Trump is reportedly weighing a directive that would push federal agencies to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III, but the White House says no final decision has been made. If it happens, Schedule III would bring meaningful 280E tax relief to state-legal operators and ease some research barriers, yet it would still leave cannabis federally illegal, keep interstate commerce off limits and preserve the basic conflict between state markets and federal law. In other words, it could be real progress for businesses and science, but it would not deliver legalization, descheduling, broad criminal justice reform or a durable national framework, meaning the hardest work would still be ahead.
President Donald Trump appears to be reopening a federal cannabis debate that has sat frozen for more than a year. According to The Washington Post, the White House is weighing an executive directive that would push federal agencies to move forward with rescheduling cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act. Administration officials stress that no final decision has been made, but the signal is clear: cannabis is back on the table.
If it happens, the shift would mark the most significant change in federal cannabis policy in more than 50 years. It would also arrive wrapped in contradiction. Just weeks ago, Trump signed a must-pass spending deal that quietly set the stage for the recriminalization of most hemp-derived THC products starting in 2026. Progress, in other words, is moving in two directions at once.
What Trump Is Considering
The Post reports that Trump met this week in the Oval Office with cannabis industry executives alongside Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz. During the meeting, Trump reportedly phoned House Speaker Mike Johnson, who raised objections to rescheduling based on public health concerns. By the end of the call, Trump appeared open to moving forward, though sources cautioned the process is still unresolved.
This would not be a sudden reversal. Trump said publicly in August that he would decide “within weeks” whether to change cannabis’s federal classification. That timeline came and went without action, but the renewed reporting suggests the issue never fully left the White House.
Under current federal law, cannabis remains a Schedule I substance, grouped with heroin and LSD and defined as having no accepted medical use. A move to Schedule III would formally recognize medical value and lower abuse potential, placing cannabis alongside drugs like ketamine and certain prescription painkillers.
Trump cannot personally reschedule cannabis. The Controlled Substances Act gives that authority to the attorney general, typically exercised through the Drug Enforcement Administration. Still, the White House could direct the Justice Department to move the process forward without waiting on the administrative hearings that have stalled since early 2025, potentially accelerating a final rule.
Why This Matters
For cannabis businesses, the most immediate impact would come through taxes. As long as cannabis remains classified in Schedule I or II, Section 280E of the tax code blocks operators from deducting ordinary business expenses. The result has been effective tax rates that often exceed 60%.
Brian Vicente, founding partner at Vicente LLP, said rescheduling would remove that burden. “This monumental change will have a massive, positive effect on thousands of state-legal cannabis businesses around the country,” he said, pointing to 280E relief as a survival issue for operators already stretched thin.
Rescheduling would not legalize cannabis, but it would immediately change who can stay open and who cannot. For many small and mid-sized operators, that distinction matters more than market headlines.
What Rescheduling Does Not Do
Schedule III would still leave cannabis illegal at the federal level. Interstate commerce would remain prohibited. Federal criminal penalties would still exist. Workers, patients and noncitizens would continue to face legal exposure even in states with regulated markets.
Research access would improve, but within limits. Cannabis would remain under DEA oversight and FDA scrutiny. Whole-plant cannabis would not suddenly become an FDA-approved medicine, and state programs would continue operating in a legal gray zone.
Those limits are not abstract. High Times has documented how partial reforms can coexist with aggressive enforcement, most recently when the administration signed legislation redefining hemp in ways that will wipe out much of the hemp-derived market next year. That move has already sparked resistance from states and prompted questions about whether federal agencies even have the capacity to enforce the ban, a concern echoed in a recent Congressional Research Service memo.
Seen against that backdrop, cannabis rescheduling looks less like a clean break from prohibition and more like another uneasy compromise layered onto an already fractured system.
A Step Forward, Not the Destination
Supporters of rescheduling argue that formally acknowledging cannabis’ medical value is long overdue. Shawn Hauser, a partner at Vicente LLP, described the potential move as a repudiation of Nixon-era drug policy and a meaningful shift in public health thinking. She also cautioned that rescheduling alone does not close the deeper gaps in federal law or deliver the criminal justice reform many advocates continue to demand.
That tension runs through the cannabis community. Some see Schedule III as progress worth taking, even if it falls short. Others worry it could entrench federal control and tilt the field toward large corporate and pharmaceutical players. High Times has explored those concerns in depth, including our reporting on why Schedule III could be worse than standing still and how conservative policy frameworks could use rescheduling to tighten oversight rather than loosen it.
Both things can be true. Rescheduling would ease pressure on businesses and researchers. It would also leave the core contradiction of U.S. cannabis policy intact.
What Comes Next
If Trump moves forward, he would be reviving a process that began under the Biden administration, when federal health officials concluded cannabis has accepted medical use and recommended Schedule III. The DEA’s hearing process has been stalled for months, leaving the industry and regulators stuck in limbo. An executive push could break that deadlock.
Even then, the larger question remains unresolved. Cannabis would still sit inside the Controlled Substances Act. Hemp would still face a looming federal crackdown. States would still be navigating conflicts between local markets and federal law.
Rescheduling may be progress. It may even be meaningful progress. But it is not legalization, not descheduling and not the end of prohibition’s long shadow. For a plant and a culture that have waited decades for recognition, this moment calls for clear-eyed realism.
The road forward is opening. The finish line is still further down it.
