The Drug Enforcement Administration defended cannabis's current Schedule I classification during a pivotal administrative hearing, pushing back against the Department of Health and Human Services' recommendation to move the plant to Schedule III.
DEA attorneys argued that cannabis meets the criteria for Schedule I based on its high potential for abuse and lack of currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. The agency's position sets up a direct conflict with HHS's scientific assessment, which found cannabis has accepted medical uses and a lower abuse potential than Schedule I or II substances.
The hearing, required under the Administrative Procedure Act, marks the first time the DEA has publicly defended its scheduling position since HHS submitted its rescheduling recommendation in August 2023. DEA officials presented testimony from agency pharmacologists and cited international treaty obligations under the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.
The Agency's Case
The DEA's core argument rests on two statutory requirements for Schedule I substances. First, the agency contends that cannabis has a high potential for abuse, pointing to emergency department visits and addiction rates among regular users. Second, DEA attorneys argued that cannabis lacks "currently accepted medical use" under the agency's five-part test, which requires FDA-approved applications and well-controlled studies.
"The fact that individual states have legalized medical cannabis programs does not meet the federal standard for accepted medical use," a DEA attorney argued during the proceedings. The agency emphasized that no FDA-approved cannabis plant material exists for medical use, only synthetic cannabinoid drugs like Epidiolex.
The DEA also raised concerns about rescheduling's impact on international treaty compliance. Moving cannabis to Schedule III could conflict with the Single Convention, which requires signatories to maintain strict controls on cannabis.
Industry and Medical Community Response
Cannabis industry representatives and medical researchers attending the hearing challenged the DEA's interpretation of the scientific evidence. The U.S. Cannabis Council submitted testimony arguing that the agency's five-part test for accepted medical use is outdated and doesn't account for the extensive state-level medical cannabis programs serving millions of patients.
Dr. Sue Sisley, a researcher who has conducted FDA-approved cannabis studies, testified that the DEA's position ignores decades of clinical evidence from state programs and international research. She noted that 38 states have legalized medical cannabis, creating what she called "the largest real-world clinical trial in history."
Several pharmaceutical companies also weighed in, with some supporting rescheduling to facilitate research and drug development. The industry has long complained that Schedule I status creates significant barriers to clinical trials and product development.
What Happens Next
The DEA will review testimony and written submissions before issuing a final rule. The agency has no statutory deadline but typically takes several months to process administrative hearing records. Legal experts expect the decision to face immediate court challenges regardless of the outcome.
If the DEA maintains Schedule I status despite HHS's recommendation, it would mark an unprecedented rejection of the health agency's scientific assessment. The Controlled Substances Act gives HHS binding authority on scientific and medical matters, though the DEA retains final scheduling authority.
The rescheduling debate has significant implications for the $33 billion legal cannabis industry. Moving to Schedule III would allow state-licensed cannabis businesses to claim federal tax deductions under Section 280E, potentially saving the industry billions in taxes. It would also ease research restrictions and potentially open banking access.
But some advocates warn that Schedule III rescheduling doesn't go far enough, arguing that cannabis should be descheduled entirely and regulated like alcohol. Several members of Congress have introduced legislation to remove cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act altogether.
The DEA's final decision could come before the end of 2026, though the agency has provided no official timeline.
This article is based on original reporting by cannabiswire.com.
