Congressional Leaders Drop Attempt To Block Marijuana Rescheduling, While Preserving State Medical Cannabis Protections

Bipartisan House and Senate leaders have rejected a provision that would’ve blocked the Justice Department from rescheduling marijuana—while maintaining a longstanding rider protecting state medical cannabis programs from federal interference.

While a GOP-controlled House committee advanced a version of Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) appropriations legislation over the summer that would’ve prevented DOJ from rescheduling cannabis, a new bicameral agreement unveiled on Monday omits that language.

The move comes weeks after President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to expeditiously complete the process of moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

Here’s the language of the provision advanced by the House Appropriations Committee but excluded from the latest agreement: 

“SEC. 607. None of the funds appropriated or other wise made available by this Act may be used to reschedule marijuana (as such term is defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)) or to remove marijuana from the schedules established under section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812).”

GOP senators have separately tried to block the administration from rescheduling cannabis as part of a standalone bill filed in 2023, but that proposal did not receive a hearing or vote.

Meanwhile, on Monday, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) said a marijuana rescheduling appeal process “remains pending” despite Trump’s executive order.

The newly unveiled bicameral CJS bill, which is being combined with legislation to fund parts of the government covering interior, environment and energy and water Development, also contains a rider that’s been annually renewed since 2014 barring the Justice Department from using its funds to interfere in the implementation of state medical marijuana laws.

However, for reasons that are unclear, the rider that lists each state that would be protected excludes Nebraska.

Here’s the text of that provision: 

“SEC. 531. None of the funds made available under this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to any of the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, or with respect to the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, or Puerto Rico, to prevent any of them from implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.”

Missing from the latest version is an addition to that rider that the House previously included that would have authorized enhanced penalties for sales near schools and parks.

That provision specifically stipulated that the Justice Department could still enforce a section of U.S. code that calls for increased penalties for distributing cannabis within 1,000 feet of an elementary school, vocational school, college, playground or public housing unit.

However, a joint explanatory statement for the new spending package also says Congress “directs the Department to appropriately enforce the Federal Drug-Free School Zones Act (2 1 U.S.C. 860), to ensure that areas with young children, including schools and playgrounds remain drug-free.”

That appears to be related to a report from the Senate committee that was released earlier this year stating that the medical marijuana protection rider “does not explicitly preclude” U.S. attorneys from enforcing a federal statute on selling or manufacturing controlled substances in “areas with young children, including schools and playgrounds.”

The new bill also maintains protections for state industrial hemp research programs under the 2014 Farm Bill: 

“SEC. 530. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used in contravention of section 7606 (‘Legitimacy of Industrial Hemp Research’) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Public Law 113–79) by the Department of Justice or the Drug Enforcement Administration.”

“President Trump set an important foundation by signing three appropriations bills into law in November, and we are carrying that momentum into the new year,” House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole (R-OK), said in a press release. “This bipartisan, bicameral package reflects steady progress toward completing FY26 funding responsibly.”

Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-ME) said the overall deal is a “fiscally responsible package that restrains spending while providing essential federal investments that will improve water infrastructure in our country, enhance our nation’s energy and national security, and spur scientific research necessary to maintain U.S. competitiveness.”

Advocates may welcome the exclusion of the rescheduling provision and inclusion of medical marijuana protections in the CJS bill, but many cannabis stakeholders have protested Trump’s signing of a separate appropriations measure in November that includes provisions to ban most consumable hemp products.

However, when the president issued the marijuana rescheduling order last month, he also directed Congress to reevaluate that policy and ensure that people can continue to access full-spectrum CBD products. A federal agency will also be moving to cover such products for certain patients under Medicare and Medicaid.