Those who thought the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) stacked the cannabis rescheduling deck in favor of prohibitionists under the Joe Biden administration may be in for more disappointment.
Under a new administrative law judge hearing process that’s scheduled to begin June 29 – for the DEA to determine the merits of a proposed rule to reclassify cannabis as a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) – President Donald Trump’s administration will only entertain testimony from those who oppose the proposed rule.
The DEA announced seven “interested persons” on June 18 who are “adversely affected or aggrieved” by the proposed rule, all of whom are against loosening federal restrictions on cannabis. The seven designated participants include:
- National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association (NDASA)
- Tennessee Bureau of Investigation
- Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM)
- The states of Nebraska, Idaho, Indiana and Louisiana
- DUID Victim Voices
- Kenneth Finn, M.D.
- Phillip A. Drum, Pharm.D.
“The notice of hearing provided that every interested person, defined in 21 CFR 13011.01(b), who wishes to participate in the hearing shall file a written notice of intention to participate in conformity with the requirements of 21 CFR 1308.44(b) and in the form prescribed in 21 CFR 1316.48,” the DEA announcement states. “The administrator has completed his assessment of the notices of intent to participate that were timely submitted and has selected the following interested persons to participate in the hearing.”
Finn, a physician who practices comprehensive pain medicine in Prescott, Ariz., as well as NDASA, SAM, and the states of Nebraska and Indiana, all filed lawsuits last month attempting to reverse U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s April 22 order to immediately reclassify state-licensed medical cannabis and FDA-approved products containing cannabis or cannabis extracts from Schedule I to Schedule III under the CSA.
When Blanche announced that order for medical cannabis, he also issued a separate notice for the upcoming hearing on the proposed rulemaking to reclassify all cannabis (including nonmedical products) in accordance with Trump’s executive order from December 2025 to complete the process in “the most expeditious manner” possible.
In doing so, Blanche withdrew the previous administrative law judge hearing process that was stalled by an interlocutory appeal under Biden, whose DEA had selected 25 designated participants, including some pro-rescheduling parties.
The notice for administrative hearings issued by both Blanche and former DEA Administrator Anne Milgram (under Biden) define an “interested person” as “any person adversely affected or aggrieved by any rule or proposed rule issuable” as defined in 21 CFR 1300.01(b) under 21 U.S.C. 811. It remains unclear why the Biden DEA selected rescheduling proponents, while the Trump DEA did not, under the same definition.
The Trump DEA’s new expedited hearing process is different, but it retains the same proposed rule that was set forth under the previous administration, when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services determined cannabis has currently accepted medical use and that its potential for abuse is less than substances listed in Schedules I and II of the CSA.
The American Trade Association for Cannabis and Hemp (ATACH), a pro-rescheduling party that filed a written notice of intention to participate in the upcoming hearing process, pointed out Thursday that the Trump DEA will now be solely responsible for defending the proposed rule.
“ATACH is deeply disappointed that not a single supporter of cannabis rescheduling was selected. The upcoming rescheduling hearing will now strictly include prohibitionist parties that oppose President Trump’s position on rescheduling,” ATACH President Michael Bronstein said in a statement.
“ATACH’s exclusion from the hearing represents a missed opportunity for the ALJ to hear directly from key scientific and medical experts on the medical use and safety profile of cannabis,” he said. “Instead, the selected roster is a who’s who of prohibitionist voices who have little-to-no experience with the medical use of cannabis.”
In announcing the interested parties who will participate in the upcoming hearing, scheduled to conclude no later than July 15, the DEA also announced its chief administrative law judge (ALJ), Derek C. Julius, who will preside over the hearing.
From 2022 to 2024, Julius served as the DEA’s foreign section chief in the Office of Chief Counsel, including as a senior attorney in the diversion and regulatory policy section in 2022. He also specialized in immigration litigation and earned a Master of Studies in international human rights law from the University of Oxford in 2021.
Julius indicated in a preliminary order on June 18 that the upcoming hearing won’t focus on state-licensed medical cannabis or FDA-approved cannabis products that Blanche’s April 22 order already reclassified.
“Importantly, the scope of this hearing is not to discuss the rescheduling of medical products approved by the Food and Drug Administration that contain marijuana and of medical marijuana products already regulated by the states, which has already occurred. See 91 Fed. Reg. 22,714 (2026),” the ALJ wrote. “Accordingly, no evidence or testimony will be received on that matter. The narrow issue in this matter is whether the remainder of marijuana, as defined in the CSA, should be transferred from its current place on Schedule I of the list of controlled substances to Schedule III.”
The judge also confirmed that the government is “the proponent” of the proposed rescheduling rule and has the “burden of proof” for the rule.
For the hearing, each designated party will have 15 minutes for their opening statement and may present up to two witnesses to testify for no more than two hours each, or one witness for up to four hours, and each interested party may cross-examine each of the government’s witnesses for no more than one hour. Interested parties will not be permitted to cross-examine one another’s witnesses.
That said, although no pro-rescheduling entities were selected to participate as interested parties in the hearing, the DEA could potentially call a pro-rescheduling party as one of its witnesses for testimony.
Julius ordered the designated parties to file brief prehearing statements (up to 25 pages) no later than June 24, requesting that they include the names of their witnesses and a summary of what they will testify on.
Despite ATACH’s exclusion, Bronstein said the trade association, through the Coalition for Cannabis Scheduling Reform (CCSR), will “continue to advocate for the reclassification of cannabis based on science, standards and sound policy.”
