DEA Cannabis Rescheduling Faces New October 21 Deadline After Judge Weighs Reopening Hearing

By Nicolás Rodríguez, Managing Editor

The federal marijuana rescheduling process faces another procedural hurdle after a Drug Enforcement Administration administrative law judge ordered the agency to respond to a motion seeking to reopen the evidentiary hearing.

Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius gave the government until October 21 to respond to opponents seeking additional discovery and testimony related to a Government Accountability Office report questioning the documentation of federal drug-scheduling procedures.

The order does not reopen the hearing or resolve whether the GAO report should be admitted into evidence. The proceedings remain on hold while the judge considers the pending motions.

Opponents Seek Additional Evidence

The October 14 order follows a motion filed by DUID Victim Voices, physician Kenneth Finn and the National Drug and Alcohol Association, three parties opposing the proposed broader transfer of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.

The groups want the judge to admit a September 23 GAO report and, if admitted, reopen the hearing for limited discovery and testimony.

The GAO report found gaps in the DEA’s and Food and Drug Administration’s written procedures for evaluating and scheduling controlled substances. However, the watchdog also found that DEA considered federal health authorities’ recommendations in all 95 cases where it was required to do so between 2020 and 2025.

In its October 9 response, the DEA opposed additional briefing on the report but deferred to the judge on whether the document should be admitted into the hearing record.

On October 13, Smart Approaches to Marijuana and the states of Idaho, Indiana and Nebraska also supported admitting the report and allowing supplemental briefing.

Judge Keeps Proceedings on Hold

In his October 14 order, Julius granted the opponents permission to file a reply but reserved judgment on admitting the GAO report.

“Having received a new substantive motion, I will once again order a response and allow time for filing,” Julius wrote.

The judge ordered the government to submit its response by October 21, limiting the filing to ten pages.

“This matter remains STAYED to allow time for a response and to allow time for the tribunal to consider the pending motions,” the order states.

The distinction matters for cannabis operators and investors awaiting a broader federal rescheduling decision. Allowing additional testimony or document discovery could extend the administrative proceedings, although no further hearing has been authorized.

The April federal rule covering qualifying state-licensed medical marijuana and FDA-approved products remains separate from the broader rescheduling proceeding. That distinction leaves the industry facing continued uncertainty over the federal tax and regulatory consequences of a comprehensive Schedule III transfer.

As federal cannabis policy continues to evolve, operators, investors, and policymakers will gather at IgniteIt’s Capital & Policy Summit in Washington, D.C., on November 18, to discuss regulatory uncertainty, capital allocation, and the industry’s next phase.