EXCLUSIVE: Advocates Push To Shape DEA’s Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing on June 29

The Drug Enforcement Administration will open a rare public hearing on June 29 as part of its process to move marijuana out of Schedule I after carrying the burden of the classification for more than 50 years. The proceeding will examine how the agency evaluates cannabis’ medical use, its potential for abuse, and whether the plant belongs in Schedule III or should be removed from the Controlled Substances Act entirely. Advocacy groups on both sides of the issue have filed notices seeking to testify, setting up a broad debate over how federal law should treat cannabis going forward.

MPP’s Argument On Abuse

The Marijuana Policy Project is among the organizations seeking to participate in the upcoming hearing. In an exclusive phone interview with IgniteIt, MPP executive director Adam J. Smith explained that the group wants the DEA to hear from people who understand how cannabis is actually used in legal states. He said the agency’s current framework does not reflect that reality and that the definition of abuse is one of the most important issues MPP hopes to address.

“One of the things that we want to talk about is the definition of abuse, which under the current standards is basically any nonmedical use,” Smith said. “We think that with cannabis, that is an inappropriate definition of abuse, because millions of people use it regularly, arguably nonmedically, in ways that they feel benefit their lives.”

He noted that the federal approach does not match how cannabis is treated in most of the country.

“More than half the country lives in states where [cannabis is] perfectly legal,” Smith argues, “and we think that leaning on a definition of abuse that really encompasses all use other than medical is inappropriate and misunderstands the plant and how people have used it for thousands of years.”

Why MPP Says The Plant Does Not Belong On Any Schedule

Smith also emphasized that rescheduling does not go far enough. He said the hearing is an opportunity to explain why the plant itself should not be scheduled at all, even if synthetic cannabinoids may warrant tighter control. The distinction, he added, is central to understanding how cannabis is used and regulated in the real world.

“While rescheduling is a step forward, potentially, for patients, the plant and its natural extracts do not belong on the schedule,” he said. “Synthetics that do not naturally occur in the plants and that are chemically created, we don’t have good information about what the effects of those are for human consumption. While those may be appropriate for scheduling, the plant and its natural extracts, because of how they’re used, do not belong on the schedule.”

MPP’s Policy Perspective

Smith added that MPP’s long history in cannabis policy gives the organization a perspective shaped by decades of work on legalization, criminal justice reform, and youth access. He said that experience is directly relevant to the questions the DEA will consider and reflects the real-world outcomes of regulated cannabis systems.

“We have led more successful efforts to legalize cannabis for medical use and for adult use than any other institution in the country,” said Smith. “Over 30 years, we have been a driving force in helping us move from almost a million arrests a year down to 200,000 arrests a year, and have seen over that time teen and youth use decline to its lowest levels since the ‘70s.”

He explained that MPP’s approach is grounded in public health and personal freedom. 

“We bring a broad public policy perspective that centers public health and safety, reducing teen access to cannabis, and supporting the personal freedom of adults to make choices about their own health and consciousness,” Smith noted.

NORML’s Parallel Push

The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws is also seeking a seat at the hearing, arguing that the DEA must acknowledge the millions of adults who legally use cannabis outside the medical system. 

“Marijuana cannot lawfully remain in Schedule I,” Joseph A. Bondy, counsel to NORML and chair of the advocacy group’s board of directors, said in a statement. “But Schedule III is not the end of the road. It is, at most, an interim correction. It does not resolve the federal government’s continued failure to recognize adult cannabis consumers who are acting lawfully under state law.”

Bondy added that the hearing must address the reality of adult-use markets. 

“Adult cannabis consumers do not become patients because federal law lacks a better category for them,” he said. “They are not abusing medicine. They are participating in state-regulated adult-use systems enacted by voters and legislatures.”

Prohibitionists Also Seek To Testify

Opponents of legalization are also pushing to participate, including the influential but controversial Smart Approaches to Marijuana. 

“This fight is not over, and we will not sit on the sidelines while the federal government hands Big Marijuana its biggest political win in history,” Kevin A. Sabet, the group’s president and CEO, said in a statement cited by Marijuana Moment. “Rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III has no scientific basis and would hand the industry billions of dollars in rewards for targeting children.”

Looking Ahead

The DEA is expected to release the final list of approved witnesses in the coming weeks. Additional filings are anticipated before the deadline, and medical experts and cannabis industry representatives are also expected to seek a place on the roster. With the June 29 hearing approaching, the proceeding is shaping up to be one of the most consequential federal discussions on cannabis policy in decades.