Blog

On June 18, 2026, Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek C. Julius issued a Preliminary Order announcing the selected interested parties, schedule, and expectations for the DEA’s upcoming marijuana rescheduling hearing. The order covered who will testify, when the hearing will occur, what participants should wear, who can attend, and what the tribunal will consider.

Since then, media coverage and dialogue in the cannabis community have focused on who will testify at the hearing, while the more serious concern is that the order appears to narrow the hearing's scope, implying a departure from how US scheduling works. That framing also fails to address a larger misunderstanding about what the outcome of this hearing will mean for cannabis businesses, which is clouding the judgment of some cannabis businesses and state regulators when it comes to evaluating the importance of the DEA registration. This could have devastating consequences for the legal medical cannabis supply chain and, ultimately, for patient access if they let tomorrow’s DEA deadline pass them by. 

My point is not that the hearing or the witness list are irrelevant, but the hearing should not be a distraction from the real legal and practical issues facing states and businesses. Cannabis businesses that may qualify for DEA registration should be applying. State regulators should help them identify eligible licenses, document medical-only operations, preserve medical supply chains, and protect patient access.

Who testifies at Scheduling hearings is defined by CSA, not the ALJ Judge or the DEA

This hearing is about the DOJ’s May 21, 2024, notice of proposed rulemaking proposing to transfer marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act. Under the CSA, administrative hearings are intended to give parties who are specifically adversely affected or aggrieved by a proposed rule the opportunity to object and present their concerns.

The selected interested parties are not a representative cross-section of the cannabis debate, and they are not supposed to be. They are parties that the tribunal determined had a qualifying objection, an adverse interest, or a legally recognizable stake in the proposed rule. In plain English, the hearing is structured for the parties challenging or objecting to the proposed scheduling action, not for every organization that supports moving cannabis out of Schedule I.

The DEA got this wrong in the prior hearing process. Then-DEA Administrator Anne Milgram announced witnesses for the earlier in-person proceedings in a manner that did not cleanly align with the CSA’s interested-party framework. That created an awkward start for then-Chief Administrative Law Judge John J. Mulrooney II, who admonished DEA and had to sort out which witnesses had standing and whose testimony could be considered in the administrative record.

The Scope of the ALJ Hearings and Cannabis Scheduling

After decades of rescheduling attempts thwarted by the DEA, it is understandable that the witness list has people concerned. But that focus risks missing the part of the order that has much greater consequences for patients and businesses: the scope of the hearing itself.

Judge Julius’s order states that the hearing will not address the rescheduling of FDA-approved medical products that contain marijuana or medical marijuana products already regulated by the states. Instead, the hearing will focus on whether the remainder of marijuana, as defined in the CSA, should be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule III.

This should raise serious concerns, as under U.S. scheduling law, Schedule I is reserved for substances with no currently accepted medical use. If cannabis has a currently accepted medical use, it cannot remain in Schedule I.  Cocaine and methamphetamine remain tightly controlled, but they are not in Schedule I because they have accepted medical uses and are only legal with a DEA registration.

Some cannabis businesses are treating the ALJ hearing as if it is an “adult-use hearing” that may legalize their operations or give them the same benefits they would receive from DEA registration. Some regulators in dual-market states appear to be waiting to see what happens at the hearing rather than helping eligible businesses apply for DEA registration.

Schedule III is still a controlled substance schedule. Businesses that manufacture, distribute, dispense, or handle Schedule III substances generally must comply with federal registration and other requirements. Rescheduling marijuana generally would not automatically legalize any cannabis businesses.

The tax issue is also more complicated than many headlines suggest. Schedule III would affect the application of Section 280E, but post-rescheduling, non-DEA-registered cannabis businesses will find that their tax problems are associated with federally illegal activity, not just 280E.

The outcome of this hearing will not legalize adult-use cannabis businesses, nor will it give cannabis businesses the same legal standing, tax position, banking opportunities, investment opportunities, or enforcement protections that they can obtain only by participating in the medical cannabis pathway created by AG Order No. 6754-2026.

 That misunderstanding is one reason some businesses are not applying for DEA registration now.

AG ORDER NO. 6754-2026 Changes the Enforcement Landscape

AG Order No. 6754-2026 created a path for state-licensed medical cannabis businesses to seek DEA registration and operate within a federally recognized medical cannabis framework. That is the opportunity businesses should be evaluating, especially businesses that started in medical cannabis but moved into adult-use markets to survive and make payroll. Regulators should be helping them. Instead, in too many dual-market states, regulators are not encouraging or helping businesses to apply.

Americans for Safe Access released State Preparedness for Federal Cannabis Regulation & Enforcement, Part 1: State Actions Needed to Preserve & Protect Patient Access Before the June 26, 2026, DEA Registration Deadline, which urges states to act before the deadline to preserve patient access, support eligible businesses seeking DEA registration, rebuild patient enrollment, and create or protect medical-only supply-chain documentation.

These recommendations are the practical steps that determine whether patients can access federally recognized medical cannabis and whether businesses can show they are operating inside the lawful medical pathway. If regulators wait for the ALJ hearing instead of helping businesses apply, patients could lose access to the very supply chains that make federal recognition meaningful.

Patients cannot exercise rights tied to medical cannabis status without access to a legal supply. They cannot rely on a medical-only framework if products are not cultivated, processed, tested, distributed, and dispensed in a way that can be documented as medical.

Businesses can apply after the June 26 deadline, but will not be allowed to operate under the federal pathway until they are approved and will have to wait in line. In a regulated market, timing matters. Missing the window could mean business disruption, loss of patient supply, and increased legal exposure.

The enforcement risk is not theoretical. AG Order No. 6754-2026 creates a federal medical pathway. It does not legalize adult-use cannabis, non-medical cannabis supply chains, or unregistered activity outside the recognized framework. Once the federal government creates a lawful route for medical cannabis, businesses outside that route may become easier targets.

The DOJ also has tools, such as drug-free zone enhancements and asset forfeiture authority under the RAVE Act, to close businesses, with messaging that communities will support. Enforcement framed around unregistered businesses near schools could quickly shift the public conversation away from patients and toward public safety.

Let’s Get this Right for Patients

The June 26 DEA registration deadline is the immediate test. It is the moment for states to show whether they are serious about protecting patients and helping medical cannabis businesses move into the federally recognized framework.

DEA registration is what will protect patients and position businesses for the future. Cannabis businesses should apply by tomorrow; regulators should help them, and states should adopt the emergency measures needed to preserve patient access before more time is lost.