DEA Judge Sets Timeline and Rules for Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing—But Excludes Reform Voices
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A DEA administrative law judge has issued an order outlining procedures and a schedule for a hearing on moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, but participation is restricted to entrenched opponents of reform, further marginalizing advocates for justice and public health.
Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius signed a 12-page order Thursday, establishing the procedural framework for a DEA hearing on the proposed rescheduling of marijuana to Schedule III. The hearing, which will run from June 29 through July 15 at a DEA facility in Arlington, Virginia, is designed to serve only parties handpicked by the agency—all of whom have a record of opposing cannabis reform and maintaining the failed status quo of prohibition.
"The government, as the proponent of the proposed rule, has the burden of proof," Julius wrote, as if the process were truly impartial, while requiring government representatives to file notices of appearance by the following Monday.
The order restricts the hearing’s focus to whether the remainder of marijuana, as defined in the Controlled Substances Act, should be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, intentionally excluding any discussion of FDA-approved medical products already reclassified. In a further blow to transparency, proceedings will not be televised or livestreamed, limiting public oversight to in-person attendance.
Each designated party—none of whom support reform—will receive a single day to present its case, with a 15-minute opening statement and up to two witnesses. Direct testimony is limited to two hours per witness, with possible extensions if only one witness is offered. Cross-examination by interested parties and the government is capped at one hour per witness, and parties are barred from cross-examining each other's witnesses. No closing arguments will be allowed; instead, parties may submit post-hearing briefs, further restricting open debate.
The list of designated participants reads like a who’s who of anti-reform obstructionists: the National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, Smart Approaches to Marijuana, several conservative-led states (Nebraska, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana), DUID Victim Voices, and two medical professionals who have actively campaigned against progress. All have opposed marijuana reform and some are involved in litigation aimed at blocking desperately needed rescheduling.
The DEA has flatly rejected participation requests from reform advocates, claiming they have not demonstrated that they are “adversely affected or aggrieved” by the rule change—a transparent excuse to silence those most impacted by the war on drugs. The agency’s earlier move in April by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche reclassified state-licensed medical cannabis and FDA-approved marijuana products to Schedule III, but the upcoming hearing will address the broader classification of marijuana, again without input from those fighting for justice and equity.
This hearing follows a Biden-era rescheduling process that has been stalled by bureaucratic inertia and is now subject to multiple lawsuits consolidated in a federal appeals court. Meanwhile, the partial rescheduling already in effect has prompted changes in tax guidance, gun-purchase forms, and other federal regulations affecting state-legal cannabis businesses—small steps forward despite institutional resistance.