Congressional researchers are giving an update on the status of the federal-state marijuana law conflict, detailing the limitations of a pending rescheduling action, laying out options for lawmakers to address the issue and noting changes to hemp policy that are set to take effect later this year.
Notably, the new report removes language from an earlier version that had said it is “likely” federal officials “will move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.”
In an “In Focus” report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), analysts explained how it’s “increasingly common for states to have laws and policies allowing for medical or recreational use of marijuana” that remains in violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
Federal agencies under the Biden administration recommended moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the CSA following a scientific review—and President Donald Trump in December issued an executive order directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to quickly complete that process—but that hasn’t materialized yet.
If cannabis is reclassified, however, that “would not bring the state-legal medical marijuana industry into compliance with the CSA” without additional legal changes, CRS said. And while Congress has held hearings and introduced bills proposing a variety of marijuana reforms, it’s yet to enact legislation to alter the scheduling status of marijuana.
The report serves as an update to an earlier 2024 analysis of federal-state marijuana laws in which CRS mentioned that rescheduling wouldn’t affect the legality of “the state-legal recreational marijuana industry,” and it’s unclear why that was amended to reference the “medical marijuana industry” instead (Emphasis added.)
Also in its 2024 update, CRS said that “Congress could take several routes” to address the marijuana policy conflict, including by taking “no action, in which case it appears likely [the Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA] will move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.”
The latest version still leaves open the possibility that Congress take no action, but it now avoids commenting on the likelihood that DEA completes the rescheduling process. Instead, the report says “DOJ may move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III” in response to congressional inaction.
Both versions state that “Congress could also enact marijuana legislation before or after DEA acts on rescheduling.” The updated report, however, includes additional language noting that “concerns about the United States’ compliance with international treaty obligations in regard to marijuana control may remain.”
Other changes in the report include basic statistic updates on the number of states that have enacted legalization and usage rates, with CRS acknowledging that underage marijuana use hit a low of 6 percent in 2023 and 2024, down from 7.9 percent in 2011 prior to the implementation of the first adult-use cannabis laws.
It further updated a section on hemp laws, explaining how while the cannabis crop was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill, the definition of hemp is being revised under separate agriculture legislation the president signed last year. Rather than testing for THC content based only on delta-9 THC concentration, it will now be tested for total THC—a policy change that takes effect in November that industry stakeholders say will effectively eradicate the consumable cannabinoid market.
The report also adds new language referencing the enactment of the HALT Fentanyl Act, which “contained provisions meant to streamline Schedule I controlled substance research, including marijuana research.”
Overall, though “state laws do not affect the status of marijuana under federal law or the ability of the federal government to enforce it, state legalization initiatives have spurred a number of questions regarding potential implications for federal laws and policies, including federal drug regulation and access to banking and other services for marijuana businesses,” CRS said.
“Thus far, the federal response to states’ legalizing marijuana largely has been to allow states to implement their own laws. DEA has nonetheless reaffirmed that marijuana growth, possession, and trafficking remain crimes under federal law irrespective of states’ marijuana laws,” it said. “Federal law enforcement has generally focused its efforts on criminal networks involved in the illicit marijuana trade.”
“Congress could also enact marijuana legislation before or after DOJ acts on rescheduling. Such legislation might take the form of more or less stringent marijuana control, ranging from requiring federal law enforcement to dismantle state medical and recreational marijuana programs, to limiting federal marijuana regulation through means such as appropriations provisions, to rescheduling or de-controlling marijuana under the CSA. This last option would largely eliminate the gap with states that have authorized recreational and comprehensive medical marijuana; however, concerns about the United States’ compliance with international treaty obligations in regard to marijuana control may remain. As Congress considers these questions, states may continue to act on marijuana legalization.
The report concludes by pointing out that “no state has reversed its legalization of either medical or recreational marijuana at this time.”
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.
