One Democratic senator has challenged the White House commitment to pushing through a schedule change. The Senator demanded that answers be given about why there was radio silence from the White House.
Now 99 days since President Trump signed an executive order, dubbed‘Increasing Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research,’ directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to reschedule cannabis from a Schedule I to a Schedule III substance ‘in the most expeditious manner’, Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN) is demanding answers.
On March 27, the US Congressman sent a letter to Bondi and Terrance Cole, Administrator of Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), highlighting failures in implementation.
Cohen points out that the HALT Fentanyl act, which was signed into law in July 2025, required the Attorney General to publish rules within six months implementing the new research provisions. The deadline for this had been January 16, 2026. This date has passed.
Cohen wrote that “scientific research using these substances was harmed because the DEA did not issue these regulations.” He noted that researchers are currently unable access Schedule I substances such as cannabis and psilocybin for research.
In addition, he brings up a key issue which is preventing any progress in the process. John Mulrooney, DEA Chief Administrative Law Judiciary announced his retirement effective August 1 on July 23, 2020. He said explicitly that he was leaving the DEA in the absence of an Administrative Law Judicial to decide this or other pending Administrative Enforcement Cases.
With Cole yet to fill the vacancy, Cohen questions how ‘the Drug Enforcement Agency plans to reschedule without an ALJ to oversee the Hearing?’
READ MORE…
Inaction for decades
Cohen urges a specific timeline to address these points. He describes the current state of affairs as a continuation from over 50 years of inaction.
The Shafer Commission, appointed by Nixon in 1972, presented its findings to Congress and called for reform.
“However the Nixon Administration didn’t adopt the findings of the Commission he named. This report was published more than fifty years ago. Marijuana should never have been on Schedule 1. This is a firm conviction of mine. The inclusion of marijuana on Schedule I has resulted, in particular, in disproportionately harsh prison sentences and substantial research.
Industry will welcome the calls for clarification, as it has eagerly awaited answers from the government to fundamental questions.
This void was filled by industry experts with their intense speculations, as has become more common during the process of rescheduling.
A recent Congressional Research Service report (CRS), updated on 10 March, its ninth revision to the assessment of the federal state gap in cannabis policy, reflected this level of unease.
The 2024 version of the same report stated that if Congress took no action, ‘it appears likely DEA will move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.’
However, the 2026 version replaces that with the considerably more cautious language, stating that the ‘DOJ You can learn more about it here Bring marijuana up to Schedule III.
CRS raises important questions in its report about the final impact of rescheduling. It notes that even full descheduling of cannabis, the most expansive reform available, would not necessarily resolve all outstanding legal questions, as concerns about US compliance with international drug control treaty obligations ‘may remain.’
Another CRS document, dated December 2010, notes that a bill proposed in the current 119th Congress will maintain Section 280E’s tax prohibition against cannabis business deductions. This means the anticipated tax relief as rescheduling’s greatest commercial benefit may not be guaranteed even if it reaches completion.
A Democratic Senator has questioned the White House’s promise to force through rescheduling. He has also demanded an explanation for its radio silence.
Now 99 days since President Trump signed an executive order, dubbed‘Increasing Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research,’ directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to reschedule cannabis from a Schedule I to a Schedule III substance ‘in the most expeditious manner’, Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN) is demanding answers.
Terrance Cole, the Drug Enforcement Agency Administrator (DEA), and Bondi were contacted by the US congressman on March 27 to highlight failures with implementation.
Cohen points out that the HALT Fentanyl act, which was signed into law in July 2025, required the Attorney General to publish rules within six months implementing the new research provisions. The deadline for this had been January 16, 2026. This date has passed.
Cohen wrote: “Because of the DEA’s failure to issue regulations for scientific research, these substances have been harmed or impeded.” Scientists are currently unable, for research, to gain access Schedule I drugs, such as cannabis, psilocybin and ecstasy.
In addition, he brings up a key issue which is preventing any progress in the process. John Mulrooney the DEA’s chief administrative law judge, announced his resignation on July 23rd 2025. He said that he was retiring effective August 1 of this year.
With Cole yet to fill the vacancy, Cohen questions how ‘the Drug Enforcement Agency plans to reschedule without an ALJ to oversee the Hearing?’
READ MORE…
Inaction for decades
Cohen, while calling for concrete deadlines for these issues to be addressed, paints the present situation as an extension of more than half a decade of inaction.
The Shafer Commission, appointed by Nixon in 1972, presented its findings to Congress and called for reform.
“However the Nixon Administration didn’t adopt the findings of the Commission he named. This report was published more than fifty years ago. Marijuana should never have been on Schedule 1. This is my strong belief. The inclusion of marijuana on Schedule I has resulted, in particular, in disproportionately harsh prison sentences and significantly hindered research.”
This call for clarity is welcomed by industry which was eagerly awaiting the answers of the administration on a number of important questions.
This void was filled by industry experts with their intense speculations, as has become more common during the process of rescheduling.
A recent Congressional Research Service report (CRS), updated on 10 March, its ninth revision to the assessment of the federal state gap in cannabis policy, reflected this level of unease.
The 2024 version of the same report stated that if Congress took no action, ‘it appears likely DEA will move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.’
However, the 2026 version replaces that with the considerably more cautious language, stating that the ‘DOJ You can learn more about it here Move marijuana from Schedule I into Schedule III’
CRS raises important questions in its report about the final impact of rescheduling. It notes that even full descheduling of cannabis, the most expansive reform available, would not necessarily resolve all outstanding legal questions, as concerns about US compliance with international drug control treaty obligations ‘may remain.’
Another CRS document, dated December 2010, notes that a proposed bill in the 119th Congress could maintain Section 280E restrictions on deductions for cannabis businesses even if rescheduling were to be completed. Therefore, the anticipated tax benefits of rescheduling are not assured even if rescheduling reaches completion.
Cannabis Law Resources for Poland
Browse essential legal pages on cannabis sales and cultivation in Poland. You can use these resources to learn about the requirements for certifications, permissions and compliance.
-
Polish News Registration and Interests of Cannabis Businesses
-
Permissions for Cannabis Sales in Poland
-
Authorization for Importing or Manufacturing Medical Products
-
Permission for Manufacturing or Importing Medical Products
-
Certificate of Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)
-
Registration of Medical Products in Poland