Story perspectives

Trump Moves Medical Cannabis to Schedule III, Saves $15 B

4/23/2026

Left

Trump Reclassifies Cannabis

Analysts say the Schedule III reclassification could cut $15 billion in excess cannabis taxes, creating tens of thousands of jobs.
U.S. President Donald Trump, through Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, moved state-licensed medical marijuana to Schedule III on April 23 2026.
The shift should ease limits, letting universities and hospitals study cannabis safety without funding risk.
Smart Approaches to Marijuana sued, arguing the policy favors profit and could increase use.

Right

Trump Reclassifies Cannabis

President Donald Trump cited a Stanford study ibogaine cut depression and anxiety up to 90 % in veterans with brain injuries.
The order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump creates a registration pathway and tax break for companies holding medical-marijuana licenses.
Attorney General Todd Blanche announced the order reclassifies FDA-approved marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.
Trump issued order to speed psychedelic drug review, citing benefits for veterans with mental illness.

History

Historical Context

The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 classified cannabis as a Schedule I drug, limiting its medical use despite recommendations for decriminalization from the 1972 Shafer Commission. In 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services recommended reclassifying cannabis to Schedule III, reflecting changing perceptions of its medical benefits and potentially generating $15 billion in tax revenue and thousands of jobs.

1 of 3

Trump Reclassifies Cannabis

Analysts say the Schedule III reclassification could cut $15 billion in excess cannabis taxes, creating tens of thousands of jobs.
U.S. President Donald Trump, through Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, moved state-licensed medical marijuana to Schedule III on April 23 2026.
The shift should ease limits, letting universities and hospitals study cannabis safety without funding risk.
Smart Approaches to Marijuana sued, arguing the policy favors profit and could increase use.

1 / 3