“Nobody representing those most harmed by marijuana arrests and over-incarceration was designated to participate.”
By Kat Murti, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, and Chelsea Higgs Wise, Marijuana Justice
Tuesday was supposed to be the start of the much anticipated Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) hearing on potentially rescheduling marijuana under federal law. But now, months after the announcement that cannabis might soon be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the hearing has been indefinitely canceled.
This whole debacle represents yet another example of how federal policies continue to ignore the will of the people when it comes to marijuana.
While the cannabis industry is seemingly divided on both rescheduling and the implications of this latest development, it remains clear that the American people as a whole support ending the federal war on cannabis. Rescheduling marijuana falls far short of that goal.
The vast majority of the record-breaking 43,000+ public comments to the proposed rule demonstrated support for federally decriminalizing and legalizing marijuana—a position that was not represented at all in the now-cancelled hearing. President Joe Biden’s DEA chief, Anne Milgram, excluded voices championing decriminalization from the selection of witnesses to participate and has been rightly criticized for stacking the deck with supporters of marijuana criminalization.
As the rescheduling process drags on, it is crucial that advocates, people who have been harmed by marijuana criminalization and industry leaders continue to point out the shortcomings of rescheduling, amplify the voices of communities who have been excluded from these hearings and press federal leaders to take congressional action on marijuana reform that tangibly benefits the communities who have been most harmed by over a century of cannabis prohibition.
It doesn’t really matter whether the hearing happens now or later—or even if it happens at all. Regardless of whether marijuana stays in the most restrictive federal classification—Schedule I of the CSA—or whether it is moved to Schedule III, it will unfortunately remain federally illegal in virtually every instance in the United States.
That means that a rescheduling hearing will not only have little impact on the individuals and communities who suffer the most due to federal marijuana criminalization—including patients, consumers and individuals arrested and convicted for marijuana offenses—but will ignore their experiences entirely.
A hearing to determine the future of federal marijuana policy should center the voices of communities most impacted. But, almost as if by design, nobody representing those most harmed by marijuana arrests and over-incarceration was designated to participate in the hearing that was supposed to begin today.
Had the hearing occurred as scheduled, there would have been no voice for those currently behind bars for marijuana. Nor any voice for the people facing deportation for marijuana activity. Nor any voice for those denied employment, education and housing opportunities, or federal benefits such as food stamps, due to a previous marijuana conviction. Nor any voice for the generations of young, poor and minority communities whose bright futures have been stolen from them by harmful drug war policies that put a target on their backs.
That is not to say a rescheduling hearing would have had no chance at producing some beneficial outcomes for certain stakeholders. For example, if marijuana is ultimately moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, a significant tax penalty imposed on state-regulated cannabis businesses would end. For small marijuana businesses, this tax relief is anticipated to provide economic benefits and is expected to result in enhanced job security for those working for these businesses. But, that’s largely where the limited advantages of rescheduling marijuana would end.
Contrary to popular belief, rescheduling cannabis will not necessarily make marijuana easier to research. Nor would rescheduling change virtually any of the current federal criminal penalties for marijuana, including personal possession and use. Rescheduling will not release anyone currently incarcerated for marijuana, nor will it restore rights and opportunities for individuals and communities targeted by marijuana criminalization.
Additionally, rescheduling does nothing to protect state marijuana regulatory programs, nor the patients, consumers or businesses that rely on them. And, it does nothing to protect small businesses and equity programs from the emergence of national and multinational corporate monopolies.
In order to achieve these important objectives, Congress must pass legislation to remove marijuana from the CSA (a.k.a. “descheduling”). This descheduling legislation must also include provisions to restore rights and provide a path to expungement and resentencing for those with previous marijuana convictions.
Further, this legislation needs to establish a system that ensures the fair federal regulation of marijuana while providing funding to reinvest in communities most harmed by the decades of brutal criminal enforcement of marijuana laws. Thankfully, these types of bills have already been introduced and have even passed in the House of Representatives but similar legislation in the Senate has yet to advance.
With newly sworn-in President Donald Trump back in office and likely to name Milgram’s replacement in the near future, the ball is now in his court to take ownership of DEA’s (mis)handling of this issue. Now that the marijuana rescheduling hearing has been indefinitely canceled and with a likely change in DEA leadership on the horizon, the process and outcome of rescheduling are uncertain.
However, what is clear is that rescheduling is not enough and will not satisfy the will of the American people. The overwhelming majority of public comments on rescheduling—close to 30,000 comments—sought the descheduling of marijuana. This is in step with public polling on federal cannabis legalization that shows support at similar rates—and across party affiliation—that has only grown over time.
Ending the criminalization of marijuana is what the public wants, and descheduling is how we get there.
Ultimately, it will fall upon Congress to listen to their constituents and pass legislation to end marijuana criminalization. In the meantime, the Trump administration can take a number of incremental steps to lessen the harms of marijuana prohibition, such as issuing clemency and new guidance from the Department of Justice to deprioritize federal marijuana prosecutions.
Unlike the largely symbolic progress that rescheduling would bring, these measures could help protect and improve the lives of everyday people—including President Trump’s supporters.
While certain incremental measures can be helpful, it should be obvious that the cornerstone of any real solution to address harms caused by federal marijuana is to end criminalization itself. In other words, to deschedule marijuana. For those who are most harmed by federal marijuana criminalization, marijuana rescheduling—if it even happens—won’t bring that relief. Now is the time for a people-driven solution, and the people support decriminalization.
Kat Murti is executive director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), the largest national network of young people working to end the war on drugs. Chelsea Higgs Wise, MSW, is the co-founder and executive director of Marijuana Justice, which organizes towards ending the drug war for the U.S. South.
“Nobody representing those most harmed by marijuana arrests and over-incarceration was designated to participate.” By Kat Murti, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, and Chelsea Higgs Wise, Marijuana Justice Tuesday was supposed to be the start of the much anticipated Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) hearing on potentially rescheduling marijuana under federal law. But now, months after Read More
