WASHINGTON D.C. – In a significant move that could derail federal marijuana reform, a key Republican-led committee in the House of Representatives has voted to block the use of federal funds for rescheduling cannabis. The House Appropriations Committee approved a fiscal year 2026 spending bill that includes language explicitly preventing the Justice Department from moving forward with any efforts to reclassify marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
This legislative maneuver, spearheaded by conservative Republicans who cite public health concerns, aims to thwart a process initiated under the Biden administration that President Donald Trump has indicated his administration is reviewing. The measure, inserted into the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) appropriations bill, passed the committee by a 34-28 vote, signaling a deep division within the Republican party on cannabis policy.
Congressional Blockade on Rescheduling
The provision, detailed in Section 607 of the proposed bill, states: “None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to reschedule marijuana… or to remove marijuana from the schedules established under section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act.” This language effectively seeks to freeze the ongoing review process conducted by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regarding cannabis’s federal classification. The move is particularly notable as it arrives shortly after President Trump publicly stated his administration was “looking at” a decision on rescheduling within weeks, creating an internal conflict between the executive branch’s stated intentions and the legislative actions of some in his party.
Congressman Andy Harris (R-MD), a vocal opponent of cannabis reform, is among the leading figures pushing for this restriction. Harris has consistently voiced concerns that increased access to cannabis is detrimental to public health, arguing against rescheduling based on his interpretation of scientific standards and international drug treaties. His stance reflects a faction within the GOP that views further federal cannabis liberalization with deep skepticism, often citing risks of addiction and potential harm to youth.
The Rescheduling Process and Its Potential Impact
The Biden administration had initiated the formal process to review cannabis’s federal classification, culminating in an August 2023 recommendation from HHS to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the CSA. This reclassification would acknowledge its accepted medical use and moderate potential for dependence, a significant shift from its current status alongside substances like heroin and LSD. Such a move could unlock critical benefits for the burgeoning cannabis industry, including reduced barriers to research, improved access to banking services, and crucially, relief from the burdensome IRS Section 280E tax code, which prevents cannabis businesses from deducting ordinary operating expenses.
However, rescheduling is not full legalization. Schedule III substances are still controlled, and federally regulated cannabis would likely still be subject to specific restrictions. Despite these nuances, the cannabis industry and advocates have largely viewed rescheduling as a vital step toward normalizing the industry and fostering greater investment and growth.
Internal Party Divisions and Trump’s Ambiguous Stance
President Trump’s own position on rescheduling appears somewhat mixed. While he has expressed curiosity about medical cannabis and indicated a decision was imminent, his administration’s approach is seen through the lens of broader policy reversals of Biden-era initiatives. This legislative push by House Republicans creates further complexity, potentially pitting congressional opposition against presidential consideration. Some analysts suggest that the Republican party is internally divided on how to approach cannabis policy, with a growing segment acknowledging shifting public opinion and the economic benefits of reform, while a traditionalist wing remains resistant.
Broader Legislative Landscape and Industry Concerns
The CJS spending bill’s passage through committee also includes modifications to existing protections for state medical cannabis programs. Section 529(b) of the bill proposes changes to the long-standing Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment, which has historically shielded state-legal medical cannabis operations from federal interference. The new language could potentially allow for increased enforcement against businesses operating within federal “Drug Free Zones” – areas within 1,000 feet of schools, parks, and public housing. This addition raises concerns among advocates about renewed federal crackdowns on state-compliant businesses.
For the cannabis industry, the outcome of this legislative battle is critical. News of such political maneuvers often influences cannabis-related stocks and investment strategies. The coverage of these developments across various media, including dedicated cannabis news outlets and broader political reporting, underscores the ongoing public and governmental debate. The effectiveness of this congressional block will ultimately depend on its passage through the full House and Senate, with the Senate’s version of the CJS bill reportedly not containing the same restrictive language, casting doubt on its ultimate enactment.
As the dust settles from this committee vote, the future of federal cannabis policy remains uncertain. The proposed congressional action highlights the intricate interplay between executive actions, legislative priorities, and deeply held ideological differences on cannabis, impacting everything from medical research to the financial viability of businesses nationwide. The conversation around cannabis, related policy, and its themed media presence continues to evolve amidst these political shifts.
