The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has selected participants Hear about the Trump administration’s cannabis reorganization process this will begin this month—and only those opposed to the reform have been invited to participate.

On Thursday, the DEA began notifying parties who expressed their intention to participate that they had been invited to participate, and sending rejection letters to those who were not invited.

The invited participants are:

• Drug and Alcohol Screening Association (NDASA)
• Tennessee Bureau of Investigation
• Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM)
• The states of Nebraska, Idaho, Indiana and Louisiana
• Voice of the Victims
• Kenneth Finn, MD
• Phillip A. Drum, PharmD

All organizations, individuals and officials have come out against marijuana reform, and some have filed lawsuits specifically trying to block cannabis reform.

Supporters of the reform who have expressed their intention to participate have not been invited.

According to several rejection letters seen by Marijuana Moment from cannabis reform advocates, the DEA said they do not meet the definition of “interested person” to participate because they “would not be harmed or harmed by any rule or proposed rule that may be issued.”

In a letter to the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA), DEA Administrator Terrance Cole wrote that the agency has “concluded that you have not demonstrated that you are harmed or harmed by the promulgation of a proposed rule to transfer marijuana, 21 CFR 1308.11(d)(23) 21 CFR 1308.11(d)(23), marijuana as defined in abstracts, 21 CFR. 1308.11(d)(58), and naturally derived delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinols from Schedules I through III of the CSA as proposed in the “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (NPRM).

“In fact, you state that the DPA supports the removal of marijuana from Schedule I and ‘does not object’ to the transfer of marijuana to Schedule III. Furthermore, the DPA states that any harm it would suffer from the NPRM would be to schedule marijuana in Schedule III. Because the DPA has not sufficiently demonstrated that the proposed rule itself is harmed or harmed, the DEA concludes that the DPA is not an “interested person.”

“Accordingly, the DEA is denying your request to participate in the hearing,” Cole told DPA.

Cat Packer, DPA’s director of drug markets and law enforcement, told Marihuana Moment after receiving the opt-out notice that “the rescheduling would leave the federal criminalization of marijuana largely intact and falls far short of what the public has asked for.”

“More than 70 percent of this public comments submitted on the proposed rule supported decriminalizationHowever, many patients, consumers, families, small businesses and individuals who have suffered the consequences of the ban — including arrests, incarcerations, family separations, housing barriers, immigration consequences and lost economic opportunities — have been excluded from meaningful participation in these proceedings, he said. dialogue, helping to shape the policies that affect their lives, families and communities.”

Michael Bronstein, president of the American Trade Association for Cannabis and Hemp (ATACH), said his group is “very disappointed” that not a single supporter of cannabis rescheduling was elected.

“The upcoming redistricting hearings will strictly include prohibitionist parties who oppose President Trump’s stance on redistricting. Now it’s up to the Drug Enforcement Administration to defend its rule,” he said.

SAM president Kevin Sabet, meanwhile, said his prohibitionist group “appreciates the opportunity to make our case” at the hearing.

“Rescheduling marijuana would be the biggest drug policy mistake in a generation,” he argued in a statement. “SAM looks forward to presenting the science, data, and public health stakes that show why reprogramming should be rejected.”

The hearingwhich will be overseen by a DEA administrative law judge, will begin on June 29 and conclude no later than July 15.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in April He issued an order that immediately reclassified the state’s licensed medical cannabisas well as marijuana products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under Schedule I through Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

According to a separate order signed by the acting Attorney General, in the upcoming hearing, marijuana III.

In order to be considered for participation in the hearing, the parties had to submit requests, indicating their interest in the procedure, the claims or issues they want to hear and their position on these issues.

“The purpose of the hearing is to ‘receive factual evidence and expert opinion’ on whether marijuana should be transferred to Schedule III of the controlled substance list,” Blanche’s initial statement in April said.

The attorney general will also select an administrative law judge (ALJ) to oversee the proceeding.

“The ALJ’s authority includes the power to hold conferences to simplify or determine the issues at the hearing or to consider other matters that may assist in the expeditious resolution of the hearing; to require the parties to state their position in writing; to sign and issue subpoenas; to compel the production of documents and materials to the extent necessary to conduct the hearing; to examine witnesses; to direct, exclude, or testify; the Rule on Procedural Matters and the President’s DEA Hearing Procedures and Administrative Procedure Actions allowed under the law, Blanch wrote.

Preliminary hearing process on the marijuana redistricting process initiated by the Biden administration It was halted last year amid allegations of improper communications and witness selection.

the current The marijuana redistricting process is being challenged in several ways which have been upheld by a federal Court of Appeals. those pieces of State attorneys general have filed lawsuits against cannabis reform, Opponents of marijuana legalization and a a cannabis-based biopharmaceutical corporation.

Meanwhile, the reorganization of state-licensed medical cannabis is already having a major impact.

The Congressional Research Service published a report on the current rescheduling of cannabis Certified patients with medical marijuana from state licensed dispensaries are now eligible for Class III. “The order appears to allow end users to use marijuana medically without a CSA prescription,” he says.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has published a Draft update to a gun purchase form to recognize the legal status of medical marijuana in the reprogramming. The revised section of the question states that only the “recreational use or possession of marijuana” is federally prohibited, omitting the prior form’s mention of medical cannabis.

The US Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) said they plan to issued new tax guidelines for the marijuana industry after reprogramming. The reform will benefit state-licensed marijuana businesses by allowing them to take federal tax deductions that are currently prohibited under IRS Code Section III, known as Section 280E.

Even the DEA, which has long opposed cannabis legalization and accused the Biden administration of stalling the initiative in the reorganization process, has done so. It launched a registration process for legal marijuana businesses in the state to take advantage of the federal benefits that come with the reform.

The Department of Transport, on the other hand, issued guidelines stating this use Legal medical cannabis in the state is still no excuse for truck drivers to test positive for drugspilots and other safety-sensitive personnel.

A congressional committee recently Federal officials voted to block further steps to reschedule cannabis.

Read DEA Reorganization Denial the letter To the Drug Policy Alliance below:

For over 50 years, Solarweave has been a woven covering solution for greenhouse and polytunnel applications. First introduced in the 1970s, it was developed as a sustainable alternative to plastic films and is recognized for its long life, strength and consistent performance.

Designed and manufactured in Australia, Solarweave is designed to withstand demanding growing environments, including high temperatures and high winds. Today, it is used worldwide in many protected cropping systems.

Building on this heritage, GALE Pacific has expanded the Solarweave range with the new D40 and D60 variants, giving growers greater flexibility to manage light, condensation and UV exposure while maintaining the durability that Solarweave is known for.

© GALE Pacific

Light performance optimized for modern grow systems
The extended Solarweave range allows growers to select the right balance of light properties and anti-drip performance for different crops, climates and structures.

Solarweave D40 and D60 gradually increase fog, light diffusion and UV protection. This allows more light to penetrate through the crop canopy and helps reduce plant stress and disease risk in greenhouse environments.

Long life for stronger life value
Unlike plastic films that often need to be replaced every few seasons, Solarweave is used for 15 years or more in greenhouse and polytunnel applications.

This extended service life reduces replacement frequency, labor requirements and downtime during the life of the structure. When evaluated over time, many growers believe Solarweave provides a greater return on investment by avoiding the recurring costs and downtime associated with film replacement and disposal.

Built for real-world production
Solarweave is repairable, allowing localized damage to be repaired on site rather than replacing the entire coating. This is a practical advantage for continuous commercial growing operations.

With decades of proven performance, Australian manufacturing expertise and a wide range of options, Solarweave continues to evolve while remaining a reliable solution for long-lasting greenhouse covers.

For more information:
GALE Pacific
Email: (email protected)
galepacific.com/

“We’re doing everything we can to create the right regulatory framework so that the market can be properly served.”

By: Ben Solis, Michigan Advance

The Michigan Senate is retooling marijuana industry license cap legislation to include new barriers to obtaining a license for growers, processors or dispensary operators with significant industry-related tax debt. help boost the industry as it faces a new 24 percent wholesale tax.

The Michigan Senate Rules Committee on Wednesday heard second testimony on recent changes to Senate Bill 597, a bill that proposes new limits on the state’s marijuana industry licenses. The hearing comes almost a year after the bill was introduced and was the subject of the first hearing in October 2025.

Sponsored by Sen. Sam Singh (D-East Lansing), SB 597 would limit the licensing of marijuana dealers and wholesalers per 10,000 residents in a municipality starting Jan. 1, 2026. The move would be similar to how the state regulates liquor sales, Singh said last year.

SB 597 it is also part of a larger package. Senate bills 599–602 It aims to create a regulatory framework for consumer hemp products in Michigan. That portion was primarily sponsored by Sen. Dayna Polehanki (D-Livonia) and was introduced as a way to regulate intoxicating hemp products, including Delta-8 and other synthetic cannabinoids, sold at Michigan gas stations, convenience stores and online marketplaces.

Those pieces passed the Democratic-controlled Senate late last year and are now in the GOP-led House. The license cap piece is still being worked on in the Senate.

Singh’s testimony Wednesday served to refresh the committee’s memory on the legislation and examine the details of the newly adopted bill language.

One of the biggest changes is that licensees must pay all state taxes when seeking another license. It would require the potential licensee to refund the basic tax, fees and tax penalties owed. Singh said the change would align with the way the marijuana industry controls and regulates liquor licenses in Michigan.

The senator said a problem currently facing the Cannabis Regulatory Agency is that it does not have the ability to deny an applicant a new license if that applicant had a previous license, but closed it while owing various state industry taxes, including a required excise tax.

Under the current regulatory framework, a licensee could close their existing license and not have that tax debt continue while they seek a new license because the CRA lacks a mechanism to stop that process because of the tax owed.

Singh said that was more important than ever given how the Legislature added a new 24 percent wholesale tax in the 2025-26 budget deal. The Legislature appropriated $420 million annually in road funding. The the industry is currently fighting that tax in courtas its stakeholders argue, tax will A wholesale marijuana tax generating less revenue than anticipated.

Recent reports indicate that the industry’s struggles have intensified as tax revenues have fallen short of expectations, according to to The Gander.

“Now that we have a wholesale tax of 24 percent, I could see that becoming more and more of an issue,” Singh said. “If we want to make sure that the income is stable, and again, those incomes may be a little low to begin with, we have to make sure those protections are there.”

The updated language includes a provision to place a moratorium on new grower licenses, but allows current growers to obtain an additional license to build and expand. Singh said this was also done to stabilize the market.

Another change concerns the return of products.

“We heard from the Hazkai community that currently, within the law, there is no policy on how to return the product,” Singh said. “What we’ve heard from wholesalers is that some people are returning products weeks, even months, after they’ve received them. So they’ve asked us to find a way to deal with returned product. What our bill basically does is you have three days to return the product, and it has to be in the original packaging and in the original packaging.”

The committee took no further action on the bill.

After the hearing, the Michigan Advance asked Singh if changes to the state’s new wholesale tax did not generate the revenue the Senate and House had hoped to pass.

Singh said this was not a reaction to the problems with the tax.

“We’ve been working on this, these sets of issues, since April of last year. When you have an initiative approved by the voters, there are often things they’ve never thought about, especially on the regulatory side, on the enforcement side,” Singh said. “We are doing everything we can to create the right regulatory scheme to ensure that the market is properly filled, to ensure that the product is safe for those who will use the product, but at the same time to ensure that everyone pays their taxes.”

Whether the bill will help ensure more licensees pay the appropriate tax, Singh said the Legislature, the state and its marijuana industry peers will have to wait and see.

“I always share my personal concern that this tax was higher than it should have been. I think there could have been a combination, with a tax on special increases on the retail side, and maybe a lower wholesale tax,” Singh said. “But at this point, I think it’s too early to gauge where we’re going to be. I think after a couple of quarters, we’ll know what those revenues are going to look like as we go forward.”

This story was first published by the Michigan Advance.