Trump signs executive order to accelerate marijuana rescheduling

President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act, a change that eases federal restrictions without legalizing the drug nationally. The move represents the most significant federal policy shift on cannabis in half a century and is expected to open the door to expanded medical research, new business opportunities, and a reexamination of federal enforcement priorities.

The order relocates marijuana from the strictest drug category — reserved for substances deemed highly prone to abuse and without accepted medical use — to a lower classification indicating reduced abuse potential and recognized medical applications. The decision follows years of bipartisan pressure, state-level legalization campaigns, and growing public support for looser marijuana laws.

Trump Frames Move as Medical, Not Recreational

In the Oval Office, Trump emphasized that the policy shift does not legalize the drug.

“I want to emphasize that the order I am about to sign is not the legalization [of] marijuana in any way, shape, or form — and in no way sanctions its use as a recreational drug,” he said. Flanked by medical experts and public health officials, Trump reiterated his longstanding personal opposition to drug use, including alcohol and cigarettes, while acknowledging medical marijuana may hold therapeutic value when tightly controlled.

“Marijuana can be legitimate in terms of medical applications when carefully administered in some cases. This may include the use as a substitute for addictive and potentially lethal opioid painkillers,” he said. “This reclassification order will make it far easier to conduct marijuana-related medical research, allowing us to study benefits, potential dangers, and future treatments.”

Earlier in the week, Trump previewed this rationale, noting that reclassification “leads to tremendous amounts of research that can’t be done unless you reclassify.”

New Medicare Program for CBD Access

At the signing, Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, announced a forthcoming program to expand access to CBD products for seniors. CBD, a non-intoxicating cannabis compound, has been associated with anxiety reduction and pain management, though comprehensive research remains limited.

“Today our innovation center at CMS is announcing a new model and additional actions to give our seniors access to cannabinoids. These are CBDs. They are not addictive, which many are already using to manage pain,” Oz said. The program, set to begin in April 2026, will allow Medicare-enrolled patients to obtain CBD products at no added cost if recommended by a physician.

Supporters Cite Medical Value, Critics Warn of Health Risks

Advocates for rescheduling argue medical cannabis is widely used by patients suffering from cancer, glaucoma, and chronic pain, and that broader acceptance could reduce reliance on opioids. They also highlight the economic benefits states have seen in tax revenue and consumer demand.

Critics, however, warn that expanding access will exacerbate public-health problems, particularly among teenagers. They cite rising marijuana potency, continued black-market activity, and the risk of creating a powerful industry built on selling an addictive product.

“This is a giant gift to Big Marijuana and its pushers who are now more incentivized to target children with their highly addictive products,” said Dr. Kevin Sabet, a former federal drug policy adviser who now leads the anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana. The organization announced plans to sue the administration, with former Attorney General Bill Barr expected to spearhead the legal effort.

Nearly two dozen Republican Senators also voiced opposition in a letter to the White House, citing evidence of developmental and cognitive harms linked to early or prenatal marijuana exposure.

“The evidence shows that marijuana is harmful to its users, especially to young people and women who are pregnant and nursing,” they wrote. The lawmakers argued marijuana poses “long-term effects on brain health,” referencing concerns about “permanent IQ loss” from early use and risks such as “fetal growth restriction, premature birth, stillbirth, and problems with brain development.”

The senators also expressed fears that lower federal restrictions could increase workplace and vehicular accidents and expose children to increased marketing.

In the House, a separate group of Republicans warned the decision could worsen the nation’s addiction crisis and indirectly benefit drug cartels — a particularly pointed criticism given Trump’s emphasis on combating cartels through immigration and foreign-policy initiatives.

Political and Public Backdrop

Trump signaled openness to easing marijuana restrictions during his 2024 campaign, seeking to appeal to younger voters. Analysts note that many younger men — a demographic where Trump gained ground — are more supportive of softer marijuana laws.

Public opinion continues to favor legalization, though support has slipped slightly. A recent Gallup poll found 64% of Americans back legal marijuana, with sharp partisan divides: 85% of Democrats approve, along with two-thirds of independents. Among Republicans, support fell from 53% to 40% over the past year.

What Rescheduling Means Next

Reclassifying marijuana to Schedule III could offer several immediate impacts:

Expanded research: Universities and medical institutions will face fewer barriers to studying cannabis.

Business benefits: Cannabis companies may gain tax deductions previously unavailable to Schedule I drug businesses.

Law-enforcement shifts: Federal prosecutions for marijuana-related offenses may continue to decline.

No change in legality: Marijuana remains federally illegal for recreational use, and interstate commerce of cannabis products is still banned.

The executive order marks a historic shift — loosening federal restrictions while stopping short of the full legalization that many states and advocacy groups have pursued. How the policy plays out will depend on forthcoming regulations, potential lawsuits, and how Congress chooses to respond in the months ahead.