Iowa’s Board of Pharmacy is proposing to temporarily place certain medical marijuana products in Schedule III under the Iowa Controlled Substances Act, following the federal government’s April 28 rescheduling order.¹ The proposal, published September 30 as Regulatory Analysis RA 26-323, would add qualifying marijuana, marijuana extracts, and naturally derived delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinols to Iowa’s Schedule III when those products are in an FDA-approved product or subject to a state medical marijuana license under Iowa Code chapter 124E.² It is part of a broader controlled-substances rulemaking that also addresses twenty substances proposed for Schedule I, one for Schedule IV, and three precursor substances.³
Iowa’s action raises a question that South Dakota has not yet resolved. Federal rescheduling established a pathway for qualifying state medical-marijuana businesses, but it did not automatically rewrite every state’s controlled-substances statutes. Iowa is proposing a corresponding state scheduling change. South Dakota’s Attorney General has addressed whether the existing medical program can continue, while a separate question concerning the state’s Schedule I criteria remains before its Department of Health.⁴
The Iowa Board of Pharamcy’s regulatory analysis anticipates benefits for patients who hold medical cannabidiol program certifications from the federal move of qualifying products out of Schedule I.⁵ That is the agency’s stated expectation. The April 28 federal order placed defined categories of marijuana in Schedule III and created a registration pathway for qualifying state-licensed businesses under 21 C.F.R. § 1301.13(k). Under § 1301.13(k)(5), notwithstanding Part 1306, specified state medical certifications or other qualifying documents may be sufficient to permit dispensing to a user, provided the document meets the conditions specified in the federal rule.⁶
That provision addresses dispensing to a user. It does not, by itself, establish that every activity authorized under a state medical-marijuana program is exempt from federal controlled-substances requirements. Iowa’s statement about reduced enforcement risk should therefore be read alongside the actual conditions of the federal rule.
The Iowa Schedule III proposal is framed as a temporary designation under Iowa Code § 124.201. Subsection (4) establishes a process for temporarily adding substances newly designated as controlled under federal law, with a two-year expiration provision if the General Assembly does not enact the amendment. Its application to marijuana products already controlled under Iowa law presents a separate question of statutory interpretation. The regulatory analysis also cites § 124.201A, which addresses FDA-approved cannabis-derived prescription drug medications. That provision does not expressly establish the same automatic scheduling mechanism for all products licensed under Iowa’s medical cannabidiol program.⁷
The September 30 document is a regulatory analysis proposing rulemaking, not an adopted rule placing those products in Schedule III.
The proposal does not itself amend the forms of medical cannabidiol permitted under Iowa Code chapter 124E. Smokable marijuana flower remains outside the medical cannabidiol program under existing state law and administrative rules.⁸ Schedule III placement and authorization to manufacture, dispense, possess, or use particular products are related but distinct legal questions.
What Iowa’s proposal means for South Dakota
Iowa’s proposal provides a useful comparison with South Dakota, where the Department of Health has been asked to examine the effect of federal rescheduling on the state’s own controlled-substances law.
On October 6, South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley issued Official Opinion 26-06, concluding that federal rescheduling would likely have a negligible impact on the continued operation of South Dakota’s medical-marijuana program.⁹ The opinion also acknowledged that a separate state rescheduling decision would require action by the Legislature or voters and that the Department of Health has a statutory role in making scheduling recommendations.
The opinion answered whether federal rescheduling disrupts the existing medical program. It did not determine whether tetrahydrocannabinol continues to satisfy South Dakota’s Schedule I criteria under § 34-20B-11 or whether the Department should make a recommendation under § 34-20B-27.¹⁰
South Dakota maintains separate statutes for its medical-marijuana program and its controlled-substances schedules. Chapter 34-20G governs the medical program. Chapter 34-20B establishes the controlled-substances schedules, including the Schedule I criteria in § 34-20B-11 and the Department of Health’s authority to recommend scheduling changes under § 34-20B-27. Section 34-20B-27 directs the Department to recommend that a substance be added, deleted, or rescheduled when the Department determines that the substance has a different potential for abuse.¹¹ A federal finding of currently accepted medical use for a defined category of marijuana may be relevant evidence. It is not, by the text of § 34-20B-27, an automatic command that the Department must reopen the Schedule I listing for tetrahydrocannabinol.
On August 31, WeedPress petitioned the Department of Health to address whether the federal rescheduling findings warrant review under those provisions.¹² The petition does not depend on a claim that federal rescheduling automatically changes South Dakota law.
Iowa’s proposal does not establish that South Dakota must follow the same procedure or reach the same result. The states have different statutes and different administrative authorities. But Iowa’s Board of Pharmacy is addressing the relationship between the new federal classification and its state schedules through a formal regulatory process. An opinion that the medical program can continue operating is not necessarily a determination that every question under the state’s controlled-substances chapter has been resolved.
A public hearing on the Iowa proposal is scheduled for October 20, 2026, at 10 a.m. at 6200 Park Avenue, Suite 100, in Des Moines. Virtual participation will be available through the Department of Inspections, Appeals, and Licensing website. Written comments may be submitted to Jeremiah Junker at jeremiah.junker@dia.iowa.gov by 4:30 p.m. on October 20.¹³
Two states, two responses to the same federal order
Iowa has published a proposal to place qualifying medical marijuana products in Schedule III under state law. South Dakota has received an Attorney General opinion explaining why its medical-marijuana program can continue under the federal registration framework.
Neither action automatically determines what the other state must do.
The comparison nevertheless exposes a distinction between maintaining an existing medical program and examining whether the state’s controlled-substances schedules remain appropriate following a federal scheduling change.
Iowa has put that question into a public regulatory process. South Dakota’s Department of Health has a separate scheduling question before it under chapter 34-20B.
Whether that question requires a new determination, a recommendation to the Legislature, or no change at all remains to be addressed under South Dakota law.
The Department’s response is due October 31. Failing to respond entitles the petitioner – that’s me – to judicial review. Stay tuned.
¹ Iowa Dep’t of Inspections, Appeals & Licensing, Regulatory Analysis RA 26-323 (Sept. 30, 2026), https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/aco/bulletincontent/09-30-2026.Regulatory%20Analysis_1789069678982.pdf.
² Id. (proposed 481—553.13(6)).
³ Id.
⁴ S.D. Att’y Gen. Op. 26-06 (Oct. 6, 2026), https://atg.sd.gov/OurOffice/OfficialOpinions/opinionhtml.aspx?id=1779; Jason Karimi, WeedPress Asks South Dakota Health Department to Rule Whether Schedule I Cannabis Still Fits the State’s Own Statute, WeedPress (Aug. 31, 2026), https://weedpress.org/2026/08/31/weedpress-asks-south-dakota-health-department-to-rule-whether-schedule-i-cannabis-still-fits-the-states-own-statute/.
⁵ RA 26-323, supra note 1.
⁶ 21 C.F.R. § 1301.13(k)(5) (2026); 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. 22714 (Apr. 28, 2026).
⁷ Iowa Code §§ 124.201(4), 124.201A; RA 26-323, supra note 1.
⁸ See Iowa Code ch. 124E; Iowa Admin. Code r. 641-154.13.
⁹ S.D. Att’y Gen. Op. 26-06, supra note 4.
¹⁰ SDCL §§ 34-20B-11, 34-20B-27.
¹¹ SDCL § 34-20B-27.
¹² Karimi, supra note 4.
¹³ RA 26-323, supra note 1.
Leave a Reply