Federal Cannabis Reform Once Again on Hold in the United States

The Reclassification of cannabis in the United States faces a new procedural hurdle. Derek Julius, chief administrative law judge of the DEA, has temporarily suspended the federal proceedings to determine whether cannabis should be reclassified from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act.

This decision, issued on September 29, follows a motion filed by three parties opposed to a broader reclassification: the National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association (NDASA), DUID Victim Voices and Dr. Kenneth Finn. They are asking the judge to add to the hearing record a report recently published by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and to allow for the presentation of additional arguments regarding its findings.

A GAO report scrutinizes federal procedures

Published on September 23, the GAO report examines how federal agencies evaluate and classify controlled substances. Rather than determining the status of cannabis itself under federal law, this audit focuses on the procedures used by the DEA, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other federal agencies.

Its findings highlight gaps in the official documentation. According to the report, the DEA «has no policies or procedures specifying how its staff should conduct evaluations or classify substances,» while the FDA «has no policies or procedures specifying how its staff should conduct evaluations or make classification recommendations for substances .».

The audit examined the scheduling actions taken by the DEA regarding 208 substances between 2020 and 2025. When a federal health recommendation was required and a final decision had been made, the DEA’s decisions aligned with those recommendations in all 84 cases reviewed.

For opponents of Class III, however, the lack of comprehensive written procedures raises questions about the process underlying the current proposal. Their petition argues that the validity of the government’s argument «depends entirely on the quality of the process that produced it.».

Judge Julius has not yet decided whether the GAO document will be officially entered into the record. He has simply stayed the proceedings pending his consideration of this issue.

The DEA must respond by October 13

The DEA is now available until October 13, 2026 to submit a response of no more than 20 pages stating whether the case should be reopened. Other parties may also respond, although they are not required to do so.

«Accordingly, given the nature of this motion, it is ORDERED that this case be STAYED pending the resolution of the motion,» Judge Julius wrote.

Prior to this suspension, the The testimony had already concluded at the end of the hearings held between June 29 and July 15. The next expected step was the decision recommended by Judge Julius, which would ultimately have served as the basis for a final decision by the DEA administrator.

No deadline has been announced at this time, either for the decision on the GAO’s motion or for the judge’s recommendation.

The classification in Annex I at the heart of the federal debate

More broadly, the proceedings concern the question of whether Cannabis should be reclassified from Schedule I to Schedule III. The federal government defended this change, citing, in part, a scientific and medical assessment from the Ministry of Health and Social Services.

In its final brief, the DEA argued that cannabis «no longer meets the legal criteria for Schedule I, as it is currently recognized for medical use in the United States and its use under medical supervision is considered safe.».

The agency also highlighted the fact that more than 30,000 practitioners treat more than six million patients in 43 U.S. states as evidence of established medical use.

Opponents, for their part, emphasized the potential risks to public health and safety, as well as procedural issues surrounding the federal assessment.

A procedural stay

The order of September 29 does not address the scientific validity of the cannabis reclassification, nor does the GAO report recommend any specific classification for this plant. The immediate question is whether the audit should be included in the administrative record and give rise to new arguments from the parties.

This stay therefore adds another layer of uncertainty to a federal process already marked by hearings, litigation, and legal actions.

For now, the October 13 is the next date to watch. The DEA's response could help determine whether Judge Julius will resume his work toward his recommendation or whether he will reopen the case for a new round of briefs, which could push the Decision Regarding Class III.