The Federal Rescheduling of Medical Marijuana

In 2022 President Biden requested that the DEA and the US Department of Health and Human Services review how cannabis is scheduled. After a scientific and medical evaluation, HHS recommended to the DEA that cannabis be moved from Schedule I to Schedule III. In 2024 the DEA made a proposal to do so, but the hearing to make a final decision was delayed throughout 2024 and 2025. (Source: Ohio State Drug Enforcement and Policy Center, federal marijuana rescheduling)

On December 18, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order titled "Increasing Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research", which called for the US Attorney General to "take all necessary steps to complete the rulemaking process related to rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III of the CSA in the most expeditious manner in accordance with Federal law."

On April 23rd, 2026, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche issued a new order which immediately moved both FDA-approved products containing cannabis, and all state-licensed medical cannabis-based products — including those under our PA state MMJ program — to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. It also called for an expedited administrative hearing process to consider rescheduling all cannabis to Schedule III, which began on June 29 and ended July 15th, 2026. When there is reporting available on the results of this hearing, we will provide updates. 

This is a welcome change, but one whose scope and consequences will be developing through 2026. From the wording so far, the focus of the new order is more on changing regulation and research on cannabis as medicine, and less on protection and outcomes for individuals and current patients of the PA state MMJ program. It's important to note that no changes have been made to laws governing the recreational use and possession of cannabis or cannabis products. Recreational marijuana is still a Schedule I drug.

Certain drugs, substances, and chemicals are classified by the Drug Enforcement Administration into five categories, depending both on the drug's approved and possible medical uses and the drug's potential for abuse and dependency. Schedule I represents the most potential for abuse and Schedule V, the least. Use and possession of Schedule I drugs have the most severe penalties. (Source: DEA drug scheduling)

The concept of drug scheduling was introduced in 1970 by the Controlled Substances Act (part of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act). Cannabis was assigned Schedule I status with the passage of that act in 1970, and its cultivation, possession, and distribution were made illegal. (Sources: CRS R45948; CRS R44782)

California first amended its drug laws to allow for medicinal cannabis use in 1996. Since then, 40 states (like PA!) have enacted laws, policies and state-run programs governing the use of MMJ. But federal laws based on the Controlled Substances Act have not changed, leading to what is called the 'policy gap' between state and federal laws. Although in states like PA with a state-run MMJ program, use and possession of medical cannabis is legal and without penalties, there is still the possibility of patients being charged and penalized with federal crimes under federal laws. There are many restrictions and complications with employment for patients enrolled in the MMJ program, including mandatory drug testing for some federal employees and possible bans from positions requiring a Commercial Driver's License (CDL), a subject explored in more depth below. There are also potential legal and tax ramifications and banking barriers for any businesses involved in the MMJ industry. (Source: CRS IF12270)

All in all, these are a lot of developments with very few material changes yet for you, the patients.

However, the schedule change paves the way for important changes that can now occur should additional legislation follow. Some possibilities could be the elimination of federal criminal penalties for MMJ patients complying with their state laws; expungements of criminal records for some offenses; and limits on drug testing for federal employees. For this to be the case, the policy gap between the state and federal government would need to be closed, perhaps similarly to the way envisioned by the Responsibly Addressing the Marijuana Policy Gap Act, a now-dead bill from 2019.

We will continue to provide updates as the rescheduling process moves forward and as agency policy changes in response to the schedule change.

The short answer under current TSA policy: no, unless your medical marijuana is one of a very narrow set of FDA-approved products.

On April 27, 2026, the TSA made unannounced and unexplained changes to their "What Can I Bring?" webpage that caused a stir of speculation on the web that soon, patients would be allowed to fly with medical marijuana. Language on the page that used to specifically mention the illegality of marijuana possession was removed. People also noticed that the page said that MMJ was allowed in both carry-on and checked luggage with 'Special Instructions'. It turns out that checking the fine print here is important.

Fact-checking website Snopes did a deep dive into the matter and found that almost nothing had changed regarding TSA policy (1, see footnotes). The 'Special Instructions' state that the TSA is focused on aviation security, not general law enforcement or drug searches, but that they will 'refer the matter to a law enforcement officer' if any illegal substances or evidence of criminal activity are found during a security screening. While the webpage does say that MMJ is allowed, any medical marijuana products brought onto a plane must meet federal requirements, and since nearly all medical marijuana products are still federally unlawful, patients are still de facto prohibited from bringing their MMJ aboard an aircraft. Still, the removal of the language about federal illegality sends a signal that the TSA may be anticipating making policy changes in response to the rescheduling in the future.

In the meantime, you can check out our page on using your Pennsylvania medical card in other states to see if you are able to access your medicine while traveling.

Last updated July 22nd, 2026. This is not legal advice; it is meant to be informational and to offer reasonable interpretation of complex issues.

We are hopeful that these changes will ultimately lead to improved protections for employees who have their MMJ card. While Pennsylvania Act 16, the PA law that allows for the medical cannabis program, protects employees (2, see footnotes) from job discrimination and termination solely on the basis of their certification (Act 16, Chapter 21, Section 2103(b)), there are still employment risks to using medical marijuana. Employers can make disciplinary and termination decisions using positive drug test results or even the impression that an employee is under the influence of marijuana. This is especially true if an employee's job involves certain tasks, e.g., high-voltage electricity, public utilities, public health or safety (2). Employers also have leeway to determine what tasks are considered life-threatening and dangerous and therefore exempt from protection.

Employees in PA subject to federal standards are treated more strictly. This includes employees of the federal government (6), commercial drivers, some aviation workers, and others (3, see footnotes). The Federal Drug-Free Workplace Program conditions federal employment on refraining from using 'illegal drugs' and defines those as either Schedule I or II drugs used without a valid prescription or lawfully authorized use (4, see footnotes), whether on or off duty. Employees of companies that receive federal grants and contracts also have to contend with federal drug policies (5, see footnotes).

Although state-licensed medical marijuana products have been moved to Schedule III, implying that they could no longer be strictly prohibited, federal drug policies have not changed with the rescheduling and policy is what is used to discipline employees. For example, marijuana continues to be listed on the official federal drug-testing panel, which was reaffirmed without revision just six weeks before the rescheduling was announced and has not been changed since. Because marijuana products must be from a state-licensed source to be considered a Schedule III drug, there is also the issue of burden of proof to consider.

A drug panel cannot test for the legitimacy of the product in the body, just whether THC is present. Schedule III status is contingent on the marijuana product being produced and distributed by a state-licensed entity, not on whether the patient has a legitimate medical card. An employee who tests positive for THC may then have to provide a chain of evidence that their positive test resulted from using a Schedule III marijuana product rather than a Schedule I product.

If you're thinking that this could be a confusing bureaucratic nightmare, you're not alone. There is currently insufficient guidance from many federal agencies that would provide clarity as to how evidence of approved use can be demonstrated if an employee tests positive for THC. We have also not found evidence that a state-issued medical card would be considered sufficient for this purpose. Rather, the only clear guidance we have found so far explicitly says it is not.

At least one agency that we know of, the Department of Transportation, has issued guidance on May 15th, 2026 in response to the rescheduling: a state-issued medical card or certification cannot provide a 'legitimate medical explanation' for an employee's positive THC result. The reasoning it supplies is as follows: legitimate medical explanations require a drug to be legally prescribed, but state-dispensed marijuana is not FDA-approved. Without that approval, it cannot be prescribed (certification to use is not considered a prescription) and therefore cannot serve to excuse a positive test.

This makes it reasonably clear that a policy-to-implementation gap still exists and that there are still employment risks to the use of cannabis as a medicine, especially since marijuana is still on the federal drug testing panel. Also, until agencies make explicit what use they accept and how an employee is expected to prove it, that risk will remain and it would be prudent to assume that pre-rescheduling policy still applies. (See SAMHSA, Drug-Free Workplace Program background.)

Last updated July 22nd, 2026. This is not legal advice; it is meant to be informational and to offer reasonable interpretation of complex issues.

One of the most frequently asked questions in Pennsylvania is whether medical card holders are barred from purchasing firearms or if their currently-owned guns may be subject to confiscation if they decide to get a card. There's a lot to digest here about developments both directly and indirectly related to the schedule change, so we created a whole page for the subject: "Guns & Your Medical Card". Notably, the Supreme Court made a decision in June of 2026 in United States v. Hemani that could have powerful implications for patients who own or wish to purchase firearms.

You can link to our Gun page using the button below for details and updates.

1. Using archived images of the Medical Marijuana page of the "What Can I Bring" section on the TSA website from 2019, Snopes showed that the "Yes (Special Instructions)" qualifier had been in place for years already, indicating that this "Yes" language had nothing to do with the recent rescheduling. After the FDA approved a CBD oil in 2018, the TSA made this update to their website with the same caveat that the "yes, you may bring it aboard the aircraft" here only applies to the minuscule number of federally lawful marijuana products.
2. If a job involves high-voltage electricity, public utilities, public health or safety, certain chemicals, etc. (see Act 16, Chapter 5, Section 510 for more details), that employee may not perform that duty 'while under the influence with a blood content of more than 10 nanograms of active tetrahydrocannabis [THC] per milliliter of blood in serum', so exceptions to this protection exist. The blood-in-serum concentration component does not apply to every job, for example, those involving heights or in confined spaces (like mining). Likewise, an employer can prevent an employee from performing a task the employer deems life-threatening without any concentration threshold.
3. As of May 2026, there are 94,800 federal employees in Pennsylvania (BLS series SMS42000009091000001). As of 2022 there were about 375,000 Commercial Driver's License holders in PA (PA legislative testimony).
4. Executive Order 12564, the Drug-Free Federal Workplace order issued by Reagan, defines illegal drugs as Schedule I or II drugs without a valid prescription or other lawfully authorized use. It also stipulates the following: 'Section 1. Drug-Free Workplace. (a) Federal employees are required to refrain from the use of illegal drugs. (b) The use of illegal drugs by Federal employees, whether on duty or off duty, is contrary to the efficiency of the service. (c) Persons who use illegal drugs are not suitable for Federal employment.'
5. Drug-Free Workplace Act: This act requires contractors and grant recipients of the federal government to have drug policies in place. It does not specify that testing is generally required. This act also affects Schedules I–V drugs as opposed to the EO that applies to Schedules I and II. (41 U.S.C. § 8101)
6. While not every federal position is designated for regular testing, any employee may be tested if there is reasonable suspicion of illegal drug use. (clearly stated here: GSA Drug-Free Workplace Program)