What Employers & Plan Fiduciaries Must Know About Recent DEA Marijuana Rescheduling Orders and Hearings Considering Broader Marijuana Rescheduling


July 27, 2026

U.S. employers should reassess their existing policies on workplace drug use and testing and disability accommodation decision-making for Federal Drug Administration (“FDA”)-approved and state licensed medical use of marijuana in response to Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) rescheduling orders under the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”) implemented last April while closely monitoring for DEA action on a DEA proposal to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III substance under the CSA.  The proposed marijuana rescheduling would significantly affect the consequences of marijuana use by individuals in the United States, including the testing and consequences of marijuana use under Department of Transportation (“DOT”) and other federal drug testing mandates.

Where the Rescheduling Stands Today

The recently completed ALJ hearing traces back to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking published May 21, 2024, proposing to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the CSA. After more than a year of procedural DEA delay holding hearings or taking other material action on the proposed rule, President Trump’s December 18, 2025 executive order directed the Attorney General to expedite completion of the rulemaking. In response, on April 23–24, 2026, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a final order that:

  • immediately moved FDA-approved marijuana drug products into Schedule III;
  • immediately moved marijuana subject to a qualifying state medical marijuana license into Schedule III; and
  • simultaneously ordered a new, expedited DEA administrative hearing to evaluate the broader question of whether marijuana generally — not limited to FDA-approved or state-licensed medical products — should move from Schedule I to Schedule III. See DOJ Office of Public Affairs release; DEA Marijuana Rescheduling Regulatory Actions page.

That broader hearing opened June 29, 2026 at DEA headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, before Chief ALJ Derek C. Julius, ran (with a recess for the July 4th holiday period) through mid-July, and formally concluded on July 15, 2026 following closing presentations from a group of participating states. See DEA press release; Notice of Hearing, 91 Fed. Reg. 22777 (Apr. 28, 2026). Because DEA and DOJ are the proponents of the rule, the hearing’s structure permitted testimony only from designated participants opposing rescheduling — including Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), the National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association, and the States of Nebraska, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, and Tennessee (through its Bureau of Investigation), among others. Pro-reform organizations including NORML sought and were denied participant status. ALJ Julius also ordered that the hearing would not be televised, livestreamed, or otherwise broadcast, limiting observation to in-person attendance.

With the evidentiary record now closed, ALJ Julius set August 17, 2026 as the deadline for designated parties to file optional post-hearing briefs (up to 50 pages each, one per party), after which he will prepare his findings and recommendation for the DEA Administrator. See Order for Transcript Corrections and Post-Hearing Briefs, In re Schedules of Controlled Substances: Proposed Rescheduling of Marijuana (DEA July 16, 2026). Particularly given President Trump’s expressed support for expanding access to medical marijuana, many might assume this rapidly approaching deadline signals a decision on the proposed rescheduling is near. It bears noting, however, that neither the ALJ’s recommendation nor the Administrator’s subsequent final decision is bound by any deadline. Following the DEA’s previous 1980s cannabis rescheduling proceeding, the ALJ took roughly two years to issue a recommendation that the Administrator then rejected outright, a rejection the D.C. Circuit ultimately upheld. See Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics v. DEA, 15 F.3d 1131 (D.C. Cir. 1994).

As if this ambiguity isn’t enough, the Acting Attorney General’s April 2026 final order reclassifying to Schedule III FDA-approved and state licensed marijuana now faces legal challenges such as the one brought by Smart Approaches to Marijuana and the National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association, see SAM Inc., et al. v. U.S. Department of Justice, et al., No. 26-1106 (D.C. Cir., petition filed May 4, 2026), and another brought by the Attorneys General of Indiana and Nebraska, see Nebraska, et al. v. U.S. Department of Justice, et al., No. 26-1130 (D.C. Cir., petition filed May 22, 2026).  While the fate of these consolidated challenges awaits resolution by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, employers and health plans must deal with the currently effective policy change that, for now, has made a Schedule I drug FDAA-approved medical and state-licensed marijuana.

Pending the resolution of challenges to the currently effective change of FDA-approved medical and state licensed marijuana and DEA action on its broader rescheduling proposal, however, employers and plan sponsors should review their existing marijuana use and testing policies for the already effective FDA approval of FDA-approved marijuana drug products and marijuana subject to a qualifying state medical marijuana license that took effect under the final rescheduling orders issued by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on April 23–24, while continuing to monitor the Federal Register and other FDA and Congressional comments and actions signaling when and the likely direction the FDA intends to take on the broader proposal to reschedule marijuana generally from Schedule I to Schedule III.

What Already Changed — Independent of the Proposed DEA Rescheduling Rule Change

It is important for compliance purposes to separate what is already final from what remains pending:

Already in effect (April 2026 Final Order)

  • FDA-approved marijuana-containing drug products are in Schedule III.
  • Marijuana handled under a qualifying state medical marijuana license is in Schedule III, with a new expedited DEA registration pathway for state licensees.
  • State-licensed medical marijuana businesses are relieved of the Internal Revenue Code § 280E deduction disallowance, which applies only to Schedule I and II trafficking.
  • Recreational/adult-use marijuana, unlicensed marijuana, and synthetically derived THC remain in Schedule I and are unaffected by the April order.

Still pending (record closed; awaiting ALJ recommendation and DEA final decision)

  • Whether marijuana as a category — including adult-use/recreational marijuana not tied to an FDA-approved product or state medical license — moves to Schedule III.
  • The government has been explicit throughout that this proceeding is not about legalizing recreational use; it concerns whether marijuana has a “currently accepted medical use” sufficient to satisfy the CSA’s scheduling criteria.
  • Post-hearing briefs are due August 17, 2026; the ALJ’s recommendation and DEA’s final decision will follow on an unannounced timeline.

Why This Matters for Employers — and Why It Doesn’t Change as Much as Headlines Suggest

A move from Schedule I to Schedule III would be historically significant, but it would not legalize recreational marijuana use, and it would not, by itself, require employers to change drug-free workplace policies. Marijuana would remain a controlled substance requiring a valid prescription for lawful use under federal law; unauthorized possession or use would remain a federal offense. HR and employment counsel should calibrate client and internal expectations accordingly while continuing to monitor the following areas:

Drug testing and drug-free workplace policies

The scheduling change could impact your current workplace drug use and drug testing policies by expanding legally permitted use and requiring the collection of added documentation for those claiming permitted use. Employers, insurers and others concerned about impairment by workers consuming marijuana in accordance with its new scheduling will need to consider the need for and advisability of adopting policies tailored to their concerns and ensuring their testing and other administrative practices meet applicable legal requirements.

For purposes of this analysis, the changes adopted last April can make medicinal use in accordance with FDA-approved or state-licensed uses legal in the applicable workplace jurisdiction. However, the proposed schedule III classification would not convert a positive marijuana test into evidence of lawful drug use in the ordinary case, since off-label recreational use would remain unauthorized under federal law absent a valid prescription.

Employers should nonetheless review testing panels, medical review officer (MRO) protocols, and policy language for currency, and confirm policies still align with applicable state law, which increasingly diverges from federal scheduling on off-duty use protections.

DOT and other safety-sensitive/federally regulated testing

The recently adopted and additional proposed rescheduling of marijuana to a Schedule III classification are unlikely to change U.S. Department of Transportation drug testing requirements, as its 49 C.F.R. Part 40 rules operate independently of CSA scheduling. DOT has previously confirmed that rescheduling marijuana would not, by itself, change safety-sensitive testing requirements. Employers with DOT-covered or other federally regulated safety-sensitive positions should watch for any DOT or agency-specific guidance issued in response to a final rescheduling decision. Nevertheless, the rescheduling likely foreseeably could encourage even broader unauthorized use by employees or others reading the rescheduling as eliminating prohibitions, reflecting a further decline in enforcement, or both.

ADA and disability-related considerations

The recent DEA rescheduling of FDA-approved use of medicinal marijuana to a Schedule I drug classification will expand legally available options for medicinal marijuana use by employees in accordance with appropriately prescribed and used medicinal marijuana. Also, forty states now authorize medical marijuana under state law, many with employment protections for off-duty medical use that already operate independently of federal scheduling. Federal rescheduling will not harmonize this patchwork, and multistate employers should continue maintaining state-by-state policy matrices rather than assuming a federal fix is coming.

These changes can create new Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) implijcations by, among other things:

  • Requiring employers to consider requests for accommodation of medically prescribed marijuana by broadening the availability and medicinal use of FDA-approved and state-licensed medicinal marijuana. Rescheduling does not change the ADA’s treatment of current illegal drug use as outside the definition of a protected disability while such use continues.
  • Requiring employers to consider the convergence between ADA’s mental/psychological impairment prong and MHPAEA parity classification issues when designing substance use disorder treatment benefits — a distinct analysis from current-use accommodation questions, and one worth continuing to track alongside this rulemaking.

Health and welfare plan sponsors and fiduciaries

The reclassification of FDA-approved medicinal marijuana also can create new design questions for health and disability benefit plan sponsors and claims and appeals health challenges for health and disability plan fiduciaries. For instance,

  • Health, AD&D, disability, life and other benefit plan sponsors and fiduciaries should recognize that the rescheduling adopted last April expands the legally allowed prescription and use of marijuana.
  • While Schedule III status does not itself create a coverage mandate, the approval could affect how FDA-approved uses are treated by removing exclusions or rules that previously denied coverage based on their more restricted DEA Schedule III status. While formulary and coverage decisions for any FDA-approved cannabinoid product remain a plan design and medical-necessity determination for the plan sponsor and its PBM or other fiduciaries, previously relied upon exclusions may no longer operate in the same way to restrict coverage.
  • Plan sponsors, their prescription benefit managers, insurers and other service providers should reevaluate current formularies and coverage provisions and exclusions for MHPAEA and other implications. They also should watch the FDA approval pipeline for cannabinoid drug products for potential formulary impact, should evaluate the need for changes in coverage or benefit exclusions and added fiduciary or other risks relating to benefit coverage and limitations potentially impacted by marijuana use. Health, disability, accident and dismemberment, and life insurance plan fiduciaries and insurers should use care to consider prudently the potential implications of rescheduling on any claims or appeals including special concerns and considerations likely to arise with respect to health benefits impacted byh MHPAEA. Fiduciaries should use care to coordinate any MHPAEA comparative analysis work touching substance use disorder benefits with counsel already tracking that parity exposure.

Cannabis-industry and cannabis-adjacent employers

State-licensed medical marijuana operators already qualify for § 280E relief under the April 2026 order; HR and finance functions at these employers should confirm payroll tax treatment reflects the change and monitor the expedited DEA registration pathway for state licensees.

Recommended Action Items

For HR and Employment Counsel

  • Review (but do not overhaul) drug-testing and drug-free workplace policies now; hold substantive revisions pending a final DEA decision, which — with post-hearing briefs not even due until August 17 — remains months away at minimum.
  • Confirm state-law policy variations are current, independent of the federal rescheduling timeline.
  • Flag DOT-covered positions for a separate compliance check once DOT issues any post-rulemaking guidance.

For Health, AD&D, Disability and & Other Welfare Plan Sponsors and Fiduciaries

  • Task PBM and plan counsel with monitoring FDA’s cannabinoid drug approval pipeline for formulary implications.
  • Coordinate substance use disorder benefit design review with pending MHPAEA comparative analysis obligations.

For General Counsel and Risk Management

  • Track the consolidated D.C. Circuit challenges to the April 2026 Final Order alongside the ALJ’s post-hearing process; a reversal on appeal could unwind the medical/state-licensed rescheduling already in effect.
  • Maintain rescheduling-tracking analysis as privileged work product where prepared to inform litigation or enforcement-risk posture.

For State-Licensed Medical Marijuana Employers

  • Confirm § 280E tax treatment has been updated and pursue the expedited DEA registration pathway using existing state licensure as supporting evidence.

Stay Tuned and Share Your Input

While the DEA’s proposed rescheduling is a self-initiated proposal, the ALJ’s post-hearing recommendation and what action, if any, the DEA ultimately will take on its proposal to reschedule marijuana more broadly remain uncertain. Although the DEA hearing on the proposed ruling is complete, communications to the DEA and Congress still offer opportunities to influence the direction and outcome of these decisions. Concerned employers and others should consider communicating any input or concerns to the DEA and Congress promptly to ensure their input receives consideration. Meanwhile, employers, health and disability plans and other interested parties should reevaluate their policies in response to the already adopted rescheduling as they monitor for future developments.

For Help or More Information

The author of this update, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is an attorney Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization with decades of experience advising and assisting health industry and other employers to design, audit, and defend their employment and other risk management and compliance practices, including conducting audits and investigations, designing and updating compliance and risk management programs, responding to government investigations, conducting transaction, governance, and other due diligence, and assisting with other legal and operational compliance and risk management and legislative and regulatory affairs. She is available to assist your organization in assessing the impact of these developments and navigating the compliance and strategic steps that follow. For more information about these concerns or Ms. Stamer, contact Ms. Stamer via e-mail or via telephone at (214) 452 -8297.

About the Author

Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is an American College of Employee Benefits Counsel and a Martindale-Hubble “AV-Preeminent” (Top 1%) attorney and advisor board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization peer peer celebrated as “Top Rated Lawyer” and “LEGAL LEADER™ “Top Rated Lawyer” and “Best Lawyer” for her work in ERISA & Employee Benefits Law, Health Care Law, Labor and Employment Law, and Business and Commercial Law.

Nationally recognized for her decades of leading-edge workforce, health and other employee benefits and insurance, compensation, regulatory affairs and compliance, and other management work, public policy leadership and advocacy, coaching, teachings, and publications, she is the publisher of Solutions Law Press, Inc.® practitioner-focused compliance publications for employers, plan sponsors, HR professionals, health care, insurance, technology and data industry leaders, and legal counsel and risk management advisors.

Along with these activities, Ms. Stamer also has earned national recognition for her authorship of thousands of highly regarded works, presentations as a knowledgeable speaker, testimony and other input of regulators and legislators, and media interviews on health and other benefits, human resources and other workforce, health care, insurance, data privacy and security and other related concerns. 

For more information about Ms. Stamer, engaging her services or to speak, her work, credentials, experience and involvements, or other matters, see the About the Author page, her website at www.cynthiastamer.com, or contact Ms. Stamer via telephone at (214) 452-8297 or via e-mail here.

Leave a comment