On June 18, 2026, Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek C. Julius of the Drug Enforcement Administration issued a Preliminary Order that sharply narrows the scope of the upcoming expedited administrative hearing on marijuana rescheduling. The order makes clear that the rescheduling of FDA-approved marijuana products and state-regulated medical marijuana products has already occurred and will not be revisited. The hearing, set to begin June 29, will address only whether the remaining categories of marijuana should move from Schedule I to Schedule III.¹
This development follows Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s April 2026 final order that placed those medical categories into Schedule III and simultaneously launched the new, compressed hearing process. The ALJ’s ruling provides important procedural clarity just days before the hearing opens at the DEA’s Arlington, Virginia facility.
The Core Ruling: Medical Pathways Already Rescheduled
Judge Julius wrote:
“Importantly, the scope of this hearing is not to discuss the rescheduling of medical products approved by the Food and Drug Administration that contain marijuana and of medical marijuana products already regulated by the states, which has already occurred. See 91 Fed. Reg. 22,714 (2026). Accordingly, no evidence or testimony will be received on that matter. The narrow issue in this matter is whether the remainder of marijuana, as defined in the CSA, should be transferred from its current place on schedule I of the list of controlled substances to schedule III.”²
This language directly tracks the April 28, 2026 Federal Register notice that effectuated the medical rescheduling. The ALJ is enforcing a clean division: the medical side is settled for purposes of this proceeding; the hearing is now confined to the “remainder.”
The order further specifies that “marijuana” for hearing purposes follows the CSA definition in 21 U.S.C. § 802(16)(A), excluding items carved out in § 802(16)(B). Only competent, relevant, material, and non-repetitious evidence will be admitted, and the ALJ encourages affidavits given the compressed timeline.³
Procedural Backdrop and the Bifurcated Approach
The current hearing replaces an earlier proceeding (Docket No. 24-44) that was stayed and ultimately terminated. On April 22, 2026, Acting AG Blanche withdrew the prior notice of hearing and issued a new Notice of Hearing for an expedited process.⁴
The April action relied in part on the Attorney General’s authority to align scheduling with U.S. obligations under the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, allowing certain categories to move more quickly. The broader rulemaking for the remainder proceeds through the full administrative process under 21 U.S.C. §§ 811 and 812, including this hearing.
The hearing itself runs from June 29, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. ET through July 15, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. ET daily in the North Courtroom of the DEA Hearing Facility, 700 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, VA 22202.⁵
Who Is at the Table — and Who Bears the Burden
Judge Julius identified seven Interested Parties (plus the Government) as Designated Parties, including Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), multiple states (including Nebraska), law enforcement entities, and medical professionals generally viewed as opposing broader rescheduling. Reform-oriented groups that support rescheduling were not selected.⁶
Crucially, the order states: “The Government, as the proponent of the proposed rule, has the burden of proof.” This places the onus squarely on DEA to justify moving the remainder to Schedule III.⁷
What This Means in Practice
For state medical cannabis programs and patients: The April order and this ALJ ruling together provide greater federal clarity and a pathway for compliant state-licensed operators to pursue DEA registrations. Research access for FDA-approved or state-regulated medical products should improve.⁸
For religious liberty and probation advocates: The federal government’s formal recognition that certain marijuana products have accepted medical use (a Schedule III criterion) strengthens as-applied RFRA and state religious-exemption arguments. Individuals and groups seeking accommodations for sincere sacramental or medical use can point to this administrative record.⁹
For the broader market and reform efforts: The hearing will determine whether non-state-licensed or adult-use marijuana moves to Schedule III. A favorable outcome could expand research and ease certain frictions. Pending litigation challenging the April medical rescheduling order adds another layer.¹⁰
For the hearing process itself: With only two-and-a-half weeks of hearing time and a heavy emphasis on written submissions, the proceeding will be fast-moving. Prehearing statements, exhibit exchanges, and strict admissibility rules will govern.¹¹
Why This Matters Now
This Preliminary Order is a procedural roadmap that locks in the medical rescheduling as accomplished fact for hearing purposes and focuses the remaining dispute on the non-medical and non-state-regulated remainder. It reflects the Administration’s strategy of securing immediate benefits for medical patients and state programs while subjecting the larger question to a formal, expedited evidentiary process.
The compressed July 15, 2026 deadline means any recommended decision from Judge Julius, followed by a final order, could come relatively quickly.
Bottom Line
Medical cannabis rescheduling via state programs and FDA-approved products is no longer up for debate in this hearing — it has already happened. The narrow question left for June 29–July 15 is whether the rest of marijuana follows. Judge Julius’s June 18 order provides the procedural guardrails for that fight.
Advocates, patients, operators, researchers, and state officials should review the full Preliminary Order carefully and prepare targeted submissions. The medical door has opened administratively; the question of how wide it opens for everything else will be litigated in Arlington over the next several weeks.
Footnotes
¹ In re Schedules of Controlled Substances: Proposed Rescheduling of Marijuana, Hearing Docket No. 26-96, Preliminary Order (DEA ALJ June 18, 2026) [hereinafter ALJ Preliminary Order].
² ALJ Preliminary Order (quoting the scope limitation and citing 91 Fed. Reg. 22,714 (2026)).
³ ALJ Preliminary Order (discussing evidence standards under 21 C.F.R. § 1316.59(a) and encouragement of affidavits).
⁴ Schedules of Controlled Substances: Rescheduling of Marijuana, 91 Fed. Reg. 22,778 (2026) (withdrawal); 91 Fed. Reg. 22,777 (2026) (new Notice of Hearing).
⁵ ALJ Preliminary Order (detailing hearing logistics).
⁶ ALJ Preliminary Order (listing Designated Parties/Interested Parties).
⁷ ALJ Preliminary Order (citing 5 U.S.C. § 556(d) and 21 C.F.R. § 1316.56).
⁸ See U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Press Release, Justice Department Places FDA-Approved Marijuana Products and Products Containing Marijuana Subject to a Qualifying State-Issued License in Schedule III (Apr. 23, 2026).
⁹ ALJ Preliminary Order (in conjunction with the April 2026 rescheduling of medical categories recognizing accepted medical use).
¹⁰ Schedules of Controlled Substances: Rescheduling of Food and Drug Administration Approved Products Containing Marijuana From Schedule I to Schedule III; Corresponding Change to Permit Requirements, 91 Fed. Reg. 22,714 (Apr. 28, 2026).
¹¹ ALJ Preliminary Order (sections on prehearing statements, exhibits, and admissibility).
WeedPress: The Paper Trail 
Leave a comment