrate what removing barriers and normalizing both medical and adult use of cannabis can look like in the United States. The State of Colorado eagerly supports the HHS recommendation of rescheduling marijuana from Schedule 1 to Schedule 3 on the CSA.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear (D)

As Governor, my job is to move our state forward. Rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III is a significant, common-sense step forward for all Kentuckians, especially those with significant medical conditions.

The jury is no longer out on marijuana: it has medical uses and is currently being used for medical purposes. This recognition is overwhelming – and bipartisan. In Kentucky, for example, I signed a medical marijuana law that passed with support from Republican legislative supermajorities and a Democratic Governor.

A well-regulated medical marijuana market provides an alternative to opioids. Our sister states have shown that medical marijuana programs are safe. With age-restrictions, rigorous testing standards, packaging and labeling requirements, and advertising restrictions, state medical marijuana markets have provided safe, effective medical products to millions of Americans. We look forward to seeing how safe medical marijuana products will reduce the suffering and improve the lives of tens of thousands of Kentuckians when our Program launches in 2025.

Twenty-five Republicans in Congress

It is clear that HHS and DOJ chose the desired conclusion first and worked backwards, since the rule does not provide sufficient reason to move marijuana to schedule III.

DEA Administrator [Ann] Milgram did not sign the rule, and it states many times that DEA believes additional information is needed regarding the appropriate schedule for marijuana… The Proposed Rule references DEA’s findings from 2016, when it rejected two petitions to remove marijuana from schedule I. It seems that DEA stands by its findings from 2016—all the more reason why this rule should not have been published without sign off from the DEA Administrator.

National Conference of State Legislatures

While NCSL commends the administration on the decision to reschedule cannabis to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act, this is only the first step toward cementing nationwide cannabis reform. NCSL maintains that cannabis should be removed completely from the CSA, explicitly allowing states to set their own cannabis policies without federal interference. States have proven to be the laboratories of democracy, and since California legalized medical cannabis in 1996, state legislatures have nimbly established and maintained robust medical and recreational cannabis markets with minimal negative externalities. Further, state-regulated cannabis markets have helped curb the illicit market by replacing untested and adulterated products with tested, well-labeled, safe cannabis products. States have been able to direct cannabis sales tax revenue into underfunded areas such as education and drug rehabilitation programs. Descheduling cannabis completely will ensure these state efforts will not be wasted.

State cannabis regulators

Cannabis Regulators Association (CANNRA)

CANNRA remains committed to supporting our members in successfully implementing whatever the final rule on rescheduling is, and respectfully calls on the DEA, the [Department of Justice], and other engaged federal agencies to issue appropriate guidance to guide implementation. As a nonpartisan government association whose members are charged with administering state and territorial laws related to marijuana and cannabinoids, we are available to provide additional insight…

In addition, it will be important for federal agencies to issue clear guidance about any allowance and requirements for interstate commerce under a new schedule.

Regulators face a reality now where the same 200mg delta-9 THC chocolate bar can be scheduled if the THC was derived from Cannabis sativa Lwith >0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight (i.e., marijuana), or unscheduled if the delta-9 THC came fromCannabis sativa L with <=0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight (i.e., hemp) – even when the chocolates are identical. This creates an extremely difficult regulatory environment, particularly when certain hemp-derived products in the market contain higher THC levels than those allowed under state-regulated cannabis (i.e., ‘marijuana’) laws.

Regulators would benefit from federal clarity and guidance on how to assess and regulate the same molecules (often in the same quantity in finished products) differently based on whether they are from ‘hemp’ or ‘marijuana.’

New York State Office of Cannabis Management

The New York State Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) extends its support to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Department of Justice (DOJ) in reevaluating marijuana’s status under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This historic step reflects the growing consensus that cannabis should be regulated and accessible for both medical and adult-use purposes, aligning with the views of 88% of Americans who support cannabis legalization. New York State has had a state-run medical cannabis program for a decade and legalized adult-use cannabis in 2021, regulating the cannabis industry in a manner that protects public health and safety. Federal rescheduling of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III acknowledges its medicinal value, consistent with recent recommendations from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

OCM requests additional guidance from the federal government, like the Cole Memorandum (2013) which signaled the federal government’s enforcement priorities and commitment to allow states to regulate cannabis by their state-run programs. New York’s cannabinoid hemp, adult-use, and medical cannabis programs include hundreds of licensees and over 100,000 medical cannabis patients, who depend on access to regulated cannabis. Rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III would be a positive change, however state regulated cannabis programs need surety from the federal government that these programs will remain stable and accessible to consumers even as the federal government develops and issues guidance areas unaddressed by rescheduling alone.

Rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III signals federal intent for substantial policy and practice change and opens the door for additional federal guidance to support state-run cannabis programs. Of several issues that persist, however, are federal criminalization of adult-use cannabis, limited interstate commerce, persistent banking challenges, and continuity of care for medical cannabis patients. While rescheduling may open pathways for prescription drug models, ambiguity remains for many adult-use cannabis products. In addition, the federal government should consider addressing and eliminating criminal penalties associated with the possession, cultivation, manufacture, and distribution of cannabis, in line with states’ frameworks. Further considerations should aim to expand equitable financial access and resources and solicit feedback from states on approaches whereby the federal government can best support state-regulated adult-use cannabis programs.

The State of New York strongly supports rescheduling cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III. In addition, OCM urges the federal government to provide clear guidance to protect state-level adult-use cannabis programs, improve financial access and resources, and expand the health and safety opportunities of cannabis study. These measures will ensure a thriving, equitable cannabis market that works in benefit of consumers, businesses, researchers, and local communities in kind.

Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission

The Commission strongly supports the DOJ and HHS’ acknowledgment of the accepted medical use of cannabis. This recognition aligns with extensive scientific research and the experiences of many states, including Massachusetts, where medical cannabis has been safely and effectively used to treat various medical conditions and improve patients’ lives. Rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III may help facilitate further clinical research and broaden patient access to therapeutic treatments.

The Commission believes that rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III of the CSA will enhance research opportunities and deepen society’s understanding of the effects and benefits of cannabis. Currently, as a Schedule I substance, cannabis is classified alongside drugs considered to have no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. This classification imposes stringent regulatory hurdles on researchers, limiting the scope and scale of scientific studies. By rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III, barriers may be substantially reduced.

To ensure successful understanding of the new classification and its implications, the Commission emphasizes the need for the federal government to provide comprehensive training and educational resources. These resources should be tailored for healthcare providers, law enforcement, existing medical marijuana patients and caregivers, state regulators, existing cannabis business owners, and the general public, to ensure a thorough understanding of the changes and their impacts.

While rescheduling cannabis will continue to positively influence public perception around cannabis use and reduce existing stigmas, public education campaigns are also necessary to raise awareness about the rescheduling and its implications. These campaigns should provide clear information on the legal status of cannabis, its medical uses, and safe consumption practices. Public awareness initiatives, such as Massachusetts’ ‘More About Marijuana’ campaign, can help dispel myths and promote informed decision-making among citizens whether they are novice or seasoned consumers.

Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency (CRA)

The comments below are twofold: First, we are providing information and statistics about Michigan’s Medical Marijuana Program to assist the DEA in its understanding of whether marijuana has a currently accepted medical use as determined using the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) two-part inquiry. Second, we are providing a list of considerations the DEA and other federal agencies should evaluate when determining whether to reschedule marijuana and how rescheduling should be implemented.

Rescheduling marijuana from schedule I to schedule III can have profound impacts on both the medical and adult-use markets, potentially transforming how these markets operate and are perceived, but will do little good—and could potentially wreak havoc on Michigan’s existing programs—without clear guidance from all areas of the federal government explaining the effects of rescheduling.

The CRA understands each federal agency has their own scope of responsibilities and the DEA does not exercise control over those agencies, but if rescheduling is going to have a meaningful, positive effect, the federal government must take a whole-of-government approach to implementation, messaging, and enforcement. Federal agencies should coordinate to publish as much information as possible to ensure a positive path forward in the legal marijuana space.

Nationwide, millions of individuals consume marijuana to treat their health problems or enjoy its recreational benefits legally under state law. Rescheduling does little good to states with active medical and adult-use markets if the federal government fails to provide clear and robust whole-of-government guidance on the implications of the rescheduling.

The DEA should also proactively seek the advice of the state regulators who have worked diligently—some for more than a decade—to create safe and successful state marijuana markets that generate tens of billions of dollars in economic activity nationwide each year.

Illinois Cannabis Regulation Oversight Office

Illinois supports the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Proposed Rulemaking, Docket No. DEA-1362, Schedules of Controlled Substances: Rescheduling of Marijuana.

Illinois’ experience with a legalized cannabis market demonstrates the benefits that a change in the treatment of cannabis in federal law could bring. Placing cannabis as a Schedule III substance is a positive development, but the final rule should also (1) allow and promote academic and independent research into state-legal products, (2) avoid harming state-designed programs, like Illinois’ social equity licensing, and (3) provide clear guidance to the broad range of impacted industries and fields.

To provide additional background on Illinois’ program, 13 different state agencies have responsibilities for implementation of the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Program and the Cannabis Regulation and Tax Act. … These reports show that cannabis legalization has not had a harmful effect on the residents of Illinois. Instead, medical cannabis patients have been able to access cannabis to address 56 statutorily permitted medical conditions with licensed-health care practitioner certification, guidance, and advice. Instead of tens of thousands of cannabis arrests annually, criminal justice system involvement is down to under 3,000 arrests annually and impacts have been eliminated for cannabis consumers, allowing law enforcement to focus on violent and property crimes. Finally, millions of new tax dollars have been invested in critical violence prevention, substance abuse treatment and trauma services, and workforce development training that have been accessed by tens of thousands of Illinois residents.

Compared to the benefits of legal cannabis in Illinois, harmful consequences are insignificant. The attached annual reports show that consumption of cannabis by minors has not dramatically increased. Driving under the influence of cannabis has increased but, importantly, cannabis-involved accidents decreased by the second year of legalization by 75% and remain a small fraction of all traffic accidents in Illinois. Illinois Poison Center has similarly reported more calls about youth (<11-year-olds) ingestion from pre-legalization (up 283% in 2021 from 2019) but has fallen by 10% in the following year as consumers become more familiar with cannabis. Further, preliminary data do not show death or severe lasting harm related to the incidents.

Importantly, Illinois has not seen diversion from the legal cannabis market, largely because the regulatory structure requires strict chain of custody and thorough recordkeeping. When cannabis product or waste is destroyed, State inspectors watch or approve remote inspection to ensure full compliance. Of all referred prosecutions by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, the agency that oversees cannabis dispensaries, pharmacies, doctors, and nurses, only 0.5% come from cannabis.3 Overall, Illinois’s consumer safety protections are working to protect against diversion or illicit activity in the cannabis market.

New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory Commission

The New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory Commission (“NJ-CRC”) respectfully submits this comment to express its strong support of the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) removing cannabis from the list of controlled substances in Schedule I under the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”), if not descheduling cannabis entirely. The rescheduling proposal is a step in the right direction for creating a more just, logical, and public-health centered approach to regulating a substance that the vast majority of states have considered medicine beginning almost 30 years ago. When nearly nine out of every ten Americans support some form of cannabis legalization, it is imperative that their government take this historic step to help fulfill the unending promise of a more perfect Union.

The NJ-CRC appreciates that the DEA’s Proposed Rule reflects an understanding that maintaining cannabis as a Schedule I substance is not sustainable and therefore must be rescheduled or removed from the CSA entirely. Using the DEA’s three-part analysis for determining the appropriate schedule for cannabis, the NJ-CRC respectfully submits the following evidence and analyses to support the proposal to reschedule cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III. As outlined below, while cannabis use involves the risk for abuse, the negative impacts are minimal when compared to other substances which are listed on less restrictive schedules or are completely unscheduled. Further, cannabis serves as an effective medicine with fewer negative side effects than many pharmaceutical options which are presently included on less restrictive CSA Schedules. While there are risks involved with cannabis use, states that have implemented programs to regulate cannabis have and will continue to effectively address and mitigate those risks.

NJ-CRC supports the DEA’s decision to revisit the restrictions on cannabis under the CSA and urges the DEA to implement changes that will offer far-reaching and meaningful opportunities for relief for people and communities negatively impacted by prior cannabis policies.

Maryland Cannabis Administration

State-level regulation has given the MCA the ability to establish standards for cultivation, manufacturing, and inventory control. These standards are likely a significant factor in the low levels of diversion and adverse health outcomes experienced in the State. In evaluating the rescheduling of cannabis, the DEA and DOJ should consider the benefits that Maryland patients have experienced due to cannabis. Similarly, the benefit of regulation and oversight is demonstrated when contrasting Maryland’s regulated market with the unregulated hemp-derived market.

As shown throughout this comment, data from Maryland exemplifies that cannabis use generally does not present adverse events for individuals. Instances of hospitalization due to cannabis use are exceedingly rare across both samples of the State’s patient survey. Additionally, the State’s public behavior health system has documented few treatment episodes due to cannabis use. Not only does cannabis use seldom present adverse events, but many patients in the State experience positive health outcomes from cannabis use. As discussed in the first section of this comment, 90% of the patients using cannabis to treat mental health conditions found it to be beneficial. It is additionally significant that these effects are consistent regardless of the methods of administration used by individuals, or their frequency of consumption. When considering the positive benefits experienced, the low-risk potential, and the clear benefits of a regulated market, the MCA encourages the DEA and DOJ to reschedule cannabis to Schedule III, which is much more consistent with the evidence gathered in Maryland.

Georgia Access to Medical Cannabis Commission

‬The‬‭ Georgia‬‭ Access‬‭ to‬‭ Medical‬‭ Cannabis‬‭ Commission‬‭ (“GMCC”)‬‭ supports‬‭ and‬‭ shares‬‭ the‬‭ viewpoint‬‭ expressed‬ by‬‭ the‬‭ U.S.‬‭ Department‬‭ of‬‭ Health‬‭ and‬‭ Human‬‭ Services‬‭ that‬‭ marijuana‬‭ has‬‭ a‬‭ currently‬‭ accepted‬‭ medical‬‭ use.‬

The‬‭ registered‬‭ patients‬‭ GMCC‬‭ serves‬‭ are‬‭ the‬‭ heartbeat‬‭ of‬‭ Georgia’s‬‭ medical‬‭ cannabis‬‭ program.‬‭ It‬‭ is‬‭ on‬‭ behalf‬‭ of‬‭ those‬‭ patients,‬‭ in‬‭ memory‬‭ of‬‭ those‬‭ who‬‭ have‬‭ passed‬‭ from‬‭ their‬‭ medical‬‭ conditions,‬‭ and‬‭ in‬‭ honor‬‭ of‬‭ those‬‭ who‬ still‬‭ need‬‭ access‬‭ to‬‭ medical‬‭ cannabis‬‭ for‬‭ their‬‭ health‬‭ conditions,‬‭ that‬‭ the‬‭ GMCC‬‭ respectfully‬‭ submits‬‭ this‬‭ letter‬ for‬‭ consideration.

Similar‬‭ to‬‭ any‬‭ kind‬‭ of‬‭ over-the-counter‬‭ medication,‬‭ prescription‬‭ medication,‬‭ or‬‭ other‬‭ medical‬‭ treatment,‬‭ there‭ are‬‭ potential‬‭ benefits‬‭ and‬‭ risks‬‭ of‬‭ using‬‭ medical‬‭ cannabis‬‭ that‬‭ physicians‬‭ and‬‭ patients‬‭ should‬‭ consider‬‭ and‬ discuss,‬‭ especially‬‭ those‬‭ that‬‭ pertain‬‭ to‬‭ each‬‭ patient’s‬‭ conditions,‬‭ medical‬‭ history,‬‭ and‬‭ other‬‭ vulnerabilities.‬‭ In‭ Georgia,‬‭ there‬‭ have‬‭ been‬‭ no‬‭ reports‬‭ of‬‭ adverse‬‭ events‬‭ from‬‭ patients‬‭ who‬‭ have‬‭ used‬‭ medical‬‭ cannabis‬‭ as‭ regulated‬‭ by‬‭ the‬‭ GMCC.‬‭ GMCC‬‭ has,‬‭ and‬‭ continues‬‭ to‬‭ be,‬‭ committed‬‭ to‬‭ leading‬‭ and‬‭ maintaining‬‭ a‭ well-regulated‬‭ medical‬‭ cannabis‬‭ program.

Whether‬‭ on‬‭ Georgia’s‬‭ patient‬‭ registry‬‭ or‬‭ not,‬‭ we‬‭ all‬‭ know‬‭ at‬‭ least‬‭ one‬‭ person‬‭ who‬‭ has, or‬‭ had,‬‭ one‬‭ of‬‭ the‬‭ medical‬‭ conditions‬‭ mentioned‬‭ in‬‭ this‬‭ letter.‬‭ And,‬‭ every‬‭ patient‬‭ on‬‭ Georgia’s‬‭ registry‬‭ represents‬‭ a‬‭ lived‬‭ experience‬‭ of‬‭ how‬‭ cannabis‬‭ has‬‭ an‬‭ accepted–and‬‭ necessary–medical‬‭ use.‬‭ This‬‭ is‬‭ a‬‭ fact‬‭ we‬‭ must‬‭ recognize‬‭ whether‬‭ or‬‭ not‬‭ we‬‭ have‬‭ lived‬‭ it‬‭ ourselves.‬

Thank‬‭ you‬‭ for‬‭ this‬‭ opportunity‬‭ to‬‭ provide‬‭ a‬‭ public‬‭ comment‬‭ on‬‭ a‬‭ historic‬‭ proposed‬‭ rulemaking‬‭ process.‬ Although‬‭ the‬‭ result‬‭ of‬‭ this‬‭ process‬‭ remains‬‭ uncertain,‬‭ the‬‭ GMCC‬‭ will‬‭ continue‬‭ to‬‭ put‬‭ Georgia’s‬‭ patients‬‭ first.‬‭ It‬ is‬‭ our‬‭ hope‬‭ that‬‭ the‬‭ federal‬‭ government‬‭ will‬‭ put‬‭ them,‬‭ and‬‭ patients‬‭ in‬‭ other‬‭ states,‬‭ first‬‭ too.‬

Maine Office of Cannabis Policy

OCP is supportive of the proposed rulemaking to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), to create the conditions for substantially expanded, scientifically rigorous research into the risks, benefits, and impacts of cannabis use by patients and consumers alike. While rescheduling will not address all of the existing barriers to scientific and medical research into cannabis, it will signal to universities, hospitals, and research institutions that such research can be conducted within the bounds of federal law and assuage concerns that such research would jeopardize institutions’ other federal funding.

[I]t is critical that DOJ communicates the impact, if any, that rescheduling marijuana will have on interstate commerce. Clarification of this issue is especially important for Maine cannabis business owners, as Maine borders only one other state that would serve as its gateway to any future interstate cannabis market. While it is clear to OCP that rescheduling marijuana will not have the effect of legalizing such interstate commerce, confusion regarding this issue is widespread enough to cause real concern about how the rule change will be interpreted by cannabis businesses lawfully operating within the laws of the several states.

Minnesota Office of Cannabis Management

The rescheduling of cannabis is long overdue and an important first step in realigning national drug policy to recognize the ineffective war on drugs that has marginalized and harmed millions of Americans for decades. We urge the DEA to align with this recommendation and reschedule cannabis to Schedule III this year. This is especially important considering the widespread support for cannabis legalization, whether for medical, research, or recreational purposes. We recognize that rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III introduces new questions about enforcement and regulatory authority, and we are prepared to work with our state and national counterparts to address those questions in Minnesota in a proactive and collaborative manner.

Cannabis’s current classification as a Schedule I narcotic during the expansion of state-sanctioned cannabis programs, initially medically oriented, but increasingly recreationally oriented, has long created a legal morass that has denied state regulators, state licensed businesses, and citizens the ability to act with certainty. Rescheduling to Schedule III, as noted above, comes with myriad benefits, but does not fully address the current ambiguity cannabis industry actors face. It is for this reason, in addition to rescheduling cannabis, we urge the Administration to reissue and update the Cole Memorandum to provide additional details and direction to state agencies, tribal nations, market participants, and cannabis consumers. We further encourage the Administration to incorporate an updated Wilkinson Memorandum to provide clarity around tribal interstate commerce.

State and local government bodies

Denver, Colorado

Allowing marijuana businesses to claim normal federal tax deductions would provide relief to Denver’s cannabis businesses that are paying a higher federal tax rate than non-marijuana businesses, which creates additional financial pressure as marijuana businesses experience a sales and profit decline. The tax implications of rescheduling cannabis will especially benefit social equity marijuana businesses in Denver by reducing their federal tax liability. In turn, this would benefit Denver’s economy by empowering Denver marijuana businesses to invest the extra funds in their businesses, their employees, and the community.

It is unclear how transferring marijuana to Schedule III would impact existing marijuana businesses’ ability to operate under local and state regulatory frameworks. This depends on how the DEA intends to enforce the Controlled Substances Act following this change and how the FDA intends to implement systems to adapt to this change. Any change to medical or retail marijuana businesses’ ability to operate in Denver could have significant ramifications for Denver’s economy and tax revenue. In 2023, marijuana tax revenue and licensing fees totaled $48.1 million. This revenue covers expenditures related to regulation and enforcement, but most of the revenue is spent on marijuana education for youth, homelessness services, affordable housing, and small business support.

Maryland Office of Social Equity

We are writing on behalf of the Maryland Office of Social Equity (OSE) to express our strong support for the proposed transfer of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This rescheduling represents a pivotal step forward in the ongoing cannabis reform efforts that are crucial to supporting our communities and businesses.

The proposed rescheduling action signifies timely progress and will support both current and new licensees by reducing business risks and unlocking financial opportunities, thus bringing cannabis businesses more in line with other regular businesses. Although rescheduling has its limitations, we view this action as a crucial component of comprehensive cannabis reform—a policy that Governor Moore has steadfastly advocated for and continues to support.

Rescheduling cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III can complement the cannabis reform work that states like Maryland have prioritized. It can help reduce the stigma associated with cannabis, improve access to banking services, and facilitate more robust research on the medical benefits of cannabis. These changes are essential for the continued growth and success of the legal cannabis industry, particularly for social equity licensees who have historically been marginalized and excluded from economic opportunities.

We fully support the DEA’s decision to reschedule cannabis and look forward to continuing our mission to help Maryland communities grow, learn, build, and heal from the impacts of the war on drugs.

California State Association of Counties

It is essential for federal cannabis policy to evolve in accordance with the latest scientific evidence and the shifting perspectives of society. Regrettably, federal drug policy has lagged behind the states, particularly those that have legalized cannabis in one form or another. For its part, California has been at the forefront of efforts to reform cannabis laws. In 1996, our state was the first to legalize the use of medical cannabis when voters approved the Compassionate Use Act. Twenty years later, California voters approved another statewide ballot initiative – the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA) – to legalize recreational use.

The current Schedule I status of cannabis, which categorizes it alongside substances like heroin and LSD, and which classifies the drug as more dangerous than fentanyl or cocaine, is increasingly at odds with both scientific evidence and public opinion. Schedule I classification denotes a high potential for abuse and no accepted medical use, yet numerous studies and state-level medical cannabis programs have demonstrated significant therapeutic benefits for a variety of conditions, including chronic pain, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, and nausea. Rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III would acknowledge its medical utility while maintaining appropriate regulatory controls to prevent misuse.

Reclassification would also help facilitate increased research opportunities by removing some of the existing regulatory barriers. At present, scientists and other researchers face onerous restrictions and must navigate an arduous approval process to study cannabis. This has resulted in a dearth of robust clinical data, limiting the development of evidence-based policies and medical treatments. By moving cannabis to Schedule III, these impediments would be substantially reduced. This would result in greater access to cannabis for clinical trials, thereby accelerating the understanding of its medical benefits and potential side effects. This, in turn, could improve patient access to safe and effective treatments.

Reform advocates

NORML

Over the past five decades, NORML has been party to numerous cannabis rescheduling petitions. NORML is providing these comments today in support of the reclassification of botanical cannabis.

Clinical findings provide the basis for this widespread acceptance among practicing physicians and healthcare professionals. Specifically, a review summarizing the findings of several FDA-approved, randomized placebo-controlled trials assessing the safety and efficacy of botanical cannabis in various patient populations concludes, ‘Based on evidence currently available the Schedule I classification is not tenable; it is not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking.’

This conclusion was affirmed by an exhaustive literature review by the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee on the Health Effects of Marijuana, which found ‘conclusive or substantial evidence’ that cannabis and its active constituents benefit specific patients, including those suffering from chronic pain, nausea, and spasticity.

Moreover, a recent review of the literature compiled by NORML highlights over 400 peer-reviewed papers documenting the efficacy of either cannabis or its constituents in more than 20 distinct patient populations.

The available data clearly shows that cannabis does not meet the necessary criteria of either a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance. While NORML strongly believes cannabis should be removed from the CSA altogether – thereby harmonizing federal cannabis policy with those of most US states – we do not dispute the factual basis underlying HHS’ recommendation to move botanical cannabis to Schedule III or lower. It would be arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to reject HHS’ findings of fact and maintain existing prohibitions of the cannabis plant.

Marijuana Policy Project (MPP)

We ask the Department of Justice and the DEA to promptly finalize this rule, rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III. In the alternative, please reschedule it to a less restrictive schedule, or deschedule it entirely.

Schedule I drugs must have ‘no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States,’ a high potential for abuse, and there must be ‘a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.’ Cannabis does not meet any of those criteria.

Cannabis’ medical value is almost universally acknowledged, as is its lower potential for abuse than Schedule II drugs, including prescription opioids. Its Schedule I status is an embarrassment and an insult to millions of patients and healthcare practitioners.

Classifying cannabis as if it has no medical value does real harm, complicating research, increasing stigma and discrimination against patients who benefit from it, reducing health care practitioners’ education, and delaying federally legal access to medical cannabis—thus delaying standardization of lab testing, pesticide regulation, labeling and packaging rules, and regulatory harmonization.

We ask your Department of Justice and DEA to finalize this rule by (1) issuing the regulation, (2) confirming that cannabis is not required to meet the DEA’s five-factor test, and (3) rescheduling cannabis promptly into Schedule III or a less restrictive schedule, or deschedule it entirely.

Marijuana Justice Coalition

The [Marijuana Justice Coalition] urges you to publicly support the removal (“descheduling”) of marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Only the descheduling of marijuana will truly decriminalize it at the federal level.

If the DEA determines that marijuana will remain in the CSA, your campaign pledge to decriminalize marijuana use will not have been fulfilled.

To take the next steps towards fulfilling this pledge, you must begin to explicitly support the descheduling of marijuana from the CSA. It is incumbent upon you to call on Congress to pass descheduling legislation…. Our coalition endorsed version of both of these bills because they seek to end federal penalties for marijuana and repair past harms of criminalization. Your support of this legislation could help us pass these bills into law.

Your administration can and should take immediate executive action—even while marijuana remains in Schedule I of the CSA—to lessen the harms of marijuana criminalization, such as the expansion of pardons and commutations for sentences beyond simple marijuana possession, ending marijuana-based deportations, and revising federal agency policies, particularly those involving the collateral consequences of a marijuana conviction.

Your administration has the opportunity to finally have federal marijuana policy catch up to public opinion and the state legal landscape that is increasingly rejecting marijuana criminalization. Pardons for simple possession cases are a good first step but as Vice President Harris recently said at the March 15, 2024 Roundtable Conversation about Marijuana Reform, “there still is much more to do.” As President and Vice President, the most important next step for you is to publicly and explicitly call for the descheduling of marijuana from the CSA.

Last Prisoner Project (LPP)

We urge the DEA to decontrol cannabis due to the grave public health consequences of cannabis-related incarceration.

At the Last Prisoner Project, we recognize the DEA’s decision to approve the Department of Health and Human Services recommendation to reschedule cannabis to Schedule III is historic. This announcement is the culmination of years of advocacy by groups like ourselves to push the federal government to better reflect the public’s view on cannabis. With this said, while the move is undoubtedly a step forward, it does not fulfill LPP’s goal to fully remove cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act, and we believe the failure to do so propagates significant risks to public health given the nature of cannabis-related incarceration.

Rescheduling is a peripheral change that signals the reevaluation of cannabis, but not the release of cannabis prisoners or relief for those who continue to be burdened by the lasting consequences of the carceral system, particularly as it relates to public health.

The research surrounding the relationship between incarceration and diminished life expectancies is unequivocal. Studies have shown that “each year in prison takes 2 years off an individual’s life expectancy.” And more broadly, “mass incarceration has shortened the overall US life expectancy by 5 years.” Even upon release, these impacts continue, given that mortality rates for individuals under any form of community supervision are two to three times higher than the general population. It is also worth noting that many incarcerated individuals already face increased health risks due to the disproportionate methods of policing. Cannabis is overcriminalized amongst communities of color, who already face diminished life expectancies. Furthermore, data shows that “people aged 55 years and older are among the fastest growing segments of the incarcerated population. Older adults have higher rates of chronic conditions and mental and physical disabilities.”

With these health crises in mind, LPP believes that the mere rescheduling of cannabis—which allows the continued criminalization of cannabis use and imprisonment for cannabis offenses—perpetuates the public health risks associated with incarceration. Therefore, we urge the DEA to go further, and to decontrol cannabis, thus reducing criminal penalties and creating avenues for individuals currently serving time for cannabis offenses to seek relief. We believe that this would significantly improve the nation’s public health in numerous ways. Not only would it improve the health crisis within prisons by mitigating overcrowding, but it would also improve the health outcomes of individuals incarcerated for cannabis offenses by shielding them from the fatal conditions of prisons, ultimately uplifting surrounding communities as well.

Parabola Center

While to some, rescheduling marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III might appear to represent progress, it falls severely short of addressing the full scope of injustice caused by decades of prohibition.

This article examines the impacts of marijuana prohibition and makes the case that rescheduling marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III does not constitute true justice and that true justice requires descheduling, along with policies that benefit marijuana patients, marijuana workers, and people who have been most harmed by the enforcement of marijuana laws.

While rescheduling marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III gives the appearance of progress, it falls short of addressing the full scope of injustice caused by decades of prohibition.

Rescheduling marijuana is, at best, a symbolic change that does not fully acknowledge the extensive harm caused by prohibition. True justice requires more than reclassification; it demands a broad, inclusive approach that addresses the historical and ongoing injustices faced by those targeted by these punitive policies.

While rescheduling marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III might appear to be a step in the right direction, it is not. In order to end marijuana criminalization and its harms, marijuana must be removed entirely from the CSA or descheduled. True justice demands a broader, more inclusive approach that fully addresses the racial, social, and economic injustices perpetuated by marijuana prohibition, while establishing guardrails that prevent monopolies and excessive corporate concentration.

Students for Sensible Drug Policy

While SSDP commends the Department of Justice for taking a much-needed step towards ending federal marijuana prohibition, rescheduling marijuana as a Schedule III drug simply is not sufficient.

Schedule III will not stop arrests, it will not release a single person from prison, it will not break the paper shackles of a criminal conviction, and it puts a target on the backs of every young person, who is now more likely to have their future destroyed by police intervention and arrests. It does not even fully recognize the state-legal dispensary model that the American people themselves want to see expanded.

It is not enough to simply treat the symptoms of bad cannabis policy; we must fix the problem at its root cause.

We therefore urge the Department of Justice to continue through with the spirit of ending the decades-long War on Cannabis—which we believe to be the intent of rescheduling—and completely remove marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

Cannabis Regulators of Color Coalition (CRCC)

As leaders in post-prohibition cannabis policy, we focus on equity-centered regulation, industry best practices, and cannabis competency and standardization. Our mission is to be a source of education for legislators and government agencies that aim to identify and eliminate racial disparities in cannabis policy and build sustainable cannabis regulatory frameworks designed to deliver on the reparative and restorative potential of the global cannabis legalization and decriminalization movement.

In alignment with our mission, we advocate for the complete removal of marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), thereby descheduling it entirely. Only by descheduling marijuana will the federal government be able to end marijuana criminalization at the federal level. Federal decriminalization is a necessary step to protect state and local efforts to establish their own marijuana policies, including those that decriminalize marijuana and regulate its use.

Furthermore, beyond the issue of scheduling, it is imperative that the federal government acknowledges the racist origins of marijuana criminalization and the persistent racial disparities stemming from its enforcement. To address these injustices, the federal government should take action to establish a federal framework that comprehensively embeds equity in federal marijuana policy and takes immediate action to mitigate the harms caused by cannabis enforcement.

Industry groups

National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA)

We are pleased to submit the following comment in response to the proposed rule from the DEA (89 FR 44597) in support of the reclassification of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

Law enforcement

Former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) administrators

Given the magnitude of the impact of the proposed rule and considering we face an unprecedented drug overdose crisis in this country, we write to emphasize that a hearing on this rulemaking is in the public interest.

As DEA made clear in the Proposed Rule, additional data and rigorous scientific analysis is needed to determine whether marijuana is appropriately placed into Schedule III,” the former drug enforcement officials wrote. “Sifting through the competing claims about marijuana’s pharmacological effects, potential for abuse, and implications for public safety, are best done at a hearing.

Eighteen GOP state attorneys general

“A public hearing is in the public interest, and therefore in the interest of our states,” says a sign-on letter led by South Carolina AG Alan Wilson (R). Other AGs who endorsed the message represent Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming. All are Republicans.

Eleven GOP state attorneys general

Placing marijuana on Schedule III will send a tidal wave of legal marijuana flooding into Nebraska (and similarly situated States that have yet to legalize recreational marijuana but border States that have), that will make previous access expansions look like a drop in the bucket. States like Nebraska, that have no legal marijuana market and thus collect no tax revenue that could help defray the related torrent of increasing costs, shoulder a disproportionate share of the societal burden that flows from expansions of access to legal marijuana. We urge DEA to carefully consider the harms associated with rescheduling and give due consideration to the hardships it would impose on Nebraska and States similarly situated.

New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin (D)

I write to express my strong support of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (“DEA” or “Administration”) proposed rule regarding “Schedules of Controlled Substances: Rescheduling of Marijuana,” 89 Fed. Reg. 44,597 (the “Proposed Rule”), and commend the DEA for its efforts in addressing this issue. New Jersey’s experience reforming its own cannabis regulatory framework provides strong evidence that cannabis should not be scheduled as a Schedule I controlled substance under the Controlled Substance Act (“CSA”). The Administration’s proposed rescheduling of cannabis1 is thus a welcome step toward a comprehensive legal framework that allows for common-sense regulation of a legal cannabis market for adults.

Focusing on responsible regulation of legal possession of cannabis for medical and adult recreational use undercuts and weakens the illicit cannabis market and many of the problems that come with it. As detailed below, the Administration’s much-needed action will help bolster the efforts New Jersey has undertaken at the state level to ensure that individuals and communities have access to comprehensive legal protections and benefits in connection with the State-sanctioned use of cannabis. Rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III will continue the process of building an equitable framework of common-sense legal protections for all affected people and communities.

As the chief law enforcement officer in the State of New Jersey, I am charged with ensuring public safety, promoting business accountability, and protecting individual rights. I cannot emphasize enough the importance of CREAMMA and the NJ-CRC’s regulations, which have had immediate real-life impacts on the lives of New Jersey residents and brought equity and economic opportunity to our communities. CREAMMA and NJ-CRC’s regulations have brought a previously illicit, unregulated market into the light with transparency and proper oversight and established a regulated market for adult-use recreational cannabis. This new transparency helps protect consumers by maintaining quality controls for cannabis products and requiring licensing and standards for cannabis retailers. The recreational cannabis industry in New Jersey is still young, but the NJ-CRC’s licensing and regulatory scheme has cultivated the growth of a strong, transparent and responsible business sector that enjoys various legal protections generally afforded to businesses and workers in New Jersey.

Given the needs of the State of New Jersey and its people, I support the DEA’s proposal to promptly reschedule cannabis as Schedule III under the CSA.

International Association of Chiefs of Police

On behalf of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, I am writing to express our strong opposition to the recent proposal by the Justice Department to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I substance to a Schedule III substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This proposed change represents a significant shift in federal drug policy with significant implications for public safety, public health and the ability of police agencies to protect the public.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police strongly opposes the proposed rescheduling of Marijuana and urges the adoption of, or continuation of, policies and regulations that prioritize public health and safety.

National Sheriffs’ Association

Marijuana has been in schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) since 1970, and this placement has aligned with the scientific and medical reasoning and recommendation of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)—each of the several times the issue has come up. On May 16, 2024, however, the Drug Enforcement Administration announced its intention to move marijuana from schedule I to schedule III. HHS has suddenly changed its scientific and medical reasoning, and the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in the U.S. Department of Justice has written an accommodating opinion.

At most, the evidence supports rescheduling marijuana from I to II, not III. Most significantly, marijuana has a high potential for abuse—which excludes it from schedule III. Congress found this in 1970, and HHS and DEA found this in 2016.

HHS and DEA now focus on marijuana’s relative abuse potential compared to schedule I and II drugs, like fentanyl and cocaine, and ignore or discount other abuse-potential evidence. But HHS shows no scientific or medical reason for this shift, and it shows no mistake in its 2016 analysis. Instead, HHS changed its analysis in order to avoid putting marijuana in schedule II. Skipping 812(b)(2)(A)’s criterion is a legal error. Moreover, HHS points to no evidence that marijuana’s absolute or relative abuse potential, or its relative adverse outcomes, compared to other I and II drugs, has decreased since 2016. In fact, the industry has produced marijuana strains and products that contain more delta-9 THC than a decade ago, and this means that marijuana’s absolute potential for abuse is higher and its relative abuse potential is closer to other I and II drugs than in 2016.

Association of Federal Narcotics Agents

As President of the DEAFNA (Drug Enforcement Association of Federal Narcotics Agents), I am writing to urge the current Administration not to knowingly fail this country’s youth by rescheduling marijuana from the current and justified Schedule I classification.

Recent communication from the Assistant Secretary for Health and Human Services (HHS) in support of rescheduling marijuana is unfounded and in direct contradiction with its own SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) evidence-based literature, NSDUH (National Survey on Drug Use and Health) reports, and grantee marijuana attestation requirements.

Numerous independent studies exist which quantify hte steep rise in incidence of addiction, psychosis and mental illness directly resulting from increased marijuana use, especially among adolescents. The nexus between chronic use and mental illness is proven to increase homelessness effecting children and veterans the most. Related increases have been well-documented in marijuana-impaired driving incidents, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations. The negative impact of marijuana is undeniable and, in many cases, permanent.

DEAFNA is comprised of retired and active DEA agents, who unquestionably understand this issue from every perspective. In fact, DEA agents are the only federal employees whose sole mission since 1973 has been to enforce the controlled substances laws and regulations of the United States.

We are adamantly opposed to any intentional move that we predict will have such a drastically negative and permanent impact on public safety and health.

National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition

I am writing on behalf of the National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition (NNOAC), which represents 40 state narcotic officer associations and over 60,000 law enforcement officers, to oppose the recommendation to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act.

It is disheartening to see politics overtake the decision-making process at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in what should have been an evidence-based review. When our elected legislative body has not taken up and passed any measure to change current scheduling laws with regards to marijuana, it is wildly inappropriate for the executive branch agencies to move forward anyways, basing its decision on pseudoscience.

We believe that reclassifying marijuana to Schedule III will harm public health and safety. Classifying marijuana under Schedule III would allow the industry to deduct business expenses, as they would no longer be subject to IRS regulation Section 280E. Marijuana businesses would then be able to deduct expenses for advertising and marketing, greatly expanding the industry’s commercialization ability. In a time when we have undertaken intense effort, money, and resources to educate our children and society at large about the dangers of smoking cigarettes, of which we have seen a dramatic drop, we are now sending a message that marijuana is ok. This has been reflected in the drastic rise in the use of marijuana by young adults.

The NNOAC strongly urges you to follow the science and public health evidence on this issue and oppose the rescheduling of marijuana by keeping it under Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.

Healthcare and safety groups

American Medical Association

While rescheduling cannabis from a Schedule I Controlled Substance to a Schedule III Controlled Substance is not the same thing as approving cannabis for non-medical use (or medical use for that matter), the AMA is concerned that rescheduling may send a mixed message to consumers that cannabis use is safe. Even though HHS may have concluded that cannabis has a currently accepted medical use (CAMU), the AMA believes that there is a difference between a CAMU for an FDA-approved medication that has been subject to robust clinical trials, as opposed to the use of a botanical in various forms (edibles, oils, smoked, etc.) that do not have the benefit of robust clinical data. … The cannabis plant contains about 540 chemical substances. The word ‘marijuana’ refers to parts of or products from the plant Cannabis sativa that contain substantial amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).” The DEA distinguished the relative CAMU for certain conditions, including where cannabis has no real benefit. The AMA is concerned that rescheduling will cause individuals to believe that cannabis has an accepted CAMU for any marketed use. The AMA urges the DEA to take this into consideration.

The AMA has multiple concerns with cannabis being rescheduled as a Schedule III Controlled Substance. There are clear harms to individuals, including youth, adolescents, and pregnant and breastfeeding individuals. Harms are not limited to these vulnerable populations, however. In addition, while HHS has identified several, limited CAMU for cannabis, DEA also raises the fact of the extremely limited research to help inform public health strategies to mitigate harms or support additional CAMU. The AMA strongly supports additional research and urges DEA to take the limited, available research into consideration in deciding whether to reschedule cannabis. Finally, the AMA has significant concerns about the practical implications of rescheduling—many of which were not raised in the proposed rule. While the AMA strongly supports efforts to end longstanding inequities suffered because of criminal penalties, we also strongly support regulatory clarity to provide guidance to physicians and patients. Given the extreme patchwork of state cannabis laws, the AMA sees this as an incredibly daunting challenge, but one that must be fully addressed if cannabis is to be rescheduled.

American Nurses Association

In these comments ANA agrees with the analysis that cannabis has numerous therapeutic qualities and should be moved to Schedule III. Further, ANA urges the Department of Justice and Drug Enforcement Administration to act expeditiously to have cannabis decontrolled under the CSA.

ANA strongly supports the currently accepted medical use of cannabis to alleviate disease-related symptoms and side effects. In September of 2023, ANA officially recognized cannabis nursing as a specialty nursing practice. The American Cannabis Nurses Association (ACNA) leads this practice developing the Scope and Standards and advancing the profession through advocacy, education, and research. ACNA also strongly supports this proposed rule as a critical first step needed to support cannabis nursing. Cannabis nursing supports and educates patients while they navigate underlying chronic conditions and work toward overall wellness. Yet due to cannabis being listed in Schedule I, research on its therapeutic uses have been stymied. By opening more research ability, providers and researchers will be able to fully study all possible uses dictated by scientific review principles.

Current evidence shows that alcohol consistently has a higher abuse rate than cannabis. HHS’ review to reschedule cannabis shows it has less risk to public safety than alcohol, and even with the limited amount of therapeutic research allowed at this time, the review confirmed at least three medical benefits. From a public health perspective, legalization of cannabis will remove it from the illegal market allowing proper regulation, testing, and safety procedures. Thirty-eight states have legalized medical cannabis and twenty-four states, as well as the District of Columbia and three territories, have legalized recreational cannabis. The current legal scheme for cannabis at the federal level and the differences across states has left providers and patients in many of these states in a constant place of fear when trying to utilize medical benefits. By removing cannabis from the CSA schedule, the agencies can focus on minimum public safety standards to advance public health and therapeutic access. ANA urges the agencies to follow the evidence as more research is finally allowed and funded, and to work with Congress to remove cannabis from CSA scheduling.

American Pharmacists Association

APhA supports regulatory changes to facilitate clinical research related to the clinical efficacy and safety associated with the use of cannabis and its various components. Additionally, APhA encourages health care provider education and pharmacist participation in furnishing cannabis and its components.

APhA supports the findings of the CAMU test, and strongly encourages health care providers to be involved in the clinical efficacy, safety, and management of patients using cannabis and its various components. If moved to schedule III, marijuana will likely be more incorporated into patients’ medication regimens. APhA believes this will require health care provider collaboration.

Despite certain products already being accessible to consumers in the states, federal regulations limit researchers’ ability to study cannabis and cannabis-derived products. APhA believes rescheduling marijuana to schedule III will improve research opportunities. Marijuana will be less burdensome to obtain and study. Marijuana’s current schedule I classification imposes strict regulatory requirements that make it difficult for researchers and scientists to obtain it for study. … A move to schedule III could allow for more DEA-approved suppliers of marijuana which will provide a more consistent research supply for scientists.

Rescheduling marijuana to schedule III will allow researchers to more easily secure federal funding for studies. Schedule I status limits the availability of federal grants for marijuana research due to the perceived risks and regulatory burdens.

Epilepsy Foundation

Our priorities are that people with epilepsy have access to safe, legal, reliable, and properly tested medical cannabis while also facilitating more research into the potential benefits and risks of cannabis for epilepsy and seizures. We believe that rescheduling cannabis from schedule I to schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) will help to achieve these objectives.

The Foundation is grateful that there is one Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved CBD product, Epidiolex, available to treat seizures associated with three rare forms of epilepsy. However, this product has a limited indication and some people with epilepsy cannot access it. The Foundation hopes that there will be broadened access and additional FDA-approved CBD products in the future.

The Foundation supports the DEA’s proposal to reschedule cannabis to schedule III, which would be an acknowledgement by the federal government that some forms of cannabis have possible medical uses. Rescheduling would be in alignment with the experiences of people with epilepsy who use cannabis and have found some forms of the product effective for controlling their seizures.

The Foundation supports rescheduling, but also wishes to highlight the possible limits of rescheduling for people with epilepsy. Rescheduling will not legalize cannabis, and there will still be conflicts between state and federal law on this issue. Due to these legal restrictions, people with epilepsy who use cannabis as a medical treatment may face difficulties in areas such as workplace drug testing or traveling to other states with their medication. If people with epilepsy stop taking cannabis due to these restrictions, then they could once again face uncontrolled seizures and related dangerous complications. If rescheduled, cannabis would still not be covered by insurance, and it could be costly for people with epilepsy.

American Psychiatric Association

APA supports continued research of marijuana for medical purposes but does not currently support the recommendation to transfer marijuana from a schedule I controlled substance to a schedule III-controlled substance. The proposition to reschedule marijuana from a schedule I to a schedule III demands a rigorous analysis. Rescheduling under the CSA would reclassify marijuana from a category of drugs considered to have a high potential for abuse and no accepted medical use to one that recognizes some medical use and a lower potential for abuse. Although there is accepted use of marijuana for the treatment of some physical health conditions, psychiatric conditions are not listed in the notice of proposed rulemaking, nor is there scientific evidence that cannabis is in any way beneficial for the treatment of any psychiatric disorder and there continues to be a high prevalence of abuse.

APA recommends that the Department of Justice, in coordination with the DEA and HHS, review and update regulations that would support the ability to conduct further high-quality research, without reclassification to a Schedule III. This research must also include the lens of health equity, including communities often left out of research and include research for the treatment for cannabis use disorder.

American Academy of Pediatrics

While the impact of rescheduling to Schedule III on the prevalence of adolescent cannabis use is currently unclear, we strongly believe that this action could be interpreted by the public as minimizing the drug’s adverse health impacts on youth.

Although the proposed rule would not legalize cannabis, a Schedule III status does, however, acknowledge potential medical benefits of the drug, as well as lower potential for abuse compared to other drugs in Schedule I. The AAP’s policy on cannabis is rooted in its mission to support the health and well-being of all infants, children, adolescents, and young adults and is based on what the evidence shows regarding the impact of cannabis on the health and well-being of children. Research has shown the adverse health effects of cannabis on young people of all ages. Clear and effective communication about the health impacts of marijuana and all cannabis-derived products will be essential going forward.

Washington State Medical Association

On behalf of the Washington State Medical Association (WSMA) and our over 13,000 physician and physician assistant members, thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) proposal to transfer cannabis from schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to schedule III of the CSA.

The WSMA has policy on cannabis that aligns with this proposal: The WSMA supports reclassification of marijuana’s status as a Schedule I controlled substance to a more appropriate schedule.

American Society of Addiction Medicine

ASAM could support a final rule that transfers only marijuana with lower THC concentrations to Schedule III, so long as any such final rule clearly states that (1) the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) will continue to apply, and (2) Schedule III requirements/controls will be enforced for those who take advantage of federal tax benefits due to 280E no longer being applicable after such a rescheduling.

If the DEA accepts HHS’ alternative CAMU test as sufficient under the CSA, ASAM strongly suggests that the DEA (1) consider the possible failure of marijuana with higher THC concentrations to satisfy HHS’s own alternative CAMU test, and (2) appropriately limit any potential rescheduling of marijuana to lower potency marijuana. As a result, higher potency marijuana would remain in schedule I in the absence of Congressional action.

ASAM urges any final rule transferring marijuana to Schedule III to state clearly that Schedule III requirements/controls will be enforced for those taking advantage of federal tax benefits that result from 280E no longer being applicable after such a rescheduling.

National Safety Council

While NSC supports the proposed efforts by the DEA to reclassify cannabis on the schedule of narcotics from Schedule I to Schedule III, there are potential adverse outcomes for the health and safety of workplaces and roadways within the United States if this action is not appropriately paired with substantive risk mitigation efforts. NSC urges the DEA to fully weigh the effects its proposed efforts would have to the nation’s public health, including how increased access to and use of cannabis by the public impacts sustained efforts to alleviate troubling upward trends in both workplace and roadway injuries and fatalities.

While there are inherent risks to rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III, there are tremendous barriers to potential academic and scientific research opportunities which will be removed and help safety practitioners better understand how cannabis use affects the public’s availability to work and navigate our transportation system safely.

There are a variety of tools which currently exist to help implement cannabis rescheduling and increased research safely. First, NSC has developed a training module for supervisors to help recognize when a worker may be impaired.16 This training provides supervisors and safety professionals with the tools needed to recognize the causes and signs of impairment at work and implement responses. Furthermore, reasonable cause and drug-free workplace policies, including workplace drug testing, allow for employers to maintain safe environments for all employees in safety-sensitive roles and otherwise.

If the DEA determines it is in the public’s interest to reschedule cannabis to Schedule III of the CSA, NSC requests the DEA work in a collaborative function with both public and private stakeholders to fully address the concerns expressed by NSC related to potential unintended effects of increased impairment related incidents at work and crashes on the roads. Positive public health outcomes cannot be advanced in the United States with increasing rates preventable injuries and fatalities.

Anti-cannabis advocates

Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM)

This proposed rulemaking could lead to the most significant rescheduling decision in the history of the Controlled Substances Act (the “Act” or “CSA”). 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq. Marijuana has been controlled under Schedule I since Congress itself placed marijuana under Schedule I when it passed the Act in 1970. There has been no failure to revisit that judgment in the more than five decades since.

To change course now and reschedule marijuana, DEA (or the Attorney General) would have to provide a detailed justification explaining why the consistent analysis of the government over the past five decades holding that the statutory criteria require controlling marijuana under Schedule I is no longer accurate or applicable. It is well settled that when an agency changes course, it must provide a reasoned explanation for the change.

Nothing in the record, however, provides any basis for DEA to change its prior conclusions on these points. If anything, recent research confirms the serious adverse health effects of using marijuana. To give just one example, marijuana has been shown to have serious negative effects on the neurological development of adolescents, producing cognitive deficits that persist indefinitely.

HHS has not provided any sound justification for rescheduling marijuana under the criteria established by the Act, and the Administrator should conclude that marijuana must stay in Schedule I.

Other interested parties

The Southern Poverty Law Center

While we appreciate the recognition that marijuana should be removed from Schedule I, this proposed rule falls short and will not reduce the damage that marijuana criminalization has inflicted upon marginalized people, especially Black and Brown communities. We urge the DEA to reconsider this proposed rule and instead issue a rule that would completely decriminalize and deschedule marijuana.

The administrative process conducted by the DEA was too limited in scope and failed to consider the enormous racial, economic, and public health consequences of maintaining the criminalization of marijuana. This criminalization has wreaked havoc on Black and Brown communities, wasted an enormous amount of public resources, and has been detrimental to public health and safety. It is past time for marijuana to be completely removed from the CSA and decriminalized — racial, social, and economic justice demand nothing less.

From a racial, social, and economic justice perspective, rescheduling marijuana is wholly insufficient. The analysis from the DEA that led to this proposed rule is completely void of any inquiry into the troubling history of the CSA and the ways in which the inclusion of marijuana was an integral piece of the “War on Drugs.” A war that has harmed, and continues to harm Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities. Nothing short of descheduling will address and begin to rectify these harms. We urge the DEA to reconsider this proposed rule, take into account the successes of the states that have legalized marijuana, and instead propose a rule to deschedule marijuana from the CSA.

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 240 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States, we write to comment on the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) proposed rule on the scheduling classification of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The DEA’s proposed rule would move marijuana from Schedule I classification to Schedule III classification. While this re- classification will lessen the restrictions imposed on marijuana use and attendant federal penalties, it will not alleviate the carceral impact and need for comprehensive reforms for justice-impacted individuals and communities. Instead of being rescheduled, marijuana should be completely removed from the CSA.

While modifying the classification of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III is a step in the right direction, comprehensive reform requires full marijuana decriminalization. Schedule I substances are defined as “drugs with no current accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.” Marijuana was classified as a Schedule I controlled substance in 1970, with attendant criminal penalties, at the very advent of mass federal drug criminalization. In addition, marijuana has unique minimum sentencing requirements under the CSA that would not be modified if it were to be rescheduled. Even as a Schedule III substance, mandatory minimums attached to marijuana under 21 U.S.C. § 841 would not change. Mandatory minimums imposed under this statute would still be imposed on individuals for certain quantity violations. The continued criminalization of marijuana under rescheduling is unacceptable. The DEA should instead deschedule marijuana in order to end these unjust criminal consequences.

Rescheduling is insufficient to repair the harms caused by the war on drugs or to initiate restorative policies including access to government benefits and protection from employment discrimination for formerly-incarcerated individuals, or reallocation of resources to communities that have been impacted by drug related over-policing. Devoting more resources to providing community necessities, such as high-quality health services, well-resourced schools, good-paying jobs, affordable housing, is what will keep communities safe. Maintaining CSA scheduling will also prevent reparative steps like expungements for marijuana-related criminal consequences.

The Center for American Progress

We appreciate the Biden administration’s efforts to reconsider marijuana’s inappropriate classification as a Schedule I controlled substance and the benefits that a reclassification to Schedule III would bring. A schedule III reclassification would acknowledge marijuana’s medicinal benefits and provide future opportunities for much-needed federal research on its health impacts. Rescheduling marijuana would also remove unfair and onerous tax penalties on state-legal marijuana businesses, which is of particular importance to people of color in the cannabis industry who historically face many disparities in navigating the state-level legal cannabis market.

However, we have deep concerns about the deficiency of rescheduling and believe marijuana should be fully removed from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) drug schedule. Rescheduling marijuana from a schedule I to a schedule III substance is not enough to address the harms caused by decades of overly punitive and racially biased drug enforcement stemming from America’s War on Drugs. Rather, full descheduling is needed to entirely end the criminalization of marijuana at the federal level.

The only way to end federal marijuana criminalization and its harms is to completely remove marijuana from the CSA, or “descheduling.” Descheduling must also be accompanied by a new federal policy for marijuana that ends criminal legal consequences for marijuana activity, restores rights and opportunities for individuals and communities targeted by marijuana criminalization, and creates a federal regulatory framework for the marijuana industry rooted in equity.

President Biden has repeatedly promised to decriminalize marijuana. We call on the Biden administration to follow through on this unfulfilled commitment by expediting the descheduling of marijuana and taking action now to end and repair the harms of federal marijuana criminalization. Doing so would be an important step forward in confronting the legacy of the War on Drugs and the immeasurable harms that it caused to communities of color.

United Food and Commercial Workers International Union

UFCW urges the Administration to not simply reschedule cannabis, but rather work with Congress to pass comprehensive legislation that would de-schedule cannabis with guardrails. These guardrails must include worker protections, social equity provisions, and an explicit declaration from Congress protecting the state-centered focus on interstate commerce. A change in cannabis scheduling will not completely repair the harms of the drug war, nor will it improve the lives of the over 400,000 workers in the legal cannabis industry. Only comprehensive cannabis legalization legislation will shape the industry to address the past harms and create good jobs.

UFCW believes that rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III does not go far enough to reduce the past and ongoing harms of cannabis criminalization, nor will it improve the lives of the over 400,000 workers in the legal cannabis industry. As the union who has been on the front lines of this industry since the passage of the first state medicinal cannabis laws, UFCW believes that these workers should be at the center of any change in marijuana policy.

The work the Biden administration has done issuing pardons for simple cannabis crimes has been significant in restoring justice in communities harmed by the drug wars. In fact, the Biden Administration has taken the biggest step toward descheduling cannabis since the onset of its prohibition. This proposed rule however, to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III does little to restore justice and does little for workers. This administration has been exemplary in putting workers throughout the economy in unprecedented ways. We urge President Biden to continue this approach and put cannabis workers first going forward by working with Congress on descheduling with proper guardrails. Putting workers first is how we right past wrongs.

American Automobile Association (AAA)

AAA supports rescheduling marijuana and decriminalizing possession of the drug, especially in the face of continued Congressional action towards full federal legalization or complete removal of marijuana from the federal list of controlled substances. We believe this is a more prudent step to addressing disparities within the criminal justice system as they pertain to drug-related crimes while maintaining legal ramifications for those who put others in danger due to impairment by marijuana while behind the wheel. However, AAA believes it imperative that measures be pursued to foster the prevention of impaired driving, enhance drugged driving data quality and availability, and enhance the detection and adjudication of drug-impaired drivers.

Though AAA supports the exploration of rescheduling marijuana according to the Controlled Substances Act, the DOJ and DEA must consider how to manage the potential unintended consequences of that policy decision, including but not limited to elevated marijuana-involved motor vehicle crashes, and an environment where the legal system is playing catchup to a potentially unprecedented level of impaired drivers on our roads at a time the U.S. is already grappling with record-breaking levels of traffic deaths.

American Trucking Associations

ATA believes a move to reschedule marijuana to a Schedule III substance under the Controlled Substances Act—a regulatory category with fewer regulatory restrictions and recognized as a substance with a lower risk of abuse and harm—could pose hazards to the safety of the traveling public and federally regulated safety-sensitive industries.

First and foremost, ATA is concerned about ensuring continuity in the existing drug testing program for federally regulated safety-sensitive transportation workers, which is overseen by the U.S. Department of Transportation, by maintaining marijuana’s position on the authorized drug testing panel. If marijuana were to be removed from the panel or the program is
otherwise altered to curtail testing for marijuana, ATA believes the safety of our nation’s transportation industries and all roadway and transportation system users would be at risk. Second, ATA is concerned about the broad impacts on highway and transportation safety, especially when considering the current absence of a reliable, standardized measurement for marijuana impairment to identify and thwart unsafe driving. While ATA does not maintain a formal position on marijuana legalization or deregulation for the public, we urge DOJ and DEA, in cooperation with other relevant federal agencies, to consider the far-reaching consequences of reclassification on the national transportation system and its users, the inherent public health and safety risks, and statutory and regulatory actions needed to prioritize the public health and safety of our nation’s transportation system users.

ATA appreciates the DOJ and DEA’s consideration of ATA’s concerns about highway and industry safety in light of the Agency’s proposal to reclassify marijuana to a Schedule III under the CSA. We urge the Agency to work with appropriate agencies, including DOT and HHS, to prioritize transportation and public safety by ensuring that the DOT’s drug testing program for safety-sensitive workers does not experience disruptions. We also urge the DOJ and DEA to take into consideration the robust and compelling data showing marijuana’s troubling impacts on transportation and highway safety, as well as possible regulatory measures needed to address these unintended consequences.

Distilled Spirits Council of the United States

While DISCUS does not take a position on the reclassification of marijuana, we strongly urge any decisionmakers evaluating new laws or regulations to look to the time tested taxation, regulatory and responsibility structures that govern the distilled spirits industry. We urge you to ensure that this reclassification effort and future federal proposals incorporate our key provisions regarding comparable taxation and regulation of marijuana to alcohol, as well as initiatives to address impaired driving and underage marijuana consumption. Policymakers should not move forward with any rulemaking that confers new benefits and rights to the marijuana industry without addressing these issues in tandem.

National Beer Wholesalers Association

In its solicitation for feedback, the proposed rulemaking notes that the “DEA has not yet made a determination as to its view on the appropriate schedule for marijuana.” These comments are not offered in support of or in opposition to the proposed reclassification of marijuana, but o offer several observations related to lessons from the alcohol industry’s regulatory history that the government may wish to consider before proceeding further on this issue, concerns on the issue of testing for marijuana impairment, and a reminder that the CSA specifically excludes alcohol.

As the government considers a possible reclassification of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the CSA, NBWA urges consideration of several important factors. First, that while the regulation of alcohol provides important guidance and learning for the possible federal regulation of marijuana, it is critical not to conflate the two products and their categorization under federal and state law. Alcohol is specifically excluded from the CSA and it is thus unlawful to compare the two products as part of a potential rulemaking.

Second, NBWA is concerned that the proposal does not address some of the most pressing safety issues related to marijuana impairment, notably, the need for a reliable test to determine impairment, and clear testing guidelines for employers of workers that operate heavy machinery and motor vehicles. The history and current utilization of alcohol impairment testing offers important lessons on this issue.

Finally, on the question of diversion of marijuana, while alcohol is not a controlled substance, its regulatory history as a formerly prohibited product can provide guidance as the government examines diversion of marijuana.

American Petroleum Institute

API and our members are extremely concerned about the potential significant unintended consequences this proposed action could have on the ability of the Department of Transportation (DOT) to test safety-sensitive transportation employees for marijuana use. Marijuana drug testing has been an effective method of deterrence for commercial transportation safety-sensitive employees, including pipeline workers, for more than three decades. As discussed in detail below, moving forward with this action as proposed has the potential to abruptly end DOT-regulated testing of safety-sensitive employees for marijuana and would likely have a profoundly detrimental impact on transportation safety in the United States.

HHS does not currently have the authority to test for Schedule III drugs. The authority of HHS to test for and to certify laboratories for testing is established by Executive Order 12564, “Drug-free Federal Workplace” (E.O. 12564). Under E.O. 12564, HHS is only authorized to test for drugs and certify laboratories to test for drugs listed on Schedule I or II of the CSA.

If the DOJ moves forward with rescheduling marijuana as a Schedule III substance, HHS would no longer be able to require testing for, develop the testing protocols, including applicable metabolite cutoff levels, for, or to certify laboratories to test for marijuana because of the limits currently imposed by E.O. 12564. This would have an immediate impact on the long-standing DOT drug testing regime, particularly given that there is currently not a scientifically reliable method for testing for marijuana impairment as there is for alcohol. Specifically, this change could have the unintended consequence of limiting federally regulated marijuana testing of safety-sensitive transportation employees, including, but not limited to, airline pilots, air traffic controllers, bus drivers, subway and train operators, ferry operators, merchant marine operators, truck drivers, and pipeline operators. Employers would be forced to rely upon behavioral observations to assess impairment in the absence of metabolite testing.

The potential impact of DOJ’s proposed action on DOT’s long-standing testing regime, or other federal drug testing regimes, was not discussed at all in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. This leads us to believe that DOJ is not affirmatively seeking to limit, impede, or interrupt DOT’s long-standing drug-testing regime for transportation safety-sensitive employees and that any impact on these testing programs is an unintentional and overlooked consequence of the proposed rulemaking. The absence of marijuana testing for these safety-sensitive transportation employees poses a significant risk to the safety of our roads, skies, waterways, rails, and pipelines. Rescheduling marijuana to a Schedule III drug prior to the development of a DOT-approved testing platform and an established metabolite cutoff level that signifies impairment would be premature. Accordingly, we strongly urge DOJ to reconsider this proposed action until such time as employers have access to a uniformly approved method to test for active, psychoactive marijuana in impaired employees and, at a minimum, ensure that any final action rescheduling marijuana includes, or is accompanied, by an explicit safety carve-out that would allow DOT-regulated testing to continue uninterrupted.

As the door closes on public comments, others are weighing in on the matter in different venues.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) sent a letter to federal officials condemning the Biden administration over what he described as repeated refusals from federal agencies to brief Congresson its plans and justification for rescheduling marijuana, which he argues fuels speculation that the proposed policy change is politically motivated.

At the Republican National Committee convention last week, multiple GOP lawmakers also spoke with Marijuana Moment about their views on how cannabis policy issues such as rescheduling could be impacted if former President Donald Trump wins the November election. They generally deferred to the nominee, but there were mixed opinions about what they would like to see happen.

Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), for his part, said at the event that “I don’t care” whether rolling back the Biden administration’s marijuana rescheduling move under a potential Trump presidency would hurt the Republican party, becausehe feels more strongly that the modest reform would endanger public health.

Also, bipartisan congressional lawmakers are now seeking to remove a controversial section of a spending billthat would block the Justice Department from rescheduling marijuana—one of several cannabis- and psychedelics-related amendments to appropriations legislation that have been filed in recent days.

GOP senators haveseparately tried to block the administration from rescheduling cannabisas part of a standalone bill filed last September, but that proposal has not received a hearing or vote.

This story has been updated with additional comments.

Cannabis Is More Effective In Treating Musculoskeletal Pain Than Traditional Medications Are, Patients Say In New Study

Marijuana Moment is made possible with support from readers. If you rely on our cannabis advocacy journalism to stay informed, please consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Feds To Weigh 40,000 Marijuana Rescheduling Comments From Governors, Lawmakers, Health Experts And Advocates - Marijuana Moment (2024)