On April 30, 2024, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) confirmed that it plans to recommend that cannabis be removed from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) and reclassified to Schedule III. Schedule I drugs are drugs with “high abuse potential with no accepted medical use,” such as heroin. Meanwhile, Schedule III drugs have accepted medical value but are available legally only with a prescription. This is the most significant federal drug policy shift in 50 years.
“Today, the Attorney General circulated a proposal to reclassify marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III,” Justice Department director of public affairs Xochitl Hinojosa said in a statement to the Associated Press. “Once published by the Federal Register, it will initiate a formal rulemaking process as prescribed by Congress in the Controlled Substances Act.”
What the DEA Reclassification Means and Doesn’t Mean
The DEA’s reclassification decision means that it has generally accepted the findings from a nearly year-long scientific review into cannabis conducted by the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) at the request of the Biden Administration. This review resulted in HHS’s determination that cannabis “has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States” and has a “potential for abuse less than the drugs or other substances in Schedules I and II.” HHS also recommended to the DEA that cannabis be rescheduled.
While the DEA’s policy shift is significant, it is important to recognize its limitations. Notably, the decision does not make cannabis federally legal and does not expunge prior cannabis convictions.
What Rescheduling Marijuana Would Do
Rescheduling would enable state-legal cannabis entities to take federal tax deductions that were previously unavailable pursuant to Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code. As discussed in greater detail here, Section 280E prohibits businesses involved in “trafficking” in cannabis or any other Schedule I or II drugs from deducting rent, payroll, and various other expenses that other businesses can write off, often resulting in an effective tax rate of 70% or more. Section 280E doesn’t apply to Schedule III drugs, so the DEA’s proposed change would substantially reduce cannabis companies’ tax liability.
Additionally, rescheduling marijuana would facilitate greater cannabis research and development for therapeutic uses, which is precluded with respect to Schedule I substances. Rescheduling, however, would likely require state-legal cannabis entities to comply with federal production, record-keeping, and prescribing requirements for Schedule III drugs.
What Rescheduling Marijuana Would Not Do
Rescheduling would not make cannabis federally legal. Accordingly, participants in state cannabis markets would still be in violation of federal law, and existing criminal penalties for certain marijuana-related activity would remain in force. Also, rescheduling would not expunge existing cannabis convictions.
Rescheduling would not enable state-licensed businesses to transact in interstate commerce, and it would also not necessarily facilitate banking services for cannabis entities. Other proposed federal reforms, including the SAFER Banking Act, are being considered towards this end now. You can find a detailed discussion here.
What Happens Next?
Many cannabis stocks surged following the DEA announcement, with stock prices for some national companies rising as much as 37 percent. State cannabis markets will likely be unaffected in the short to medium term, although relief from 280E tax restrictions may spur additional interest in obtaining state cannabis licenses.
The full impact of the DEA’s policy shift will not be felt for some time, as the rescheduling process will take months. The DEA proposal will first be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget; then, there will be a public notice and comment period and review by an administrative judge. The DEA will then publish the final rule in the Federal Register, and after a waiting period, the new law will become effective.
Notably, on at least one prior occasion, the DEA has issued a final rule in similar circumstances without public notice and comment. If the DEA does so here (perhaps to coincide with the coming general election in November), the timeline may speed up. However, given the range of stakeholders and the historical impact of cannabis rescheduling, this seems unlikely. In any event, legal challenges to any revision to the CSA may delay the effective date of the new law into 2025.
Monmouth County's Next Development Wave: What Developers and Investors Need to Know
Monmouth County is entering a significant new phase of development. For those looking to acquire property or undertake a new project, understanding the market opportunity is only the beginning. The more important question is whether a particular property can actually be developed as contemplated and what approvals, agreements, and other conditions will be required to […]
Are Your Conversations with AI Shielded from Discovery? Courts Are Split
Whether a client’s prompts to a generative AI tool and the documents it produces are protected from disclosure depends on the case type, who claims protection, and whether counsel was involved. In United States v. Heppner, a New York federal judge ruled that a criminal defendant’s communications with an AI platform were protected by neither […]
Guardianships in New Jersey: When a Loved One Can No Longer Manage Personal or Financial Affairs
When a family member can no longer make important decisions for themself, the question is often not whether the family will step in, but whether they have the legal authority to do so. A spouse may manage household finances, or an adult child may arrange medical care and pay bills. Still, informal assistance does not […]
New Jersey’s Revised UHAC Regulations: What Residential Developers Need to Know About Affordable Housing Commitments
New Jersey residential developers with affordable housing obligations should carefully review their existing approvals, development agreements, and proposed deed restrictions in light of the State’s revised UHAC regulations (Uniform Housing Affordability Controls). The regulations, which took effect on November 6, 2025, significantly change the administration and physical requirements for affordable housing units. For developers with […]
“No Comment” Culture: Why Silence Is Often the Riskiest Legal Strategy
A “no comment” response is sometimes the right call when a legal problem arises. As a blanket policy, however, it lets allegations go unanswered, deadlines pass, evidence disappear, and manageable disputes grow into expensive litigation. The businesses that fare best are usually the ones that say little publicly while acting decisively behind the scenes. When […]
Utility-Scale Battery Storage Projects: A Legal Roadmap for Developers, Property Owners and Other Stakeholders
Utility-scale battery energy storage systems (BESS) are becoming an increasingly important component of the electric grid throughout New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. As renewable generation expands, electricity demand increases and grid operators seek greater flexibility, battery storage can help balance supply and demand while providing additional capacity and reliability. For developers, battery storage presents […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
