The marijuana rescheduling hearing set to begin June 29 will feature only opponents of the DEA and Justice Department proposal, who have filed prehearing briefs identifying witnesses and the evidence they plan to present. The administrative proceeding will run through July 15 and will consider moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act.
Three states—Idaho, Indiana and Nebraska—filed a statement saying they will call Deepak Cyril D’Souz, inaugural director of the Yale Center for the Science of Cannabis and Cannabinoids, to testify on cannabis abuse liability. The states say D’Souz will rely on controlled human laboratory studies, brain imaging and epidemiologic research to argue that regular cannabis use can cause cannabis use disorder and that use is linked to: (1) higher risk of psychotic disorders in susceptible people; (2) addiction; (3) driving impairment; (4) neurodevelopmental harms from adolescent and prenatal exposure; and (5) measurable deficits in learning, memory and other cognitive functions.
Those states will also call Humboldt County (California) Sheriff William Honsal to testify that changes to marijuana laws expanded illicit production and interstate trafficking rather than eliminating it. In his prehearing outline, the sheriff says some medical recommendations authorized very large quantities—growers claimed authority to cultivate up to 99 plants per patient, and individual plants could yield 0.25 to 4 pounds. He will testify that indoor operations completing five to six harvest cycles per year can produce thousands of pounds annually and that criminal organizations exploited perceived loopholes to mass-produce marijuana for interstate and international distribution.
Tennessee’s Bureau of Investigation will call Erica Stephens, assistant special agent in charge of the Tennessee Dangerous Drugs Task Force. Stephens will describe two primary diversion pathways: trafficking of marijuana from states that license commercial cannabis and illegal cultivation on licensed hemp farms. The TBI filing states that marijuana is “the drug most associated with crimes against persons in Tennessee” and that deregulation and hemp legalization complicate enforcement, encourage criminal involvement in production and distribution, and increase traffic deaths connected to impaired driving.
Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), an anti-legalization group participating in the hearing, said it will call DEA pharmacologist Luli Akinfiresoye. Akinfiresoye previously submitted a report in a prior rescheduling process linking cannabis use to psychosis, depression and cognitive impairment; SAM’s statement says she will testify that repeated THC exposure alters brain reward pathways and increases risk of cannabis dependence and neurocognitive harms, particularly for adolescents. SAM will also call Bertha Madras, a former director at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, who intends to argue that marijuana still meets Schedule I criteria: high abuse potential, no accepted medical use, and lack of accepted safety under medical supervision.
The National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association said it will call Patrice Kelly, a former Department of Transportation official, and its executive director will testify that the DEA proposal did not adequately address transportation safety impacts.
The DEA’s selection process has drawn criticism because the agency invited only opponents of rescheduling to participate. DEA Administrator Terrance Cole denied a request from NORML to reconsider its exclusion, saying NORML failed to show it was “adversely affected or aggrieved” by the proposed rule transferring marijuana to Schedule III as opposed to the status quo of Schedule I.
The judge overseeing the hearing, DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius, issued an order that the proceeding will not be televised, livestreamed or broadcast. That decision contrasts with an earlier, Biden-era rescheduling hearing that permitted livestreaming. Marijuana Moment and other media groups asked Julius to reconsider, arguing that limited physical seating in Arlington, Virginia—where in-person attendance is required—does not provide meaningful public access and that contemporaneous observation is essential for reporting.
The hearing follows an April administrative order from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche that reclassified state-licensed medical cannabis and any FDA-approved marijuana products from Schedule I to Schedule III immediately. The upcoming hearing will evaluate comprehensive rescheduling to Schedule III.
Several lawsuits challenging the rescheduling process are pending and have been consolidated in a federal appeals court. Plaintiffs include state attorneys general, legalization opponents and a cannabis biopharmaceutical company. Litigation has already affected prior administrative timelines: a Biden-era hearing on rescheduling was paused and later cancelled amid disputes over witness selection and alleged improper communications.
Some policy and operational changes are already in motion. A Congressional Research Service note says certified medical patients from state-licensed dispensaries appear to be authorized to possess medical marijuana without a CSA-compliant prescription under the Acting AG’s order. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives posted a draft update to the federal gun-purchase form removing explicit reference to medical marijuana and limiting the federal prohibition to recreational use. The Treasury Department and IRS announced plans to issue new tax guidance for the marijuana industry following rescheduling.
The June 29–July 15 hearing will focus on the statutory eight-factor analysis for scheduling decisions, and opponents have narrowed witnesses to experts and law enforcement they say will quantify public health and safety harms and document law-enforcement impacts. Supporters of rescheduling and reform advocates have raised procedural objections to their exclusion and to the decision not to livestream the proceeding.
For observers, the immediate stakes are procedural transparency and the evidentiary record established during the hearing. For regulated entities and federal agencies, the outcome could change enforcement priorities, tax rules and federal forms; for patients, the Acting AG’s April order already alters possession and medical access under federal law for state-licensed programs. The administrative law judge has set strict timelines for filings and testimony; the hearing must conclude no later than July 15.
