Rescheduling of Cannabis Delayed as DEA Schedules Hearing for Expert Opinions

Earlier this year, the United States government took its first steps in over fifty years toward real cannabis reform. Acting on a recommendation from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) took the first steps to reclassify cannabis in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

While there had been hope that this process could move along quickly enough to be finalized before the election this November, the DEA has squashed those hopes by setting a formal hearing on the matter for December.

DEA Sets Hearing on Cannabis Rescheduling for December

There had been some hope that the DEA may pass up the idea of holding a formal hearing to review data and information provided during the public comment period – but really, we should’ve expected nothing less.

The U.S. government has been dragging their feet on rescheduling cannabis since the implementation of the CSA, so a few more months shouldn’t be any real surprise at all. The hearing schedule for December 2^nd will be held at 9am, in Arlington, VA.

For many, the main concern over the delay is the guaranteed change of presidential administrations taking place at the same time. In November, the U.S. is currently looking at former President Trump as the Republican nominee, and current Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee – either could potentially attempt to delay or prevent rescheduling from happening.

Rescheduling Cannabis Received Overwhelmingly Positive Responses from the Public Comment Period

Personally, it seems unlikely either would do so with the overwhelming public support for the change. During the public comment period, rescheduling cannabis received 10 times the usual response – with over 43,000 people making their voices heard on the importance of reform of cannabis laws on a federal level.

One analysis of the public comments over that 60-day period found that not only did more people feel the need to be heard than ever – but over 90% believed that cannabis should be reclassified under federal laws. Of those in support, 62% noted that they believe cannabis should be removed from the CSA altogether, not simply rescheduled, while 38% agreed that even Schedule III was too strict.

Of over 40K public comments, only 7.55% were against rescheduling cannabis – a huge change from the response we would’ve likely seen even a decade ago.

Cannabis Industry Fears Further Delays Amid Changes Post-Election

Among those most concerned about how the change in administrations may affect the DEA’s plans to reschedule cannabis over the coming months is businesses within the industry who are hoping this might give them long-needed relief to a tax burden they shouldn’t have to bear.

“We believe it’s unfortunate that the DEA has chosen to delay the decision on rescheduling cannabis until after the election. The societal, economic, and legal impacts of this decision are too significant to be postponed,” Neatleaf CEO Elmar Mair wrote to Forbes.

Of course, the benefits of improved tax situations and potential access to banking services after rescheduling will not completely end the federal/state conflict when it comes to cannabis laws.

This could potentially create more confusion as Big Pharma will likely move quickly to produce medications similar to the already FDA-approved Epidiolex, a seizure medication made by G.W. Pharmaceuticals and the first and only FDA approved cannabis-based medicine.

Who Can Participate in the DEA Review Hearing (and How to Make Sure Your Voice is Heard)

Like the public comment period, the hearing being held in December by the DEA is something that will allow many people to have their voices heard. If you’re wondering how you might be able to get in front of the presiding officer at this hearing – here’s what you need to know.

Requirements to Participate in the DEA’s Hearing on Rescheduling Cannabis

According to statements released by the DEA, interested persons are defined as “any person adversely affected or aggrieved by any rule or proposed rule issuable.” Technically, this means anyone who is negatively impacted by the current circumstances of prohibition – as well as those who believe rescheduling would cause negative impacts – can request to be heard.

Requests can be made electronically, in .PDF format, within 30 days of the hearing being scheduled, or hard copies of requests can be mailed.

Your request must include the following:

• Why you’re interested in participating.
• The specific objections, issues, or concerns you wish to have heard
• A brief description of your position regarding any objections or issues

Those who previously filed requests for hearings do not need to file an additional request to participate. Their initial request will be considered a notice of appearance for the December 2^nd hearing.

Will the DEA Continue to Delay Rescheduling, or Are We Just Jumping Through Hoops “As A Formality”?

To some, this hearing being scheduled at all is merely a formality that we need to get passed – like dozens of other substances before this to go through the process of being reclassified by the DEA. However, for others, this delay is something that induces anxiety and fears over whether we’re just seeing the start of delays and excuses for years to come.

“Waiting until after the presidential election is just another example of kicking the can down the road and making those of us working to make cannabis a safer, better industry sit in another holding pattern for no reason,” George Sadler, CEO and co-founder of Gelato Canna Co., wrote in an emailed statement to Forbes. “The people have spoken. They want cannabis legalized. This is more of the same: delay, over regulate, over tax.”

Hopefully, before the year is over, we can take comfort knowing the DEA won’t be letting any changes in the administration affect a process they have already moved forward on.

To step back now, without reasonable scientific evidence that contradicts the need to at the very least knock cannabis down to Schedule III or lower, would be a political danger zone – not something Harris or Trump is likely to do when they can instead take credit for a change that over 92% of Americans support.