The nominee to head the Drug Enforcement Administration, a federal agency that enforces marijuana laws in legalized states, is refusing to commit to rescheduling cannabis or say what he would do to ensure its enforcement by the federal government.
Terrance Cole, nominee for DEA Administrator, largely avoided addressing multiple marijuana-related questions in written replies to questions sent by two Democratic Senators during his confirmation hearing. This included a pending plan to change cannabis’s Schedule I classification to Schedule III, which was started under the Biden government.
Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Alex Padilla (D-CA) asked Cole about his position on this proposal. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Alex Padilla (D-CA) about his position on that proposal, Cole—who has previously voiced concerns about the dangers of marijuana and linked its use to higher suicide risk among youth—simply said that, if confirmed, he will “give the matter careful consideration after consulting with appropriate personnel within the Drug Enforcement Administration, familiarizing myself with the current status of the regulatory process, and reviewing all relevant information.”
While he gave noncommittal answers when asked about rescheduling in the written questions, Cole said during an in-person hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee last month that examining the rescheduling proposal will be “one of my first priorities” if he’s confirmed for the role, saying it’s “time to move forward” on the stalled process—but again without clarifying what end result he would like to see.
“I’m not familiar exactly where we are, but I know the process has been delayed numerous times—and it’s time to move forward,” he told Padilla at the time. I need to know more about where [agencies] Listen to experts, and understand the steps they’re taking.”
Booker also asked the nominee if he thought the DEA “bind” itself to the process of scheduling as outlined under the Controlled Substances Act.
Cole added, “I would follow any and all policies and laws of the Department and the law in every case, as I do with everything else.”
The prospective DEA head then responded to several follow-up questions—such as whether the agency should abide by scheduling recommendations made by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or whether drugs that have been found to be harmless and medically beneficial should be in Schedule I—by simply referencing his earlier comments.
Padilla also posed similar questions to him. He pressed his nominee about the process of rescheduling, which was stalled due to legal challenges from witnesses who were participating in the administrative hearings for finalizing the proposed rule.
Cole’s answers to the questions of whether marijuana has therapeutic value and his thoughts on cannabis rescheduling were identical. Cole repeated his comments when asked about the enforcement of federal laws if marijuana was moved from Schedule III to Schedule IV and the possibility of new federal guidelines for enforcement priorities surrounding marijuana.
What is your opinion on marijuana being criminalized at the federal government level even in states where it has been legalized? What is the best way for DEA to conduct investigations in states that have legalized marijuana? Padilla asked.
The nominee reiterated: “If I am confirmed, after consulting the appropriate personnel in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and reviewing relevant information, I will take the matter carefully into consideration.”
Cole, who was also questioned by Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina (R) at a Judiciary Committee meeting last month said that it would be appropriate to set up a “working” group to study the disparity between the state and federal marijuana laws to “stay on top”
The candidate worked for DEA as a DEA agent from 1991 to 1999. He is currently Virginia’s Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security. Part of his responsibilities includes overseeing the state Cannabis Control Authority.
Cole wrote on LinkedIn after a recent visit to CCA: “I’ve been in the law enforcement field for 30+ years, and everyone knows what I think about marijuana. So don’t bother asking!”
Trump initially chose Hillsborough County, Florida Sheriff Chad Chronister to lead DEA, but the prospective nominee—who strongly advocated for marijuana decriminalization—withdrew from consideration in January amid scrutiny from conservative lawmakers over the sheriff’s record on COVID-related public safety enforcement actions.
As far as the marijuana rescheduling process is concerned, DEA recently notified an agency judge that the proceedings are still on hold—with no future actions currently scheduled as the matter sits before the acting administrator, Derek Maltz, who has called cannabis a “gateway drug” and linked its use to psychosis.
Meanwhile, although shutting down licensed marijuana dispensaries doesn’t “rise to the top” of his priorities, an interim U.S. attorney who recently warned a Washington, D.C. cannabis shop about potential federal law violations says his “instinct is that it shouldn’t be in the community.” The interim U.S. attorney has since changed his mind for reasons unrelated to the marijuana dispensary.
Separately, an activist, who was pardoned by Trump for a conviction related to marijuana during his first term, visited the White House last month and discussed future options of clemency.
A marijuana industry-backed political action committee (PAC) has also released a series of ads over recent weeks that have attacked Biden’s cannabis policy record as well as the nation of Canada, promoting sometimes misleading claims about the last administration while making the case that Trump can deliver on reform.
Its latest ad accused former President Joe Biden and his DEA of waging a “deep state war” against medical cannabis patients—but without mentioning that the former president himself initiated the rescheduling process that marijuana companies want to see completed under Trump.
Read Cole’s answers to the senators’ marijuana question below.
QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BOOKER
1. The Department of Justice requested that the Department of Health and Human Services conduct a review of the marijuana schedule under the Controlled Substances act in October 2022. According to Title 21 (section 811(b), the United States Code, the Attorney General must request the Secretary of HHS to make a recommendation to the United States Code based on a medical and scientific eight-factor analysis to either schedule, reschedule or deschedule substances. HHS, having conducted this review and gathered scientific data, recommended to DOJ that marijuana be rescheduled from Schedule I (the current classification) to Schedule III. DOJ issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in May 2024 for the purpose of moving cannabis from Schedule I under Controlled Substances Act to Schedule III.
a. You will follow HHS’s recommendation if you are confirmed to move cannabis from Schedule I (the current classification) to Schedule III.
RESPONSE : I’ll give it careful thought if you confirm, having consulted with all the relevant staff at the Drug Enforcement Administration.
b. Does the DOJ have to follow the process of putting substances on the Schedule required by Controlled Substances Act?
RESPONSE : If confirmed, as in any other matter, I will look at each individual’s facts and circumstances, and then follow both the law and policies set forth by the Department.
In what situations do you think it is appropriate that the DEA rejects HHS’s recommendations? Please give specific examples.
See my answer to question 1.a. above.
2. Since more than 50-years ago when the Controlled Substances Act came into effect, DEA’s never overridden HHS’s recommendation that a controlled substance be rescheduled or removed from the list.
a. Do you agree to follow the Controlled Substances Act’s scheduling requirements if you receive confirmation?
See my answer to question 1.b. above.
b. Are you committed to HHS scheduling recommendations?
See my answer to question 1.a. above.
Should substances, in accordance with the Controlled Substances Act, be classified according their abuse potential and medically accepted use?
See the answer to Question 1b. above.
Schedule I should be reserved for substances with the highest level of danger and no medical purpose.
See the answer to Question 1b. above.
Alex Padilla, Senator: Questions and Answers
1. You would be responsible for ensuring that the enforcement approach of your agency adapts to any changes in marijuana law.
a. Consider you marijuana to be a valid medical remedy in the United States today? Explain your reasons, including the factors that you believe should be considered by the DEA when evaluating medical and scientific evidence.
RESPONSE I’ll give it careful thought if confirmed. After consulting the appropriate staff at the Drug Enforcement Administration. familiarizing myself with current regulatory processes and reviewing relevant information.
b. The DEA is in the process of reclassifying cannabis as a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act. Will you, if confirmed, commit to the timely completion of rulemaking in good faith, according to HHS scientific and medical advice?
See my answer to question 1.a.
What would you do to make sure that DEA enforcement practices reflect marijuana’s new Schedule III classification and maintain the credibility of the agency?
See my answer to question 1.a.
d. How do you feel about the criminalization of marijuana on a federal level, even in states where it is legal? How should DEA handle investigations or actions to enforce the law in such jurisdictions.
After consulting with the appropriate staff at the Drug Enforcement Administration, and after reviewing all pertinent information, I would like to confirm that this matter will be carefully considered.
What will the DEA’s guidance for personnel be after marijuana is reclassified to Schedule III status? Are you going to instruct DEA Agents not prioritize actions taken against marijuana-related activity that is in accordance with state laws?
See my answer to question 1.a.
What are your plans to prevent rescheduling from creating new criminal risks, particularly for those individuals and businesses that operate lawfully within state marijuana regimes in relation to derivative products or controlled substances?
See my answer to question 1.d.
Director of DOGE’s Canceled Marijuana Monitoring Program Hopes to Continue His Work