Virginia Creates Automatic Hearings for Old Marijuana Convictions

More than 1,000 Virginians still serving time for marijuana offenses that the state no longer treats as crimes have a path to resentencing. Gov. Abigail Spanberger signed legislation on May 15, 2026, establishing automatic court hearings for sentences tied to cannabis conduct that predates Virginia’s 2021 legalization of personal marijuana possession and home cultivation.

The signing came despite the General Assembly’s refusal to adopt the governor’s proposed amendments — changes that would have significantly narrowed the reform — and the legislature’s decision to return the original bills to her desk intact.

What the law requires

The legislation covers people incarcerated or on community supervision for certain felony marijuana offenses — possession, manufacture, sale, distribution, transportation, and related conduct — committed before July 1, 2021, and who remain under state supervision on July 1, 2026, the date the law takes effect. State and local corrections officials are required to identify everyone who qualifies, notify them of their rights, and work with courts to schedule hearings automatically. No petition is required; the state initiates the process.

At those hearings, a judge can suspend the unserved portion of a sentence, adjust how the remaining time is served, place a person on probation, or otherwise modify the sentence for the marijuana conviction. The relief covers people adjudicated as juveniles as well as those sentenced as adults. People whose convictions also involved acts of violence are excluded. The program sunsets on July 1, 2029.

“As laws have changed in Virginia, it is important to ensure that those who have been previously convicted of offenses under since-changed laws receive fair treatment and sentencing review,” Spanberger said in a statement from her office. “For decades, marijuana enforcement disproportionately impacted minority communities and communities of color, contributing to inequities in the criminal justice system that Virginia must no longer ignore.”

The legislation traveled through both chambers as companion bills: House Bill 26, sponsored by Delegate Rozia Henson, Jr., and Senate Bill 62, sponsored by Senate President Pro Tem Louise Lucas. Both bills shared the same core structure — the state proactively identifies who qualifies and schedules hearings without waiting for individuals to come forward.

The amendment fight

In April 2026, Spanberger sent the General Assembly proposed amendments that would have replaced automatic hearings with a petition-based system. Under that approach, eligible individuals would have needed to file on their own to trigger a resentencing review. The governor’s office also proposed removing mandatory deadlines for courts to complete those hearings.

Delegate Henson, who sponsored the House version, said he was willing to accept those changes even while warning that requiring petitions would allow some people to “fall through the cracks” for lack of a lawyer or awareness of the process. The full legislature did not agree. Both the House of Delegates and the Senate declined to take up the amendments and sent the original bills back to Spanberger’s desk.

She signed them as passed.

The choice between automatic initiation and petitions matters because of who is affected. Under the enacted law, Virginia’s corrections system bears the burden: it must identify eligible individuals and schedule hearings on their behalf. Under the governor’s alternative, that responsibility would have shifted to incarcerated people who, depending on their circumstances, may have no legal representation and limited knowledge of what relief is available. Spanberger’s own statement acknowledged that enforcement under the pre-legalization law fell hardest on communities of color — a history that makes access to the automatic process, rather than a petition option, central to whether the reform actually delivers relief.

A years-long fight, finally resolved

Comparable resentencing bills had passed the General Assembly in prior sessions but were vetoed by then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin. This session’s legislation closes that chapter. Bill sponsors and advocacy organizations estimated roughly 1,000 to 1,200 Virginians will be eligible for hearings under the new framework.

The resentencing signing lands in the middle of a broader unresolved question for Spanberger. Legislation establishing a framework for adult-use retail marijuana sales is still on her desk, with a deadline to act by May 23, 2026. The structural parallel to the resentencing fight is exact: Spanberger proposed amendments — including a delayed sales start date, higher taxes, and new criminal penalties for cannabis consumers — and the General Assembly declined to adopt them, returning the bills to her desk.

The coalition that earlier this month urged her not to veto the retail sales legislation is still waiting for an answer. The resentencing signing indicates Spanberger will move forward on cannabis reform even when the legislature declines her preferred terms. Whether the same holds for retail sales — a more commercially and politically complex set of decisions — becomes clear before the end of the month.