DOJ Could Ignore Trump’s Marijuana Rescheduling Directive, Congressional Researchers Suggest

Trump’s marijuana rescheduling order is not a finish line—it’s a lit fuse that could still sputter in the rain. The primary headline here—call it the “marijuana rescheduling order,” “federal cannabis rescheduling,” or simply the long-awaited move to Schedule III—isn’t yet law of the land. The Controlled Substances Act still lists marijuana under Schedule I until the Justice Department seals the deal. That hasn’t happened. Congressional researchers just threw cold water on the victory laps, reminding everyone that DOJ can finalize the existing proposal, rewrite it from scratch, or let it die on a bureaucratic vine. Attorney General Pam Bondi skipped the signing ceremony. The department has stayed quiet. And silence, in Washington, is never neutral—it’s a mood, a tactic, and sometimes a warning. For the cannabis industry, that uncertainty means the meter is still running on risk, capital, and patience.

Here’s the sober mechanics beneath the headlines. The executive order directed the attorney general to move quickly to reclassify cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III, aligning with a proposed rule launched in 2024. But executive orders don’t swing the CSA hammer by themselves. Agencies must finish rulemaking—publish, review, defend. According to an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the administration could adopt the proposed rule or restart the process, while Congress retains full power to reschedule or legalize legislatively at any point. If you want a sense of how that tug-of-war could collide with other timelines and collateral policies, consider the argument that Trump’s Marijuana Order Means Congress Must Delay The Federal Hemp Ban’s Timeline (Op-Ed). This isn’t just a scheduling shuffle; it’s a rethreading of federal drug policy, commerce, and enforcement—and it will all move at the speed of administrative law, which is to say: slowly, then suddenly.

Politics hasn’t left the room. A bloc of Republican state attorneys general is arguing marijuana belongs in Schedule I, and GOP lawmakers have pressed against rescheduling in public letters. The White House counters with two blunt realities: voters like the idea, and patients benefit from it. Support for the move is bipartisan and durable—something captured in Bipartisan Majority Of Americans Support Rescheduling Marijuana And Say It Has Medical Value, New Poll Finds After Trump Takes Action. On the ground, the medical case keeps stacking up, far from the culture wars and cable hits: Medical Marijuana Use Is ‘Prevalent’ Among People With Disabilities—And It Helps Treat Pain, New Federally Funded Study Shows. That’s the quiet revolution—millions using cannabis to sleep, to eat, to work, to dial the pain down to a livable hum. You can argue doctrine all day, but the waiting rooms and kitchen tables have already voted.

Now to the cash register, where policy gets real. Rescheduling to Schedule III would finally pry open the jaws of Section 280E, giving legal operators access to ordinary tax deductions. That’s not “legalization,” but it’s oxygen—tax parity that could transform balance sheets and payrolls. Research rules ease up. Scheduling’s symbolism flips from “no medical value” to “recognized medical use.” But there’s a catch big enough to drive a convoy through: Congress could still hard-code new limits, or craft an FDA-led pathway that narrows the field to products that look and behave like pharmaceuticals. The CRS cautions that both relaxation and new constraints are on the table. The states aren’t waiting, either, with ripple effects radiating outward as local lawmakers recalibrate their own maps, like the push captured in Bipartisan Tennessee Lawmakers Push For State-Level Marijuana Reform Following Trump’s Federal Rescheduling Move. Meanwhile, some in Congress want to keep squeezing the industry’s tax hose even if Schedule III happens. If you felt that chill, you’re not alone.

So what should you watch while the stakes marinate? The Justice Department’s next public move—finalizing the rule or issuing a new one—will signal the tempo. A clear timeline means markets price in 280E relief and research access; a reboot means more months of legal limbo. Litigation is likely, because of course it is. Congress could jump in with a broader framework or let the agencies fight it out, and the Food and Drug Administration’s shadow will loom over everything labeled “medical.” Bottom line: this is a high-wire act over a policy canyon dug across fifty states and a multibillion-dollar legal market. Keep a skeptical eye on the official statements, the comment periods, and the fine print in any new rule. And if you want to dive deeper into the constitutional and administrative labyrinth, the CRS summary is a steady compass: Congressional Research Service analysis. When you’re ready to explore the lawful side of the plant without the noise, take a quiet stroll through our curated selection here: https://thcaorder.com/shop/.