Marijuana rescheduling hearings are finally here, but rescheduling is not enough

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

Marijuana was placed in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act when the bill was signed into law in 1970. The Controlled Substances Act classifies drugs according to their alleged potential for abuse, whether it has a currently accepted medical use, and whether abuse may lead to drug dependence. There are five Schedules, with Schedule I substances facing the harshest criminal penalties and the strictest research restrictions. The penalties can be tied to the schedule that the substance is in, or specifically to a substance, like marijuana.

The Drug Enforcement Administration has finally started an administrative hearing over its proposed rule to place marijuana in Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. The criminal penalties and mandatory minimums, however, will not change if the DEA adopts the rule since they are tied specifically to marijuana.

It has been 54 years since the Shafer Commission report, authorized when the Controlled Substances Act was signed into law, recommended that marijuana be removed from Schedule I. The Nixon administration handpicked the committee and subsequently ignored its findings and recommendations. It is my firm belief that marijuana never belonged on Schedule I. Its inclusion and associated criminal penalties resulted in harsh and disproportionate prison sentences, particularly for communities of color, and substantially hampered research.

Richard Nixon’s former White House Counsel, John Ehrlichman, reportedly said of Nixon’s drug policy, “We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities…”

The inclusion of marijuana in Schedule I has resulted in tens of millions of people being sent to prison over the last several decades. Nearly nine in 10 Americans believe that marijuana should be legal for medicinal or recreational purposes.

Our nation’s patchwork of marijuana laws adult use regulations, medical marijuana programs, bans, federal laws to support marijuana research — produce a hazy result. Complicating this issue, Russell Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, urged Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to complete a regulatory package for intoxicating hemp products, or delay the November 2026 implementation of the hemp ban from the One Big Beautiful Bill. Since this administration seems interested in keeping intoxicating hemp products available, why move marijuana to Schedule III and not legalize and regulate adult use of marijuana? This dichotomy is nonsensical.

Schedule III is better than Schedule I for one reason alone: scientific research. Drugs in Schedule III substances are substantially easier to study than those in Schedule I. For example, to obtain a Schedule I license — which is tied to each substance — a researcher must submit their scientific protocols to the DEA and the Food and Drug Administration for review.

These protocols must include methods, the number of animals used (if any), dosages and study timelines. The approval can often take a year. Any change to the experimental design needs to be reapproved by the DEA and the FDA. In Schedule II – V, the approval timeline is significantly shorter, and scientists don’t need to inform the DEA and FDA about every change to their experimental design, allowing for more innovative and iterative experimental design. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would greatly enhance scientists’ ability to study it.

The governor of my home state of Tennessee signed a law in April to prevent the state’s commissioner of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services from rescheduling marijuana without the Tennessee General Assembly’s approval if the federal government completes the rescheduling; researchers in my state are out of luck.

I applaud the rescheduling, just as I did when President Biden announced it in 2024. But we should also be clear-eyed about this change will — and will not — do. Schedule III will not right the historical wrongs and problems of our nation’s drug laws. Rescheduling doesn’t provide relief for anyone in federal prison from a marijuana conviction, where nearly 3,000 people are still incarcerated for marijuana-associated convictions. The proper solution is the simplest, marijuana must be removed from the Controlled Substances Act.

For decades, I have pressed administration after administration to update marijuana scheduling. In letters and in Judiciary Committee hearings, I urged Presidents Obama, Biden and Trump to act quickly and decisively. Most recently, I sent a letter to the administrator of the DEA, Terry Cole, and then-Attorney General Bondi, asking about the rescheduling timing, specifically citing President Trump’s executive orders.

I’ve also offered legislation to make marijuana more accessible to patients, co-sponsored numerous bills to reform marijuana regulation, and reduce the collateral impacts of our nonsensical policies. My Restore Act, for example, would allow those convicted of nonviolent felony drug offenses to access SNAP benefits. It is never too late for us to right the historic wrongs of the War on Drugs.

I am hopeful that the DEA’s hearings will reach the proper moral and scientific conclusion we’ve known for a long time: marijuana does not belong under Schedule I.

Steve Cohen, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, represents Tennessee’s 9th District in Congress.