President Trump will decide marijuana rescheduling, federal reform

Did Donald Trump mean it when he said he wanted marijuana reform – and will the former and current president follow through?

With the marijuana rescheduling process paused indefinitely – its future is at the mercy of Trump’s future choice to lead the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration – and Republicans in Congress mostly bent to the once and current president’s will, nothing less than the future of the $32 billion marijuana industry depends on the answer.Trump made history in September when he became the first major-party presidential nominee to endorse a state adult-use legalization campaign.

Though Trump’s backing of Florida’s Amendment 3 – some critics say his endorsement was mostly spurred by his acrimonious relationship with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis – didn’t lead to the passage of recreational cannabis, the then-Republican nominee also signaled support for moving marijuana from Schedule 1 to Schedule 3 of the Controlled Substances Act.

“As President, we will continue to focus on research to unlock the medical uses of marijuana to a Schedule 3 drug, and work with Congress to pass common sense laws, including safe banking (sic) for state authorized companies, and supporting states rights to pass marijuana laws, like in Florida, that work so well for their citizens,” Trump posted on Truth Social on Sept. 9.

Trump has not touched the issue since.

Nor was it broached during the recent confirmation hearings for Pam Bondi, Trump’s nominee for attorney general.Marijuana reform hopes pinned on social media comment

In the information gap, marijuana operators and observers have filled in the blanks with speculation – most of it reliance on Trump’s Truth Social post as well as Bondi’s record.

Most important might be Bondi’s tenure as a lobbyist for Washington, D.C.-based firm Ballard Partners.

Among Ballard’s clients, congressional lobbying records show, is Tallahassee, Florida-based marijuana multistate operator Trulieve Cannabis Corp., though Bondi is not listed as one of the lobbyists working that account.

Ballard Partners did not respond to an MJBizDaily request for comment, but Trulieve is one of several marijuana companies cozying up to the new president.

Along with Cresco Labs Chief Executive Officer Charlie Bachtell, Trulieve CEO Kim Rivers attended Trump’s inauguration on Monday.

Over the weekend, she had “great conversations” about rescheduling and other cannabis industry priorities, she reported in a post on X, the Elon Musk-owned platform formerly known as Twitter.

“It’s a new day and the time is now,” Rivers wrote.

If Bondi is confirmed, what she and Trump choose to do – and whom they select to lead the DEA on a permanent basis – is important for the future of marijuana reform.

But the cannabis industry has even more urgency after the DEA’s chief administrative law judge, John Mulrooney II, last week paused the administrative rescheduling process that former President Joe Biden launched in October 2022.Biden marijuana rescheduling up to Trump

Mulrooney’s Jan. 13 order canceled the process to determine whether marijuana should be a Schedule 3 drug.

Those hearings were meant to resume on Jan. 21 but were paused by Mulrooney in response to a request from two “designated participants” in the rescheduling hearing that DEA Administrator Anne Milgram and her agency be disqualified.

Moving marijuana to Schedule 3 would grant the cannabis industry badly needed and long-sought relief from punitive federal tax law that forbids businesses from taking most standard deductions on their federal returns.

At the crux of the two designated parties’ interlocutory appeal are allegations that, under Milgram, the agency showed a demonstrable “bias” against easing federal restrictions on marijuana.

It’s unclear when the long-anticipated rescheduling hearings will resume.

It’s also uncertain whether they will restart at all.

As Mulrooney’s order indicated, “there is nothing (in federal law) that would preclude (him) from terminating hearing proceedings and transmitting a decision recommending a restart to the entire process and the issuance of a new” recommendation.

But as was the case from the start of the rescheduling hearing, the choice to accept or ignore any ruling was always solely up to the discretion of the next DEA administrator.

“Rescheduling is now squarely in the court of President-elect Trump, who publicly endorsed Schedule (3) on the campaign trail,” Adam Goers, chair of the Coalition for Cannabis Rescheduling Reform, noted in an email to MJBizDaily.

“Once confirmed as Attorney General, Pam Bondi will have the opportunity to correct course.”Next DEA chief will bow to Trump

Who will run the DEA next is anyone’s guess – but only Trump’s choice.

In early December, Trump’s first pick to lead the DEA, Hillsborough County (Florida) Sheriff Chad Chronister, withdrew his nomination after only a few days.

Trump later claimed on Truth Social that he was the one who “pulled (Chronister) out.”

Capitol Hill insiders and other observers guess it’s likely Trump will find someone from with DEA ties to lead the agency at least on a temporary or acting basis.

That seemed to be the case Monday, when the Trump administration appointed longtime DEA staffer and marijuana rescheduling skeptic Derek Maltz as interim administrator.

Whether Maltz holds onto the job or is a placeholder, the idea that new leadership will be more accommodating than Milgram, a former attorney general of New Jersey and law professor, seems unlikely, some observers told MJBizDaily.

“We don’t see how this incoming DEA administrator will be any better,” said Aaron Smith, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-headquartered National Cannabis Industry Association.

That cannabis lobbying organization was the only pro-rescheduling “designated participant” picked by Milgram to participate with “full standing” in the rescheduling hearing.

“We’re now in a position where they can drop this and nothing happens,” Smith noted.

“That would leave us with the status quo – and that’s what we’re worried about.”

But it’s even more questionable whether a Trump appointee to lead the DEA would defy the president’s will.