Donald Trump's Plan to Reclassify Marijuana Is Paused as the DEA Reviews a New Government Report

President Donald Trump's marijuana rescheduling plan has been put on hold while a US Drug Enforcement Administration judge reviews a new government report. The pause delays a decision on moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III. It does not itself change the drug's legal status under federal law.

The news came after a September ruling halted the administrative proceedings. The pause followed a request to consider findings from the Government Accountability Office. A recent GAO report examined federal drug‑scheduling procedures. It identified gaps in how the DEA and Food and Drug Administration document their processes.

Why Donald Trump's Marijuana Rescheduling Plan Has Stalled

The DEA's chief administrative law judge, Derek C. Julius, stayed the proceedings on 29 September 2026. He is considering a motion to add the GAO report to the hearing record. Three interested parties filed the request. They are DUID Victim Voices, physician Kenneth Finn and the National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association.

They also sought permission for additional briefings on the report. They asked that the judge's recommendation be held until those arguments had been considered. The government was ordered to respond by 13 October. That deadline did not guarantee a final decision on marijuana rescheduling.

The GAO report found that the DEA lacked comprehensive policies defining roles, responsibilities and procedures for drug scheduling. It also found that the FDA lacked written procedures on staff evaluations and scheduling recommendations.

Those findings do not establish that the marijuana rescheduling process was unlawful or that its scientific assessments were flawed. The report examined recent federal scheduling decisions and procedures. It did not determine whether the evidence supporting marijuana's proposed reclassification was scientifically sound.

That distinction matters. The dispute concerns whether the report should be included in the administrative record. It also concerns whether further arguments are necessary. It does not concern whether marijuana has already been approved for broader rescheduling.

What Donald Trump's Schedule III Proposal Would Change

For context, the federal government has been considering marijuana's classification for several years. The Department of Justice has explored moving it from Schedule I to Schedule III. That review followed a recommendation from the Department of Health and Human Services.

Trump later directed the attorney general to continue the marijuana rescheduling review. The proposal has moved through formal administrative proceedings. These have included an administrative hearing before a DEA judge. The details of that process remain subject to ongoing review.

Schedule I is the most restrictive category under the Controlled Substances Act. It covers substances considered to have a high potential for abuse. It also covers substances without a currently accepted medical use under federal law.

Schedule III substances are recognised as having accepted medical uses and a lower potential for dependence. The proposed change could affect medical research and regulation. It could also influence how eligible cannabis businesses are taxed under federal law.

However, marijuana rescheduling would not amount to full federal cannabis legalisation. Recreational use would not automatically become lawful nationwide. Other federal restrictions could also remain in place.

There have also been narrower changes in how some cannabis‑related products are treated. Certain FDA‑approved marijuana‑based medicines and some state‑regulated medical cannabis programmes have received different federal treatment. Any such action would be separate from a broader proposal covering marijuana generally.

Why The DEA Decision Matters For Cannabis Legalisation

The distinction between narrower actions and a wider rescheduling proposal is important for patients, researchers and cannabis businesses. Limited changes can affect specified medical products and some state‑licensed medical marijuana. A broader proposal could extend Schedule III treatment further if it is adopted.

The GAO report could now become part of the debate over how the government handles any wider change. It is unclear whether it will lead to additional briefing. It is also unclear whether it will alter the timing of the judge's recommendation.

The report also recommended that the DEA and FDA develop clearer written procedures. It did not conclude that the agencies' scheduling decisions were necessarily incorrect. It focused instead on documentation and process.

For supporters of reform, the pause means the wider proposal remains unfinished after years of review. They point to the administration's stated intention to accelerate the process. For opponents, the additional scrutiny offers a chance to challenge how the government reached its position.

The immediate question is procedural. Judge Julius must decide whether the GAO report belongs in the record. He must also decide whether the parties may submit further arguments. Only then can the case advance toward a final recommendation.