🕷️ Crawler Inspector

URL Lookup

Direct Parameter Lookup

Raw Queries and Responses

1. Shard Calculation

Query:

Response:

Calculated Shard: 30 (from laksa125)

2. Crawled Status Check

Query:

curl -X POST \
  'http://laksa030.int.ahrefs:8124/' \
  -H 'Content-Type: text/plain' \
  -H 'X-ClickHouse-Database: crawler3' \
  -H 'Authorization: Basic YXBpOg==' \
  -d 'SELECT getAhrefsURLFromUnparsed(src_unparsed) AS found_url, ifNull(toUnixTimestamp(download_stamp), 0) AS crawl_time, ifNull(toUnixTimestamp(props_url_first_seen), 0) AS first_indexed_time, download_http_code AS http_code, src_unparsed AS src_unparsed, src_root_hash AS src_root_hash, history_drop_reason AS history_drop_reason, meta_title AS meta_title, meta_descriptions AS meta_descriptions, attrs_boilerpipe_text AS attrs_boilerpipe_text, attrs_markdown AS attrs_markdown, attrs_readable_markdown AS attrs_readable_markdown, meta_canonical AS meta_canonical FROM crawler3.page_info_local FINAL PREWHERE (src_root_hash, src_unparsed) IN ((getAhrefsRootHashFromUnparsed(getAhrefsUnparsedNoserviceFromURL(\'https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482\')), getAhrefsUnparsedNoserviceFromURL(\'https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482\'))) FORMAT JSONEachRow'

Response:

{"found_url":"https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482","crawl_time":1775082214,"first_indexed_time":1746089593,"http_code":200,"src_unparsed":"gov,congress!www,\/crs-product\/LSB10482 s443","src_root_hash":"3496167000299666030","history_drop_reason":null,"meta_title":"State Marijuana “Legalization” and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress | Congress.gov | Library of Congress","meta_descriptions":[],"attrs_boilerpipe_text":"State Marijuana \"Legalization\" and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress\nState marijuana laws have changed significantly in recent years, and federal law appears poised to change in the coming months. At the state level, many states have\nenacted laws\nauthorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. A smaller but growing number of states have also amended their laws to legalize or decriminalize marijuana use. At the federal level, in April 2024, news outlets reported that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) planned to\nchange the status of marijuana\nunder the\nControlled Substances Act\n(CSA) by moving it from Schedule I to the less restrictive Schedule III. Under current law, many cannabis-related activities that comply with state\nlaw may nonetheless violate the federal CSA. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not bring state-legal marijuana markets into compliance with federal law.\nIn light of recent and proposed changes to state and federal marijuana regulation, this Sidebar provides an overview of the divergence between federal and state marijuana law. It then briefly discusses the legal consequences of the divergence and outlines certain related considerations for Congress.\nClassifying Cannabis Under Federal Law\nThe plant Cannabis sativa L. and products derived from that plant have a number of uses and may be subject to several overlapping legal regimes. Some of the chemicals found in cannabis, known as cannabinoids, produce a psychoactive effect. Thus, varietals of cannabis containing significant amounts of those chemicals, particularly the psychoactive cannabinoid\ndelta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol\n(THC), may be used as a\nrecreational drug\n. Cannabis and cannabis derivatives—including the non-psychoactive cannabinoid\ncannabidiol\n(CBD)—may also be used for\nmedical purposes\n. In addition, low-THC varietals of cannabis, often called\nhemp\n, have varied commercial and industrial applications including use in building materials, fibers, and personal care products.\nCannabis generally falls within one of two categories under federal law:\nmarijuana\nor\nhemp\n. Unless an exception applies, the CSA classifies the cannabis plant and its derivatives as\nmarijuana\n.\nHowever, the CSA definition of marijuana excludes (1) products that meet the legal definition of hemp (discussed below) and (2) the mature stalks of the cannabis plant; the sterilized seeds of the plant; and fibers, oils, and other products made from the stalks and seeds.\nFederal law defines\nhemp\nas the cannabis plant or any part of that plant with a THC concentration of no more than 0.3%. Cannabis that contains such low levels of THC is\nnot psychoactive\nand does not produce the \"high\" associated with marijuana. Notwithstanding the lack of psychoactive effect, until late 2018 most cannabis, including hemp, was legally classified as marijuana regardless of THC content, making it subject to regulation under the CSA. In December 2018, Congress enacted the\n2018 farm bill\n, which amended the CSA to provide that hemp that meets the foregoing legal definition is not a controlled substance. Although hemp is no longer a controlled substance under the CSA, it remains subject to federal regulation. For instance, the\nDepartment of Agriculture\nregulates hemp production, and the\nFood and Drug Administration\n(FDA) regulates some hemp-derived consumer products.\nMarijuana Under the CSA\nIf a substance falls within the CSA's definition of marijuana, it is a\nSchedule I controlled substance\nunder the statute and is subject to the\nmost stringent federal substance controls\n.\nAs background, the CSA imposes\ncomprehensive regulatory controls\non drugs and other substances that pose a risk of abuse and dependence. The CSA applies to both medical and recreational drugs and aims to protect public health from the dangers of controlled substances while also ensuring that patients have access to pharmaceutical controlled substances for legitimate medical purposes. Substances become subject to the CSA through placement in one of five lists, known as\nSchedules I through V\n. Either Congress (by legislation) or DEA (by rulemaking) can\nalter the status\nof a substance under the CSA by adding a substance to one of the schedules, moving it to a different schedule, or removing the substance from control altogether.\nA lower schedule number carries greater restrictions, meaning that controlled substances in Schedule I are subject to the most stringent controls.\nPlacement in Schedule I\nreflects a finding that a substance has a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use, and \"a lack of accepted safety for use … under medical supervision.\" Because Schedule I controlled substances have no accepted medical use, they may not legally be dispensed by prescription. By contrast, controlled substances in\nSchedules II through V\nhave accepted medical uses and pose progressively lower risks of abuse and dependence. Unlike substances in Schedule I, those substances\nmay be dispensed by prescription\nfor medical purposes.\nAlthough some drugs subject to the CSA may colloquially be called \"illegal drugs,\" the CSA does not fully ban any substances. It is legal to produce, distribute, and possess Schedule I substances in the context of\nfederally approved scientific studies\n, subject to\nCSA regulatory requirements\ndesigned to prevent abuse and diversion. For example, DEA-registered researchers must maintain records of transactions involving controlled substances and establish security measures to prevent theft of such substances. If a registrant\nviolates the CSA's requirements\n, DEA may take administrative enforcement action. In the event of a knowing violation, the Department of Justice (DOJ) may bring criminal charges.\nActivities involving controlled substances not authorized under the CSA are federal crimes that may give rise to large fines and significant jail time. Penalties vary according to the nature of the unauthorized activity and the type and amount of the controlled substance at issue. With regard to marijuana specifically,\nunauthorized simple possession\nmay prompt a minimum fine of $1,000 and a term of up to a year in prison, or a civil penalty for possession of a small amount for\npersonal use\n. Illicit\ndistribution of large quantities of marijuana\ncarries a prison sentence of 10 years to life and a fine of up to $10 million for an individual or a fine of up to $50 million for an organization. Penalties increase for subsequent offenses or if use of the substance causes death or serious bodily injury.\nIf marijuana were moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, it could in theory be dispensed and used by prescription for medical purposes. However, prescription drugs must be approved by FDA. Although FDA has\napproved some drugs\nderived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. If one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions from medical providers to comply with federal law.\nCannabis Under State Law\nIn addition to the federal CSA, each state has its own controlled substance laws. State substance control laws often roughly mirror federal law, and such laws are relatively uniform across states, because many states have adopted versions of a model statute called the\nUniform Controlled Substances Act\n. However, there is\nnot a complete overlap\nbetween drugs subject to federal and state control. States have sometimes opted to impose state law controls that are either more or less strict than those of the CSA.\nOne area where federal and state controlled substance laws diverge significantly is marijuana regulation. While every state once broadly prohibited the production, distribution, and possession of marijuana, in the past few decades many states have repealed or limited such prohibitions. As of May 2024, the District of Columbia, three territories, and all but three states have changed their laws to permit the use of\ncannabis for medical purposes\n. In addition, 24 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia have repealed prohibitions on\nrecreational marijuana\nuse by adults age 21 or older. State laws relaxing controls on cannabis vary in scope. Some states permit medical use of cannabis only for\ncertain medical conditions\nor restrict the means of administration by, for example,\nlimiting THC content\nor\nforbidding the use of smokeable cannabis\nfor medical purposes. With respect to non-medical marijuana, some states have\nbroadly repealed criminal prohibitions\non adult use of marijuana and fostered a state-legal recreational cannabis industry. Other states have more narrowly\ndecriminalized marijuana\n, removing some criminal prohibitions but maintaining civil penalties for marijuana-related activities. Following these changes to state law, medical and recreational cannabis businesses have begun operating openly in some parts of the United States.\nThe Federal-State Divide and Its Legal Consequences\nNotwithstanding the foregoing state laws, any activity involving marijuana that is not authorized under the CSA remains a\nfederal crime\nanywhere in the United States, including in states that have purported to legalize medical or recreational marijuana. The Supreme Court has held that state laws authorizing medical marijuana use\ndo not affect the CSA's restrictions\n. Thus, when states \"legalize\" a federally controlled substance such as marijuana, the sole result is that the substance is no longer controlled\nunder state law\n. As discussed in another\nLegal Sidebar\n, moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would have some impact on marijuana users and businesses but would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law.\nActivities that violate the CSA may give rise to federal criminal prosecution. As a practical matter, however, DEA and DOJ\nlack the resources to prosecute all violations\nof the CSA.\nDOJ\nguidance\nmemoranda\nfrom the Obama Administration broadly affirmed federal authority to prosecute such activities but also indicated that DOJ would generally not prioritize prosecution of activities involving medical marijuana that complied with state law. Under the Trump Administration, DOJ\nrescinded that guidance\n, instead reaffirming the authority of federal prosecutors to exercise prosecutorial discretion to target federal marijuana offenses \"in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and appropriations.\" DOJ has not issued formal guidance on marijuana policy during the Biden Administration, but Attorney General Merrick Garland has\nindicated\nthat the agency will not prioritize prosecuting individuals for personal use of marijuana. Notwithstanding the changes in guidance,\ndata from the U.S. Sentencing Commission\nindicate that the number of federal marijuana trafficking prosecutions decreased every year between FY2018 and FY2022.\nThe reference to appropriations in the DOJ guidance is significant, because in each budget cycle since FY2015, Congress has passed an\nappropriations rider\nbarring DOJ from using taxpayer funds to prevent states from \"implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.\" The appropriations rider thus prohibits federal prosecution of state-legal activities involving\nmedical marijuana\n. However, it poses no bar to prosecution of activities involving\nrecreational marijuana\n. Moreover, the rider does not remove criminal liability; it merely prevents enforcement of the CSA in certain circumstances. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has\nexplained\n, if Congress repealed the appropriations rider, DOJ would be able to prosecute violations of the CSA that occurred while the rider was in effect, subject to the applicable statute of limitations.\nEven absent criminal prosecution or conviction, individuals and organizations engaged in marijuana-related activities in violation of the CSA—including participants in the state-legal cannabis industry—may face collateral consequences arising from the federal prohibition of marijuana. Other federal laws impose legal consequences based on criminal activity, including violations of the CSA. For example, a financial institution handling income from an illegal marijuana business may violate federal\nanti-money laundering laws\n. The presence of income from a marijuana-related business may also prevent a bankruptcy court from\nconfirming a bankruptcy plan\n(though courts\nhave\nsplit\non the issue). Likewise, marijuana businesses may be\nineligible for certain federal tax deductions\n. (This restriction applies only to activities involving substances in Schedule I or II, so moving marijuana to Schedule III would allow marijuana businesses to\ndeduct business expenses\non federal tax filings.)\nFor individuals, participation in the state-legal marijuana industry may have\nadverse immigration consequences\n. Violations of the CSA may also affect individuals' ability to receive\ncertain\nfederal\ngovernment\nbenefits\n. In addition, federal law\nprohibits gun ownership and possession\nby any person who is an \"unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance,\" with no exception for users of state-legal medical marijuana.\nConsiderations for Congress\nEither Congress or DEA has the authority to change the status of marijuana under the CSA. DEA is currently considering whether to reschedule marijuana via\nformal rulemaking\n. DEA's proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III will be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget and will then be released and subject to public comment, meaning that final action will likely take months after a proposed rule is published. Congress possesses broad authority to change the status of marijuana by legislation before or after DEA makes any final scheduling decision. If Congress seeks to regulate marijuana more stringently, it could, among other options, repeal the appropriations rider discussed above, increase DOJ funding to prosecute CSA violations, or\nlimit federal funds\nfor states that legalize marijuana. However, most\nrecent proposals\nbefore Congress seek to relax federal restrictions on marijuana or mitigate the disparity between federal and state marijuana regulation. Some proposals would\nremove marijuana from regulation under the CSA\nentirely or move it\nto a\nless restrictive schedule\n. Other proposed legislation would leave marijuana in Schedule I but\nlimit\nenforcement\nof federal marijuana law in states that elect to legalize marijuana. Additional proposals would seek to address specific legal consequences of marijuana's Schedule I status by, for example, enabling marijuana businesses to access\nbanking\nservices\nor removing collateral consequences for individuals in areas such as\nimmigration\n,\nfederally assisted housing\n, and\ngun ownership\n.\nChanges to the status of marijuana under the CSA could raise additional legal questions. For instance, FDA regulates certain cannabis products under the\nFederal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act\n, so Congress might also consider whether to alter that regulatory regime. In addition, it is possible that relaxing the CSA's restrictions on marijuana could implicate the United States'\ninternational treaty obligations\n. For further information on proposed reforms and legal and policy issues related to marijuana's status under the CSA, see CRS In Focus IF12270,\nThe Federal Status of Marijuana and the Policy Gap with States\n, by Lisa N. Sacco, Joanna R. Lampe, and Hassan Z. Sheikh; CRS Legal Sidebar LSB11105,\nLegal Consequences of Rescheduling Marijuana\n, by Joanna R. Lampe; and CRS Report R45948,\nThe Controlled Substances Act (CSA): A Legal Overview for the 11\n8\nth Congress\n, by Joanna R. Lampe.","attrs_markdown":"[skip to main content](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#content)\n\nAlert: For a better experience on Congress.gov, please enable JavaScript in your browser.\n\nNavigation\n\n[![Congress.gov](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/img\/svg\/congress-gov-logo.svg)](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/)\n\n- [Advanced Searches](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/advanced-search\/legislation)\n- [Browse](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/browse)\n\n- [Legislation](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/legislation?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%7D)\n- [Congressional Record](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/congressional-record)\n- [Committees](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/committees)\n- [Members](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/members?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%7D)\n\n- [Search Tools](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help\/search-tools-overview)\n- [Support](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482)\n  - [Glossary](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help\/legislative-glossary)\n  - [Help](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help)\n  - [Contact](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/contact-us)\n  [Close](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482)\n  \n  - Browse the [Help Center](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help)\n  - [Glossary](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help\/legislative-glossary)\n  - [Contact](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/contact-us)\n\n- Congressional Documents\n- [Legislation](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#legislation)\n- [Legislation Text](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#legislation-text)\n- [Committee Reports](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#committee-reports)\n- [Congressional Record](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#congressional-record)\n- [Nominations](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#nominations)\n- [House Communications](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#house-communications)\n- [Senate Communications](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#senate-communications)\n- [Treaty Documents](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#treaty-documents)\n- Library of Congress Documents\n- [CRS Products](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#crs-products)\n\n[Fewer Options](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482)  [More Options](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482)\n\n[Citation](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#citation)    [Subscribe](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/get-alerts)    [Share\/Save](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#share)    [Site Feedback](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482#survey)\n\n[Home](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/) \\> [CRS Products (Library of Congress)](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-products) \\> LSB10482\n# State Marijuana “Legalization” and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress\n## CRS PRODUCT (LIBRARY OF CONGRESS)\n[Hide Overview](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482)\n\n|   |   |\n|---|---|\n| CRS Product Type: | Legal Sidebar |\n| CRS Product Number: | LSB10482 |\n| Topics: | Justice & Law Enforcement |\n| Publication Date: | 05\/14\/2024 |\n| Author: | Lampe, Joanna R. |\n\n[Download PDF (574KB)](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs_external_products\/LSB\/PDF\/LSB10482\/LSB10482.4.pdf) \\| [PDF Version History](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482)\n\n- [May 14, 2024 (LSB10482 - Version: 4)](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs_external_products\/LSB\/PDF\/LSB10482\/LSB10482.4.pdf)\n- [May 14, 2024 (LSB10482 - Version: 3)](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs_external_products\/LSB\/PDF\/LSB10482\/LSB10482.3.pdf)\n- [May 29, 2020 (LSB10482 - Version: 2)](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs_external_products\/LSB\/PDF\/LSB10482\/LSB10482.2.pdf)\n\n[Listen](https:\/\/app-na.readspeaker.com\/cgi-bin\/rsent?customerid=6927&lang=en_us&readid=dvContainer&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482 \"Listen to this page using ReadSpeaker webReader\")\n\nState Marijuana \"Legalization\" and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress\n\nUpdated May 14, 2024 (LSB10482)\n\nState marijuana laws have changed significantly in recent years, and federal law appears poised to change in the coming months. At the state level, many states have [enacted laws](http:\/\/www.ncsl.org\/research\/health\/state-medical-marijuana-laws.aspx) authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. A smaller but growing number of states have also amended their laws to legalize or decriminalize marijuana use. At the federal level, in April 2024, news outlets reported that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) planned to [change the status of marijuana](https:\/\/apnews.com\/article\/marijuana-biden-dea-criminal-justice-pot-f833a8dae6ceb31a8658a5d65832a3b8) under the [Controlled Substances Act](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?path=\/prelim@title21\/chapter13&edition=prelim) (CSA) by moving it from Schedule I to the less restrictive Schedule III. Under current law, many cannabis-related activities that comply with statelaw may nonetheless violate the federal CSA. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not bring state-legal marijuana markets into compliance with federal law.\n\nIn light of recent and proposed changes to state and federal marijuana regulation, this Sidebar provides an overview of the divergence between federal and state marijuana law. It then briefly discusses the legal consequences of the divergence and outlines certain related considerations for Congress.\n\nClassifying Cannabis Under Federal Law\n\nThe plant Cannabis sativa L. and products derived from that plant have a number of uses and may be subject to several overlapping legal regimes. Some of the chemicals found in cannabis, known as cannabinoids, produce a psychoactive effect. Thus, varietals of cannabis containing significant amounts of those chemicals, particularly the psychoactive cannabinoid [delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol](https:\/\/www.drugabuse.gov\/publications\/media-guide\/glossary) (THC), may be used as a [recreational drug](https:\/\/www.drugabuse.gov\/publications\/drugfacts\/marijuana). Cannabis and cannabis derivatives—including the non-psychoactive cannabinoid [cannabidiol](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R46189) (CBD)—may also be used for [medical purposes](https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/press-announcements\/fda-approves-first-drug-comprised-active-ingredient-derived-marijuana-treat-rare-severe-forms). In addition, low-THC varietals of cannabis, often called [hemp](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R44742), have varied commercial and industrial applications including use in building materials, fibers, and personal care products.\n\nCannabis generally falls within one of two categories under federal law: *marijuana* or *hemp*. Unless an exception applies, the CSA classifies the cannabis plant and its derivatives as [*marijuana*](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section802&num=0&edition=prelim). However, the CSA definition of marijuana excludes (1) products that meet the legal definition of hemp (discussed below) and (2) the mature stalks of the cannabis plant; the sterilized seeds of the plant; and fibers, oils, and other products made from the stalks and seeds.\n\nFederal law defines [*hemp*](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title7-section1639o&num=0&edition=prelim) as the cannabis plant or any part of that plant with a THC concentration of no more than 0.3%. Cannabis that contains such low levels of THC is [not psychoactive](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R44742) and does not produce the \"high\" associated with marijuana. Notwithstanding the lack of psychoactive effect, until late 2018 most cannabis, including hemp, was legally classified as marijuana regardless of THC content, making it subject to regulation under the CSA. In December 2018, Congress enacted the [2018 farm bill](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/115th-congress\/house-bill\/2\/text), which amended the CSA to provide that hemp that meets the foregoing legal definition is not a controlled substance. Although hemp is no longer a controlled substance under the CSA, it remains subject to federal regulation. For instance, the [Department of Agriculture](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/IF11088) regulates hemp production, and the [Food and Drug Administration](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/IF11250) (FDA) regulates some hemp-derived consumer products.\n\nMarijuana Under the CSA\n\nIf a substance falls within the CSA's definition of marijuana, it is a [Schedule I controlled substance](https:\/\/www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov\/schedules\/orangebook\/c_cs_alpha.pdf#page=13) under the statute and is subject to the [most stringent federal substance controls](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section823&num=0&edition=prelim).\n\nAs background, the CSA imposes [comprehensive regulatory controls](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) on drugs and other substances that pose a risk of abuse and dependence. The CSA applies to both medical and recreational drugs and aims to protect public health from the dangers of controlled substances while also ensuring that patients have access to pharmaceutical controlled substances for legitimate medical purposes. Substances become subject to the CSA through placement in one of five lists, known as [Schedules I through V](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section812&num=0&edition=prelim). Either Congress (by legislation) or DEA (by rulemaking) can [alter the status](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section811&num=0&edition=prelim) of a substance under the CSA by adding a substance to one of the schedules, moving it to a different schedule, or removing the substance from control altogether.\n\nA lower schedule number carries greater restrictions, meaning that controlled substances in Schedule I are subject to the most stringent controls. [Placement in Schedule I](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section812&num=0&edition=prelim) reflects a finding that a substance has a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use, and \"a lack of accepted safety for use … under medical supervision.\" Because Schedule I controlled substances have no accepted medical use, they may not legally be dispensed by prescription. By contrast, controlled substances in [Schedules II through V](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) have accepted medical uses and pose progressively lower risks of abuse and dependence. Unlike substances in Schedule I, those substances [may be dispensed by prescription](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section829&num=0&edition=prelim) for medical purposes.\n\nAlthough some drugs subject to the CSA may colloquially be called \"illegal drugs,\" the CSA does not fully ban any substances. It is legal to produce, distribute, and possess Schedule I substances in the context of [federally approved scientific studies](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section823&num=0&edition=prelim), subject to [CSA regulatory requirements](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) designed to prevent abuse and diversion. For example, DEA-registered researchers must maintain records of transactions involving controlled substances and establish security measures to prevent theft of such substances. If a registrant [violates the CSA's requirements](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948), DEA may take administrative enforcement action. In the event of a knowing violation, the Department of Justice (DOJ) may bring criminal charges.\n\nActivities involving controlled substances not authorized under the CSA are federal crimes that may give rise to large fines and significant jail time. Penalties vary according to the nature of the unauthorized activity and the type and amount of the controlled substance at issue. With regard to marijuana specifically, [unauthorized simple possession](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section844&num=0&edition=prelim) may prompt a minimum fine of \\$1,000 and a term of up to a year in prison, or a civil penalty for possession of a small amount for [personal use](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title21-section844a&num=0&saved=%7CZ3JhbnVsZWlkOlVTQy1wcmVsaW0tdGl0bGUyMS1zZWN0aW9uODQ0%7C%7C%7C0%7Cfalse%7Cprelim). Illicit [distribution of large quantities of marijuana](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section841&num=0&edition=prelim) carries a prison sentence of 10 years to life and a fine of up to \\$10 million for an individual or a fine of up to \\$50 million for an organization. Penalties increase for subsequent offenses or if use of the substance causes death or serious bodily injury.\n\nIf marijuana were moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, it could in theory be dispensed and used by prescription for medical purposes. However, prescription drugs must be approved by FDA. Although FDA has [approved some drugs](https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/public-health-focus\/fda-and-cannabis-research-and-drug-approval-process) derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. If one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions from medical providers to comply with federal law.\n\nCannabis Under State Law\n\nIn addition to the federal CSA, each state has its own controlled substance laws. State substance control laws often roughly mirror federal law, and such laws are relatively uniform across states, because many states have adopted versions of a model statute called the [Uniform Controlled Substances Act](https:\/\/www.uniformlaws.org\/committees\/community-home?CommunityKey=9873a9bf-7335-4be7-855d-b17c9e8ff3dd). However, there is [not a complete overlap](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=17359543929331018150&q=473+F.3d+1072&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p1078) between drugs subject to federal and state control. States have sometimes opted to impose state law controls that are either more or less strict than those of the CSA.\n\nOne area where federal and state controlled substance laws diverge significantly is marijuana regulation. While every state once broadly prohibited the production, distribution, and possession of marijuana, in the past few decades many states have repealed or limited such prohibitions. As of May 2024, the District of Columbia, three territories, and all but three states have changed their laws to permit the use of [cannabis for medical purposes](https:\/\/www.ncsl.org\/health\/state-medical-cannabis-laws). In addition, 24 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia have repealed prohibitions on [recreational marijuana](https:\/\/norml.org\/legal\/legalization) use by adults age 21 or older. State laws relaxing controls on cannabis vary in scope. Some states permit medical use of cannabis only for [certain medical conditions](https:\/\/dph.georgia.gov\/low-thc-oil-registry) or restrict the means of administration by, for example, [limiting THC content](https:\/\/guides.sll.texas.gov\/cannabis\/compassionate-use) or [forbidding the use of smokeable cannabis](https:\/\/law.justia.com\/codes\/georgia\/2015\/title-16\/chapter-12\/article-8\/section-16-12-191) for medical purposes. With respect to non-medical marijuana, some states have [broadly repealed criminal prohibitions](https:\/\/cannabis.colorado.gov\/legal-marijuana-use\/laws-about-marijuana-use) on adult use of marijuana and fostered a state-legal recreational cannabis industry. Other states have more narrowly [decriminalized marijuana](https:\/\/norml.org\/laws\/decriminalization\/), removing some criminal prohibitions but maintaining civil penalties for marijuana-related activities. Following these changes to state law, medical and recreational cannabis businesses have begun operating openly in some parts of the United States.\n\nThe Federal-State Divide and Its Legal Consequences\n\nNotwithstanding the foregoing state laws, any activity involving marijuana that is not authorized under the CSA remains a [federal crime](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) anywhere in the United States, including in states that have purported to legalize medical or recreational marijuana. The Supreme Court has held that state laws authorizing medical marijuana use [do not affect the CSA's restrictions](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=15647611274064109718&q=545+U.S.+1&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p29). Thus, when states \"legalize\" a federally controlled substance such as marijuana, the sole result is that the substance is no longer controlled *under state law*. As discussed in another [Legal Sidebar](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB11105), moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would have some impact on marijuana users and businesses but would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law.\n\nActivities that violate the CSA may give rise to federal criminal prosecution. As a practical matter, however, DEA and DOJ [lack the resources to prosecute all violations](https:\/\/www.gao.gov\/assets\/680\/674464.pdf#page=14) of the CSA. [DOJ](https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/opa\/legacy\/2009\/10\/19\/medical-marijuana.pdf) [guidance](https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/oip\/legacy\/2014\/07\/23\/dag-guidance-2011-for-medical-marijuana-use.pdf) [memoranda](https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/iso\/opa\/resources\/3052013829132756857467.pdf) from the Obama Administration broadly affirmed federal authority to prosecute such activities but also indicated that DOJ would generally not prioritize prosecution of activities involving medical marijuana that complied with state law. Under the Trump Administration, DOJ [rescinded that guidance](https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/opa\/press-release\/file\/1022196\/download), instead reaffirming the authority of federal prosecutors to exercise prosecutorial discretion to target federal marijuana offenses \"in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and appropriations.\" DOJ has not issued formal guidance on marijuana policy during the Biden Administration, but Attorney General Merrick Garland has [indicated](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/event\/117th-congress\/senate-event\/332392\/text) that the agency will not prioritize prosecuting individuals for personal use of marijuana. Notwithstanding the changes in guidance, [data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission](https:\/\/www.ussc.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/pdf\/research-and-publications\/quick-facts\/Marijuana_FY22.pdf) indicate that the number of federal marijuana trafficking prosecutions decreased every year between FY2018 and FY2022.\n\nThe reference to appropriations in the DOJ guidance is significant, because in each budget cycle since FY2015, Congress has passed an [appropriations rider](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10694) barring DOJ from using taxpayer funds to prevent states from \"implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.\" The appropriations rider thus prohibits federal prosecution of state-legal activities involving *medical marijuana*. However, it poses no bar to prosecution of activities involving *recreational marijuana*. Moreover, the rider does not remove criminal liability; it merely prevents enforcement of the CSA in certain circumstances. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has [explained](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=14800733384205205829&q=833+F.3d+1163&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#%5B5%5D), if Congress repealed the appropriations rider, DOJ would be able to prosecute violations of the CSA that occurred while the rider was in effect, subject to the applicable statute of limitations.\n\nEven absent criminal prosecution or conviction, individuals and organizations engaged in marijuana-related activities in violation of the CSA—including participants in the state-legal cannabis industry—may face collateral consequences arising from the federal prohibition of marijuana. Other federal laws impose legal consequences based on criminal activity, including violations of the CSA. For example, a financial institution handling income from an illegal marijuana business may violate federal [anti-money laundering laws](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45726). The presence of income from a marijuana-related business may also prevent a bankruptcy court from [confirming a bankruptcy plan](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title11-section1129&num=0&edition=prelim) (though courts [have](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=1285469564547447585&q=922+F.3d+1031&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p1032) [split](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=11696028104615878729&q=484+B.R.+799&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p809) on the issue). Likewise, marijuana businesses may be [ineligible for certain federal tax deductions](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title26-section280E&num=0&edition=prelim). (This restriction applies only to activities involving substances in Schedule I or II, so moving marijuana to Schedule III would allow marijuana businesses to [deduct business expenses](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R46709) on federal tax filings.)\n\nFor individuals, participation in the state-legal marijuana industry may have [adverse immigration consequences](https:\/\/www.ecfr.gov\/current\/title-8\/chapter-I\/subchapter-C\/part-316\/section-316.10). Violations of the CSA may also affect individuals' ability to receive [certain](https:\/\/www.jdsupra.com\/legalnews\/sowing-the-seeds-of-marijuana-60882\/) federal [government](https:\/\/www.barrons.com\/articles\/army-veteran-marijuana-job-pension-51556595661)[benefits](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R42394). In addition, federal law [prohibits gun ownership and possession](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section922&num=0&edition=prelim) by any person who is an \"unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance,\" with no exception for users of state-legal medical marijuana.\n\nConsiderations for Congress\n\nEither Congress or DEA has the authority to change the status of marijuana under the CSA. DEA is currently considering whether to reschedule marijuana via [formal rulemaking](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section811&num=0&edition=prelim). DEA's proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III will be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget and will then be released and subject to public comment, meaning that final action will likely take months after a proposed rule is published. Congress possesses broad authority to change the status of marijuana by legislation before or after DEA makes any final scheduling decision. If Congress seeks to regulate marijuana more stringently, it could, among other options, repeal the appropriations rider discussed above, increase DOJ funding to prosecute CSA violations, or [limit federal funds](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/5323\/text) for states that legalize marijuana. However, most [recent proposals](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) before Congress seek to relax federal restrictions on marijuana or mitigate the disparity between federal and state marijuana regulation. Some proposals would [remove marijuana from regulation under the CSA](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/6028\/text) entirely or move itto a [less restrictive schedule](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/610\/text). Other proposed legislation would leave marijuana in Schedule I but [limit](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/6673\/text)[enforcement](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/6673\/text) of federal marijuana law in states that elect to legalize marijuana. Additional proposals would seek to address specific legal consequences of marijuana's Schedule I status by, for example, enabling marijuana businesses to access [banking](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/116th-congress\/house-bill\/1595)[services](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/senate-bill\/2860\/text) or removing collateral consequences for individuals in areas such as [immigration](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/116th-congress\/house-bill\/4390\/text), [federally assisted housing](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/7094\/text), and [gun ownership](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/2772\/text).\n\nChanges to the status of marijuana under the CSA could raise additional legal questions. For instance, FDA regulates certain cannabis products under the [Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?path=\/prelim@title21\/chapter9&edition=prelim), so Congress might also consider whether to alter that regulatory regime. In addition, it is possible that relaxing the CSA's restrictions on marijuana could implicate the United States' [international treaty obligations](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948). For further information on proposed reforms and legal and policy issues related to marijuana's status under the CSA, see CRS In Focus IF12270, [*The Federal Status of Marijuana and the Policy Gap with States*](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/IF12270), by Lisa N. Sacco, Joanna R. Lampe, and Hassan Z. Sheikh; CRS Legal Sidebar LSB11105, [*Legal Consequences of Rescheduling Marijuana*](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB11105), by Joanna R. Lampe; and CRS Report R45948, [*The Controlled Substances Act (CSA): A Legal Overview for the 11**8**th Congress*](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948), by Joanna R. Lampe.\n\nDisclaimer:  \n These documents were prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.\n\n# [![Congress.gov](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/img\/svg\/congress-gov-logo-no-color.svg)](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/)\n## Site Content\n- [Legislation](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/legislation?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%7D)\n- [Committee Reports](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/committee-reports)\n- [Committee Meetings](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/search?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%2C%22source%22%3A%22committee-meetings%22%7D)\n- [Committee Publications](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/search?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%2C%22source%22%3A%22committee-publications%22%7D)\n- [Congressional Record](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/congressional-record)\n- [Congressional Record Index](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/congressional-record\/congressional-record-index)\n- [Members](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/members?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%7D)\n- [Nominations](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/nominations)\n- [Treaty Documents](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/treaties)\n- [House Communications](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/house-communications)\n- [Senate Communications](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/senate-communications)\n- [Legislative Process](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/legislative-process)\n- [About Congress.gov](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/about)\n\n## Help\n- [Help](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help) \\| [Feedback](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/survey) \\| [Contact Us](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/contact-us)\n- [Glossary](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help\/legislative-glossary)\n- [Search Tools](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help\/search-tools-overview)\n- [Ask a Law Librarian](https:\/\/ask.loc.gov\/congressdotgov)\n- [Webinars](https:\/\/www.loc.gov\/law\/learning\/us-webinars.php)\n- [Video](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/video)\n## Ways to Connect\n- [@congressdotgov on X (external link)](https:\/\/x.com\/congressdotgov)\n- [Congress.gov on YouTube (external link)](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/playlist?list=PLpAGnumt6iV6j07liSyksxaQe_KmPbeow)\n- [Get Email Alerts and Updates](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/get-alerts)\n- [Blog – In Custodia Legis: Law Librarians of Congress](http:\/\/blogs.loc.gov\/law\/)\n\n## Resources\n- [Congressional Web Archive](https:\/\/www.loc.gov\/collections\/united-states-congressional-web-archive\/about-this-collection\/)\n- [CRS Products](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-products)\n- [U.S. Code](http:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/)\n- [GPO govinfo](https:\/\/www.govinfo.gov\/)\n- [Law Library of Congress](http:\/\/www.loc.gov\/law\/)\n- [Guide to Law Online](https:\/\/www.loc.gov\/research-centers\/law-library-of-congress\/researcher-resources\/guide-to-law-online\/)\n- [Teacher Lesson Plans](http:\/\/www.loc.gov\/law\/find\/educational-resources\/)\n- [State Legislature Websites](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/state-legislature-websites)\n- [Bill Status Bulk Data](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help\/using-data-offsite)\n- [Congress.gov API](https:\/\/api.congress.gov\/)\n- [Roll Call Votes](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/roll-call-votes)\n- [Constitution Annotated](https:\/\/constitution.congress.gov\/)\n- [Law Library Reports](https:\/\/www.loc.gov\/research-centers\/law-library-of-congress\/legal-reports\/)\n- [GAO Reports](https:\/\/www.gao.gov\/reports-testimonies)\n\n## House Links\n- [House.gov](http:\/\/www.house.gov\/)\n- [Floor Activities](http:\/\/clerk.house.gov\/floorsummary\/floor.aspx)\n- [Representatives](http:\/\/www.house.gov\/representatives\/)\n- [Committees](http:\/\/www.house.gov\/committees\/)\n- [Hearings (Video)](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/committees\/video)\n- [Bills to Be Considered](http:\/\/docs.house.gov\/floor\/)\n- [Leadership](https:\/\/www.house.gov\/leadership)\n- [History, Art & Archives](http:\/\/history.house.gov\/)\n- [More House Resources](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help\/house-of-representatives)\n\n## Senate Links\n- [Senate.gov](http:\/\/www.senate.gov\/)\n- [On the Senate Floor](http:\/\/www.senate.gov\/legislative\/LIS\/floor_activity\/floor_activity.htm)\n- [Senators](http:\/\/www.senate.gov\/general\/contact_information\/senators_cfm.cfm)\n- [Committees](http:\/\/www.senate.gov\/pagelayout\/committees\/d_three_sections_with_teasers\/committees_home.htm)\n- [Hearings (Schedule)](http:\/\/www.senate.gov\/pagelayout\/committees\/b_three_sections_with_teasers\/committee_hearings.htm)\n- [Leadership](http:\/\/www.senate.gov\/pagelayout\/senators\/a_three_sections_with_teasers\/leadership.htm)\n- [History, Art & Statistics](http:\/\/www.senate.gov\/pagelayout\/reference\/g_three_sections_with_teasers\/reference_home.htm)\n- [More Senate Resources](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help\/senate)\n\n- [Legal](https:\/\/www.loc.gov\/legal)\n- [Accessibility](https:\/\/www.loc.gov\/accessibility)\n- [Help](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/help)\n- [Contact Us](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/contact-us)\n- [External Link Disclaimer](http:\/\/www.loc.gov\/global\/disclaim.html)\n- [USA.gov](http:\/\/www.usa.gov\/)\n\n- [![Library of Congress](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/img\/svg\/loc-gov-logo.svg)](http:\/\/www.loc.gov\/)\n- [![Copyright.gov](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/img\/svg\/copyright-logo.svg)](http:\/\/www.copyright.gov\/)\n\n[Back to top](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10482)\n\nLoading...","attrs_readable_markdown":"State Marijuana \"Legalization\" and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress\n\nState marijuana laws have changed significantly in recent years, and federal law appears poised to change in the coming months. At the state level, many states have [enacted laws](http:\/\/www.ncsl.org\/research\/health\/state-medical-marijuana-laws.aspx) authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. A smaller but growing number of states have also amended their laws to legalize or decriminalize marijuana use. At the federal level, in April 2024, news outlets reported that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) planned to [change the status of marijuana](https:\/\/apnews.com\/article\/marijuana-biden-dea-criminal-justice-pot-f833a8dae6ceb31a8658a5d65832a3b8) under the [Controlled Substances Act](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?path=\/prelim@title21\/chapter13&edition=prelim) (CSA) by moving it from Schedule I to the less restrictive Schedule III. Under current law, many cannabis-related activities that comply with statelaw may nonetheless violate the federal CSA. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not bring state-legal marijuana markets into compliance with federal law.\n\nIn light of recent and proposed changes to state and federal marijuana regulation, this Sidebar provides an overview of the divergence between federal and state marijuana law. It then briefly discusses the legal consequences of the divergence and outlines certain related considerations for Congress.\n\nClassifying Cannabis Under Federal Law\n\nThe plant Cannabis sativa L. and products derived from that plant have a number of uses and may be subject to several overlapping legal regimes. Some of the chemicals found in cannabis, known as cannabinoids, produce a psychoactive effect. Thus, varietals of cannabis containing significant amounts of those chemicals, particularly the psychoactive cannabinoid [delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol](https:\/\/www.drugabuse.gov\/publications\/media-guide\/glossary) (THC), may be used as a [recreational drug](https:\/\/www.drugabuse.gov\/publications\/drugfacts\/marijuana). Cannabis and cannabis derivatives—including the non-psychoactive cannabinoid [cannabidiol](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R46189) (CBD)—may also be used for [medical purposes](https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/press-announcements\/fda-approves-first-drug-comprised-active-ingredient-derived-marijuana-treat-rare-severe-forms). In addition, low-THC varietals of cannabis, often called [hemp](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R44742), have varied commercial and industrial applications including use in building materials, fibers, and personal care products.\n\nCannabis generally falls within one of two categories under federal law: *marijuana* or *hemp*. Unless an exception applies, the CSA classifies the cannabis plant and its derivatives as [*marijuana*](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section802&num=0&edition=prelim). However, the CSA definition of marijuana excludes (1) products that meet the legal definition of hemp (discussed below) and (2) the mature stalks of the cannabis plant; the sterilized seeds of the plant; and fibers, oils, and other products made from the stalks and seeds.\n\nFederal law defines [*hemp*](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title7-section1639o&num=0&edition=prelim) as the cannabis plant or any part of that plant with a THC concentration of no more than 0.3%. Cannabis that contains such low levels of THC is [not psychoactive](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R44742) and does not produce the \"high\" associated with marijuana. Notwithstanding the lack of psychoactive effect, until late 2018 most cannabis, including hemp, was legally classified as marijuana regardless of THC content, making it subject to regulation under the CSA. In December 2018, Congress enacted the [2018 farm bill](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/115th-congress\/house-bill\/2\/text), which amended the CSA to provide that hemp that meets the foregoing legal definition is not a controlled substance. Although hemp is no longer a controlled substance under the CSA, it remains subject to federal regulation. For instance, the [Department of Agriculture](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/IF11088) regulates hemp production, and the [Food and Drug Administration](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/IF11250) (FDA) regulates some hemp-derived consumer products.\n\nMarijuana Under the CSA\n\nIf a substance falls within the CSA's definition of marijuana, it is a [Schedule I controlled substance](https:\/\/www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov\/schedules\/orangebook\/c_cs_alpha.pdf#page=13) under the statute and is subject to the [most stringent federal substance controls](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section823&num=0&edition=prelim).\n\nAs background, the CSA imposes [comprehensive regulatory controls](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) on drugs and other substances that pose a risk of abuse and dependence. The CSA applies to both medical and recreational drugs and aims to protect public health from the dangers of controlled substances while also ensuring that patients have access to pharmaceutical controlled substances for legitimate medical purposes. Substances become subject to the CSA through placement in one of five lists, known as [Schedules I through V](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section812&num=0&edition=prelim). Either Congress (by legislation) or DEA (by rulemaking) can [alter the status](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section811&num=0&edition=prelim) of a substance under the CSA by adding a substance to one of the schedules, moving it to a different schedule, or removing the substance from control altogether.\n\nA lower schedule number carries greater restrictions, meaning that controlled substances in Schedule I are subject to the most stringent controls. [Placement in Schedule I](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section812&num=0&edition=prelim) reflects a finding that a substance has a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use, and \"a lack of accepted safety for use … under medical supervision.\" Because Schedule I controlled substances have no accepted medical use, they may not legally be dispensed by prescription. By contrast, controlled substances in [Schedules II through V](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) have accepted medical uses and pose progressively lower risks of abuse and dependence. Unlike substances in Schedule I, those substances [may be dispensed by prescription](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section829&num=0&edition=prelim) for medical purposes.\n\nAlthough some drugs subject to the CSA may colloquially be called \"illegal drugs,\" the CSA does not fully ban any substances. It is legal to produce, distribute, and possess Schedule I substances in the context of [federally approved scientific studies](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section823&num=0&edition=prelim), subject to [CSA regulatory requirements](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) designed to prevent abuse and diversion. For example, DEA-registered researchers must maintain records of transactions involving controlled substances and establish security measures to prevent theft of such substances. If a registrant [violates the CSA's requirements](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948), DEA may take administrative enforcement action. In the event of a knowing violation, the Department of Justice (DOJ) may bring criminal charges.\n\nActivities involving controlled substances not authorized under the CSA are federal crimes that may give rise to large fines and significant jail time. Penalties vary according to the nature of the unauthorized activity and the type and amount of the controlled substance at issue. With regard to marijuana specifically, [unauthorized simple possession](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section844&num=0&edition=prelim) may prompt a minimum fine of \\$1,000 and a term of up to a year in prison, or a civil penalty for possession of a small amount for [personal use](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title21-section844a&num=0&saved=%7CZ3JhbnVsZWlkOlVTQy1wcmVsaW0tdGl0bGUyMS1zZWN0aW9uODQ0%7C%7C%7C0%7Cfalse%7Cprelim). Illicit [distribution of large quantities of marijuana](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section841&num=0&edition=prelim) carries a prison sentence of 10 years to life and a fine of up to \\$10 million for an individual or a fine of up to \\$50 million for an organization. Penalties increase for subsequent offenses or if use of the substance causes death or serious bodily injury.\n\nIf marijuana were moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, it could in theory be dispensed and used by prescription for medical purposes. However, prescription drugs must be approved by FDA. Although FDA has [approved some drugs](https:\/\/www.fda.gov\/news-events\/public-health-focus\/fda-and-cannabis-research-and-drug-approval-process) derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. If one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions from medical providers to comply with federal law.\n\nCannabis Under State Law\n\nIn addition to the federal CSA, each state has its own controlled substance laws. State substance control laws often roughly mirror federal law, and such laws are relatively uniform across states, because many states have adopted versions of a model statute called the [Uniform Controlled Substances Act](https:\/\/www.uniformlaws.org\/committees\/community-home?CommunityKey=9873a9bf-7335-4be7-855d-b17c9e8ff3dd). However, there is [not a complete overlap](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=17359543929331018150&q=473+F.3d+1072&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p1078) between drugs subject to federal and state control. States have sometimes opted to impose state law controls that are either more or less strict than those of the CSA.\n\nOne area where federal and state controlled substance laws diverge significantly is marijuana regulation. While every state once broadly prohibited the production, distribution, and possession of marijuana, in the past few decades many states have repealed or limited such prohibitions. As of May 2024, the District of Columbia, three territories, and all but three states have changed their laws to permit the use of [cannabis for medical purposes](https:\/\/www.ncsl.org\/health\/state-medical-cannabis-laws). In addition, 24 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia have repealed prohibitions on [recreational marijuana](https:\/\/norml.org\/legal\/legalization) use by adults age 21 or older. State laws relaxing controls on cannabis vary in scope. Some states permit medical use of cannabis only for [certain medical conditions](https:\/\/dph.georgia.gov\/low-thc-oil-registry) or restrict the means of administration by, for example, [limiting THC content](https:\/\/guides.sll.texas.gov\/cannabis\/compassionate-use) or [forbidding the use of smokeable cannabis](https:\/\/law.justia.com\/codes\/georgia\/2015\/title-16\/chapter-12\/article-8\/section-16-12-191) for medical purposes. With respect to non-medical marijuana, some states have [broadly repealed criminal prohibitions](https:\/\/cannabis.colorado.gov\/legal-marijuana-use\/laws-about-marijuana-use) on adult use of marijuana and fostered a state-legal recreational cannabis industry. Other states have more narrowly [decriminalized marijuana](https:\/\/norml.org\/laws\/decriminalization\/), removing some criminal prohibitions but maintaining civil penalties for marijuana-related activities. Following these changes to state law, medical and recreational cannabis businesses have begun operating openly in some parts of the United States.\n\nThe Federal-State Divide and Its Legal Consequences\n\nNotwithstanding the foregoing state laws, any activity involving marijuana that is not authorized under the CSA remains a [federal crime](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) anywhere in the United States, including in states that have purported to legalize medical or recreational marijuana. The Supreme Court has held that state laws authorizing medical marijuana use [do not affect the CSA's restrictions](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=15647611274064109718&q=545+U.S.+1&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p29). Thus, when states \"legalize\" a federally controlled substance such as marijuana, the sole result is that the substance is no longer controlled *under state law*. As discussed in another [Legal Sidebar](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB11105), moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would have some impact on marijuana users and businesses but would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law.\n\nActivities that violate the CSA may give rise to federal criminal prosecution. As a practical matter, however, DEA and DOJ [lack the resources to prosecute all violations](https:\/\/www.gao.gov\/assets\/680\/674464.pdf#page=14) of the CSA. [DOJ](https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/opa\/legacy\/2009\/10\/19\/medical-marijuana.pdf) [guidance](https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/oip\/legacy\/2014\/07\/23\/dag-guidance-2011-for-medical-marijuana-use.pdf) [memoranda](https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/iso\/opa\/resources\/3052013829132756857467.pdf) from the Obama Administration broadly affirmed federal authority to prosecute such activities but also indicated that DOJ would generally not prioritize prosecution of activities involving medical marijuana that complied with state law. Under the Trump Administration, DOJ [rescinded that guidance](https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/opa\/press-release\/file\/1022196\/download), instead reaffirming the authority of federal prosecutors to exercise prosecutorial discretion to target federal marijuana offenses \"in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and appropriations.\" DOJ has not issued formal guidance on marijuana policy during the Biden Administration, but Attorney General Merrick Garland has [indicated](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/event\/117th-congress\/senate-event\/332392\/text) that the agency will not prioritize prosecuting individuals for personal use of marijuana. Notwithstanding the changes in guidance, [data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission](https:\/\/www.ussc.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/pdf\/research-and-publications\/quick-facts\/Marijuana_FY22.pdf) indicate that the number of federal marijuana trafficking prosecutions decreased every year between FY2018 and FY2022.\n\nThe reference to appropriations in the DOJ guidance is significant, because in each budget cycle since FY2015, Congress has passed an [appropriations rider](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB10694) barring DOJ from using taxpayer funds to prevent states from \"implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.\" The appropriations rider thus prohibits federal prosecution of state-legal activities involving *medical marijuana*. However, it poses no bar to prosecution of activities involving *recreational marijuana*. Moreover, the rider does not remove criminal liability; it merely prevents enforcement of the CSA in certain circumstances. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has [explained](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=14800733384205205829&q=833+F.3d+1163&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#%5B5%5D), if Congress repealed the appropriations rider, DOJ would be able to prosecute violations of the CSA that occurred while the rider was in effect, subject to the applicable statute of limitations.\n\nEven absent criminal prosecution or conviction, individuals and organizations engaged in marijuana-related activities in violation of the CSA—including participants in the state-legal cannabis industry—may face collateral consequences arising from the federal prohibition of marijuana. Other federal laws impose legal consequences based on criminal activity, including violations of the CSA. For example, a financial institution handling income from an illegal marijuana business may violate federal [anti-money laundering laws](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45726). The presence of income from a marijuana-related business may also prevent a bankruptcy court from [confirming a bankruptcy plan](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title11-section1129&num=0&edition=prelim) (though courts [have](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=1285469564547447585&q=922+F.3d+1031&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p1032) [split](https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=11696028104615878729&q=484+B.R.+799&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p809) on the issue). Likewise, marijuana businesses may be [ineligible for certain federal tax deductions](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title26-section280E&num=0&edition=prelim). (This restriction applies only to activities involving substances in Schedule I or II, so moving marijuana to Schedule III would allow marijuana businesses to [deduct business expenses](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R46709) on federal tax filings.)\n\nFor individuals, participation in the state-legal marijuana industry may have [adverse immigration consequences](https:\/\/www.ecfr.gov\/current\/title-8\/chapter-I\/subchapter-C\/part-316\/section-316.10). Violations of the CSA may also affect individuals' ability to receive [certain](https:\/\/www.jdsupra.com\/legalnews\/sowing-the-seeds-of-marijuana-60882\/) federal [government](https:\/\/www.barrons.com\/articles\/army-veteran-marijuana-job-pension-51556595661)[benefits](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R42394). In addition, federal law [prohibits gun ownership and possession](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section922&num=0&edition=prelim) by any person who is an \"unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance,\" with no exception for users of state-legal medical marijuana.\n\nConsiderations for Congress\n\nEither Congress or DEA has the authority to change the status of marijuana under the CSA. DEA is currently considering whether to reschedule marijuana via [formal rulemaking](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section811&num=0&edition=prelim). DEA's proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III will be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget and will then be released and subject to public comment, meaning that final action will likely take months after a proposed rule is published. Congress possesses broad authority to change the status of marijuana by legislation before or after DEA makes any final scheduling decision. If Congress seeks to regulate marijuana more stringently, it could, among other options, repeal the appropriations rider discussed above, increase DOJ funding to prosecute CSA violations, or [limit federal funds](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/5323\/text) for states that legalize marijuana. However, most [recent proposals](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948) before Congress seek to relax federal restrictions on marijuana or mitigate the disparity between federal and state marijuana regulation. Some proposals would [remove marijuana from regulation under the CSA](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/6028\/text) entirely or move itto a [less restrictive schedule](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/610\/text). Other proposed legislation would leave marijuana in Schedule I but [limit](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/6673\/text)[enforcement](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/6673\/text) of federal marijuana law in states that elect to legalize marijuana. Additional proposals would seek to address specific legal consequences of marijuana's Schedule I status by, for example, enabling marijuana businesses to access [banking](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/116th-congress\/house-bill\/1595)[services](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/senate-bill\/2860\/text) or removing collateral consequences for individuals in areas such as [immigration](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/116th-congress\/house-bill\/4390\/text), [federally assisted housing](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/7094\/text), and [gun ownership](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-bill\/2772\/text).\n\nChanges to the status of marijuana under the CSA could raise additional legal questions. For instance, FDA regulates certain cannabis products under the [Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act](https:\/\/uscode.house.gov\/view.xhtml?path=\/prelim@title21\/chapter9&edition=prelim), so Congress might also consider whether to alter that regulatory regime. In addition, it is possible that relaxing the CSA's restrictions on marijuana could implicate the United States' [international treaty obligations](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948). For further information on proposed reforms and legal and policy issues related to marijuana's status under the CSA, see CRS In Focus IF12270, [*The Federal Status of Marijuana and the Policy Gap with States*](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/IF12270), by Lisa N. Sacco, Joanna R. Lampe, and Hassan Z. Sheikh; CRS Legal Sidebar LSB11105, [*Legal Consequences of Rescheduling Marijuana*](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/LSB11105), by Joanna R. Lampe; and CRS Report R45948, [*The Controlled Substances Act (CSA): A Legal Overview for the 11**8**th Congress*](https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/crs-product\/R45948), by Joanna R. Lampe.","meta_canonical":null}

3. Robots.txt Check

Query:

Response:

4. Spam/Ban Check

Query:

Response:

5. Seen Status Check

ℹ️ Skipped - page is already crawled

📄

INDEXABLE

✅

CRAWLED

16 days ago

🤖

ROBOTS ALLOWED

Page Info Filters

Filter	Status	Condition	Details
HTTP status	PASS	`download_http_code = 200`	HTTP 200
Age cutoff	PASS	`download_stamp > now() - 6 MONTH`	0.6 months ago
History drop	PASS	`isNull(history_drop_reason)`	No drop reason
Spam/ban	PASS	`fh_dont_index != 1 AND ml_spam_score = 0`	ml_spam_score=0
Canonical	PASS	`meta_canonical IS NULL OR = '' OR = src_unparsed`	Not set

Page Details

Property	Value
URL	https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482
Last Crawled	2026-04-01 22:23:34 (16 days ago)
First Indexed	2025-05-01 08:53:13 (11 months ago)
HTTP Status Code	200
Meta Title	State Marijuana “Legalization” and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress \| Congress.gov \| Library of Congress
Meta Description	null
Meta Canonical	null
Boilerpipe Text	State Marijuana "Legalization" and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress State marijuana laws have changed significantly in recent years, and federal law appears poised to change in the coming months. At the state level, many states have enacted laws authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. A smaller but growing number of states have also amended their laws to legalize or decriminalize marijuana use. At the federal level, in April 2024, news outlets reported that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) planned to change the status of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) by moving it from Schedule I to the less restrictive Schedule III. Under current law, many cannabis-related activities that comply with state law may nonetheless violate the federal CSA. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not bring state-legal marijuana markets into compliance with federal law. In light of recent and proposed changes to state and federal marijuana regulation, this Sidebar provides an overview of the divergence between federal and state marijuana law. It then briefly discusses the legal consequences of the divergence and outlines certain related considerations for Congress. Classifying Cannabis Under Federal Law The plant Cannabis sativa L. and products derived from that plant have a number of uses and may be subject to several overlapping legal regimes. Some of the chemicals found in cannabis, known as cannabinoids, produce a psychoactive effect. Thus, varietals of cannabis containing significant amounts of those chemicals, particularly the psychoactive cannabinoid delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), may be used as a recreational drug . Cannabis and cannabis derivatives—including the non-psychoactive cannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD)—may also be used for medical purposes . In addition, low-THC varietals of cannabis, often called hemp , have varied commercial and industrial applications including use in building materials, fibers, and personal care products. Cannabis generally falls within one of two categories under federal law: marijuana or hemp . Unless an exception applies, the CSA classifies the cannabis plant and its derivatives as marijuana . However, the CSA definition of marijuana excludes (1) products that meet the legal definition of hemp (discussed below) and (2) the mature stalks of the cannabis plant; the sterilized seeds of the plant; and fibers, oils, and other products made from the stalks and seeds. Federal law defines hemp as the cannabis plant or any part of that plant with a THC concentration of no more than 0.3%. Cannabis that contains such low levels of THC is not psychoactive and does not produce the "high" associated with marijuana. Notwithstanding the lack of psychoactive effect, until late 2018 most cannabis, including hemp, was legally classified as marijuana regardless of THC content, making it subject to regulation under the CSA. In December 2018, Congress enacted the 2018 farm bill , which amended the CSA to provide that hemp that meets the foregoing legal definition is not a controlled substance. Although hemp is no longer a controlled substance under the CSA, it remains subject to federal regulation. For instance, the Department of Agriculture regulates hemp production, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates some hemp-derived consumer products. Marijuana Under the CSA If a substance falls within the CSA's definition of marijuana, it is a Schedule I controlled substance under the statute and is subject to the most stringent federal substance controls . As background, the CSA imposes comprehensive regulatory controls on drugs and other substances that pose a risk of abuse and dependence. The CSA applies to both medical and recreational drugs and aims to protect public health from the dangers of controlled substances while also ensuring that patients have access to pharmaceutical controlled substances for legitimate medical purposes. Substances become subject to the CSA through placement in one of five lists, known as Schedules I through V . Either Congress (by legislation) or DEA (by rulemaking) can alter the status of a substance under the CSA by adding a substance to one of the schedules, moving it to a different schedule, or removing the substance from control altogether. A lower schedule number carries greater restrictions, meaning that controlled substances in Schedule I are subject to the most stringent controls. Placement in Schedule I reflects a finding that a substance has a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use, and "a lack of accepted safety for use … under medical supervision." Because Schedule I controlled substances have no accepted medical use, they may not legally be dispensed by prescription. By contrast, controlled substances in Schedules II through V have accepted medical uses and pose progressively lower risks of abuse and dependence. Unlike substances in Schedule I, those substances may be dispensed by prescription for medical purposes. Although some drugs subject to the CSA may colloquially be called "illegal drugs," the CSA does not fully ban any substances. It is legal to produce, distribute, and possess Schedule I substances in the context of federally approved scientific studies , subject to CSA regulatory requirements designed to prevent abuse and diversion. For example, DEA-registered researchers must maintain records of transactions involving controlled substances and establish security measures to prevent theft of such substances. If a registrant violates the CSA's requirements , DEA may take administrative enforcement action. In the event of a knowing violation, the Department of Justice (DOJ) may bring criminal charges. Activities involving controlled substances not authorized under the CSA are federal crimes that may give rise to large fines and significant jail time. Penalties vary according to the nature of the unauthorized activity and the type and amount of the controlled substance at issue. With regard to marijuana specifically, unauthorized simple possession may prompt a minimum fine of $1,000 and a term of up to a year in prison, or a civil penalty for possession of a small amount for personal use . Illicit distribution of large quantities of marijuana carries a prison sentence of 10 years to life and a fine of up to $10 million for an individual or a fine of up to $50 million for an organization. Penalties increase for subsequent offenses or if use of the substance causes death or serious bodily injury. If marijuana were moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, it could in theory be dispensed and used by prescription for medical purposes. However, prescription drugs must be approved by FDA. Although FDA has approved some drugs derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. If one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions from medical providers to comply with federal law. Cannabis Under State Law In addition to the federal CSA, each state has its own controlled substance laws. State substance control laws often roughly mirror federal law, and such laws are relatively uniform across states, because many states have adopted versions of a model statute called the Uniform Controlled Substances Act . However, there is not a complete overlap between drugs subject to federal and state control. States have sometimes opted to impose state law controls that are either more or less strict than those of the CSA. One area where federal and state controlled substance laws diverge significantly is marijuana regulation. While every state once broadly prohibited the production, distribution, and possession of marijuana, in the past few decades many states have repealed or limited such prohibitions. As of May 2024, the District of Columbia, three territories, and all but three states have changed their laws to permit the use of cannabis for medical purposes . In addition, 24 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia have repealed prohibitions on recreational marijuana use by adults age 21 or older. State laws relaxing controls on cannabis vary in scope. Some states permit medical use of cannabis only for certain medical conditions or restrict the means of administration by, for example, limiting THC content or forbidding the use of smokeable cannabis for medical purposes. With respect to non-medical marijuana, some states have broadly repealed criminal prohibitions on adult use of marijuana and fostered a state-legal recreational cannabis industry. Other states have more narrowly decriminalized marijuana , removing some criminal prohibitions but maintaining civil penalties for marijuana-related activities. Following these changes to state law, medical and recreational cannabis businesses have begun operating openly in some parts of the United States. The Federal-State Divide and Its Legal Consequences Notwithstanding the foregoing state laws, any activity involving marijuana that is not authorized under the CSA remains a federal crime anywhere in the United States, including in states that have purported to legalize medical or recreational marijuana. The Supreme Court has held that state laws authorizing medical marijuana use do not affect the CSA's restrictions . Thus, when states "legalize" a federally controlled substance such as marijuana, the sole result is that the substance is no longer controlled under state law . As discussed in another Legal Sidebar , moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would have some impact on marijuana users and businesses but would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law. Activities that violate the CSA may give rise to federal criminal prosecution. As a practical matter, however, DEA and DOJ lack the resources to prosecute all violations of the CSA. DOJ guidance memoranda from the Obama Administration broadly affirmed federal authority to prosecute such activities but also indicated that DOJ would generally not prioritize prosecution of activities involving medical marijuana that complied with state law. Under the Trump Administration, DOJ rescinded that guidance , instead reaffirming the authority of federal prosecutors to exercise prosecutorial discretion to target federal marijuana offenses "in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and appropriations." DOJ has not issued formal guidance on marijuana policy during the Biden Administration, but Attorney General Merrick Garland has indicated that the agency will not prioritize prosecuting individuals for personal use of marijuana. Notwithstanding the changes in guidance, data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission indicate that the number of federal marijuana trafficking prosecutions decreased every year between FY2018 and FY2022. The reference to appropriations in the DOJ guidance is significant, because in each budget cycle since FY2015, Congress has passed an appropriations rider barring DOJ from using taxpayer funds to prevent states from "implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana." The appropriations rider thus prohibits federal prosecution of state-legal activities involving medical marijuana . However, it poses no bar to prosecution of activities involving recreational marijuana . Moreover, the rider does not remove criminal liability; it merely prevents enforcement of the CSA in certain circumstances. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has explained , if Congress repealed the appropriations rider, DOJ would be able to prosecute violations of the CSA that occurred while the rider was in effect, subject to the applicable statute of limitations. Even absent criminal prosecution or conviction, individuals and organizations engaged in marijuana-related activities in violation of the CSA—including participants in the state-legal cannabis industry—may face collateral consequences arising from the federal prohibition of marijuana. Other federal laws impose legal consequences based on criminal activity, including violations of the CSA. For example, a financial institution handling income from an illegal marijuana business may violate federal anti-money laundering laws . The presence of income from a marijuana-related business may also prevent a bankruptcy court from confirming a bankruptcy plan (though courts have split on the issue). Likewise, marijuana businesses may be ineligible for certain federal tax deductions . (This restriction applies only to activities involving substances in Schedule I or II, so moving marijuana to Schedule III would allow marijuana businesses to deduct business expenses on federal tax filings.) For individuals, participation in the state-legal marijuana industry may have adverse immigration consequences . Violations of the CSA may also affect individuals' ability to receive certain federal government benefits . In addition, federal law prohibits gun ownership and possession by any person who is an "unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance," with no exception for users of state-legal medical marijuana. Considerations for Congress Either Congress or DEA has the authority to change the status of marijuana under the CSA. DEA is currently considering whether to reschedule marijuana via formal rulemaking . DEA's proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III will be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget and will then be released and subject to public comment, meaning that final action will likely take months after a proposed rule is published. Congress possesses broad authority to change the status of marijuana by legislation before or after DEA makes any final scheduling decision. If Congress seeks to regulate marijuana more stringently, it could, among other options, repeal the appropriations rider discussed above, increase DOJ funding to prosecute CSA violations, or limit federal funds for states that legalize marijuana. However, most recent proposals before Congress seek to relax federal restrictions on marijuana or mitigate the disparity between federal and state marijuana regulation. Some proposals would remove marijuana from regulation under the CSA entirely or move it to a less restrictive schedule . Other proposed legislation would leave marijuana in Schedule I but limit enforcement of federal marijuana law in states that elect to legalize marijuana. Additional proposals would seek to address specific legal consequences of marijuana's Schedule I status by, for example, enabling marijuana businesses to access banking services or removing collateral consequences for individuals in areas such as immigration , federally assisted housing , and gun ownership . Changes to the status of marijuana under the CSA could raise additional legal questions. For instance, FDA regulates certain cannabis products under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act , so Congress might also consider whether to alter that regulatory regime. In addition, it is possible that relaxing the CSA's restrictions on marijuana could implicate the United States' international treaty obligations . For further information on proposed reforms and legal and policy issues related to marijuana's status under the CSA, see CRS In Focus IF12270, The Federal Status of Marijuana and the Policy Gap with States , by Lisa N. Sacco, Joanna R. Lampe, and Hassan Z. Sheikh; CRS Legal Sidebar LSB11105, Legal Consequences of Rescheduling Marijuana , by Joanna R. Lampe; and CRS Report R45948, The Controlled Substances Act (CSA): A Legal Overview for the 11 8 th Congress , by Joanna R. Lampe.
Markdown	[skip to main content](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#content) Alert: For a better experience on Congress.gov, please enable JavaScript in your browser. Navigation [![Congress.gov](https://www.congress.gov/img/svg/congress-gov-logo.svg)](https://www.congress.gov/) - [Advanced Searches](https://www.congress.gov/advanced-search/legislation) - [Browse](https://www.congress.gov/browse) - [Legislation](https://www.congress.gov/legislation?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%7D) - [Congressional Record](https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record) - [Committees](https://www.congress.gov/committees) - [Members](https://www.congress.gov/members?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%7D) - [Search Tools](https://www.congress.gov/help/search-tools-overview) - [Support](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482) - [Glossary](https://www.congress.gov/help/legislative-glossary) - [Help](https://www.congress.gov/help) - [Contact](https://www.congress.gov/contact-us) [Close](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482) - Browse the [Help Center](https://www.congress.gov/help) - [Glossary](https://www.congress.gov/help/legislative-glossary) - [Contact](https://www.congress.gov/contact-us) - Congressional Documents - [Legislation](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#legislation) - [Legislation Text](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#legislation-text) - [Committee Reports](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#committee-reports) - [Congressional Record](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#congressional-record) - [Nominations](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#nominations) - [House Communications](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#house-communications) - [Senate Communications](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#senate-communications) - [Treaty Documents](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#treaty-documents) - Library of Congress Documents - [CRS Products](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#crs-products) [Fewer Options](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482) [More Options](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482) [Citation](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#citation) [Subscribe](https://www.congress.gov/get-alerts) [Share/Save](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#share) [Site Feedback](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482#survey) [Home](https://www.congress.gov/) \> [CRS Products (Library of Congress)](https://www.congress.gov/crs-products) \> LSB10482 # State Marijuana “Legalization” and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress ## CRS PRODUCT (LIBRARY OF CONGRESS) [Hide Overview](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482) \| \| \| \|---\|---\| \| CRS Product Type: \| Legal Sidebar \| \| CRS Product Number: \| LSB10482 \| \| Topics: \| Justice & Law Enforcement \| \| Publication Date: \| 05/14/2024 \| \| Author: \| Lampe, Joanna R. \| [Download PDF (574KB)](https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10482/LSB10482.4.pdf) \\| [PDF Version History](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482) - [May 14, 2024 (LSB10482 - Version: 4)](https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10482/LSB10482.4.pdf) - [May 14, 2024 (LSB10482 - Version: 3)](https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10482/LSB10482.3.pdf) - [May 29, 2020 (LSB10482 - Version: 2)](https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/LSB/PDF/LSB10482/LSB10482.2.pdf) [Listen](https://app-na.readspeaker.com/cgi-bin/rsent?customerid=6927&lang=en_us&readid=dvContainer&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482 "Listen to this page using ReadSpeaker webReader") State Marijuana "Legalization" and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress Updated May 14, 2024 (LSB10482) State marijuana laws have changed significantly in recent years, and federal law appears poised to change in the coming months. At the state level, many states have [enacted laws](http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-medical-marijuana-laws.aspx) authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. A smaller but growing number of states have also amended their laws to legalize or decriminalize marijuana use. At the federal level, in April 2024, news outlets reported that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) planned to [change the status of marijuana](https://apnews.com/article/marijuana-biden-dea-criminal-justice-pot-f833a8dae6ceb31a8658a5d65832a3b8) under the [Controlled Substances Act](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title21/chapter13&edition=prelim) (CSA) by moving it from Schedule I to the less restrictive Schedule III. Under current law, many cannabis-related activities that comply with statelaw may nonetheless violate the federal CSA. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not bring state-legal marijuana markets into compliance with federal law. In light of recent and proposed changes to state and federal marijuana regulation, this Sidebar provides an overview of the divergence between federal and state marijuana law. It then briefly discusses the legal consequences of the divergence and outlines certain related considerations for Congress. Classifying Cannabis Under Federal Law The plant Cannabis sativa L. and products derived from that plant have a number of uses and may be subject to several overlapping legal regimes. Some of the chemicals found in cannabis, known as cannabinoids, produce a psychoactive effect. Thus, varietals of cannabis containing significant amounts of those chemicals, particularly the psychoactive cannabinoid [delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol](https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/media-guide/glossary) (THC), may be used as a [recreational drug](https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana). Cannabis and cannabis derivatives—including the non-psychoactive cannabinoid [cannabidiol](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46189) (CBD)—may also be used for [medical purposes](https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-drug-comprised-active-ingredient-derived-marijuana-treat-rare-severe-forms). In addition, low-THC varietals of cannabis, often called [hemp](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R44742), have varied commercial and industrial applications including use in building materials, fibers, and personal care products. Cannabis generally falls within one of two categories under federal law: marijuana or hemp. Unless an exception applies, the CSA classifies the cannabis plant and its derivatives as [marijuana](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section802&num=0&edition=prelim). However, the CSA definition of marijuana excludes (1) products that meet the legal definition of hemp (discussed below) and (2) the mature stalks of the cannabis plant; the sterilized seeds of the plant; and fibers, oils, and other products made from the stalks and seeds. Federal law defines [hemp](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title7-section1639o&num=0&edition=prelim) as the cannabis plant or any part of that plant with a THC concentration of no more than 0.3%. Cannabis that contains such low levels of THC is [not psychoactive](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R44742) and does not produce the "high" associated with marijuana. Notwithstanding the lack of psychoactive effect, until late 2018 most cannabis, including hemp, was legally classified as marijuana regardless of THC content, making it subject to regulation under the CSA. In December 2018, Congress enacted the [2018 farm bill](https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2/text), which amended the CSA to provide that hemp that meets the foregoing legal definition is not a controlled substance. Although hemp is no longer a controlled substance under the CSA, it remains subject to federal regulation. For instance, the [Department of Agriculture](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF11088) regulates hemp production, and the [Food and Drug Administration](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF11250) (FDA) regulates some hemp-derived consumer products. Marijuana Under the CSA If a substance falls within the CSA's definition of marijuana, it is a [Schedule I controlled substance](https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/orangebook/c_cs_alpha.pdf#page=13) under the statute and is subject to the [most stringent federal substance controls](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section823&num=0&edition=prelim). As background, the CSA imposes [comprehensive regulatory controls](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) on drugs and other substances that pose a risk of abuse and dependence. The CSA applies to both medical and recreational drugs and aims to protect public health from the dangers of controlled substances while also ensuring that patients have access to pharmaceutical controlled substances for legitimate medical purposes. Substances become subject to the CSA through placement in one of five lists, known as [Schedules I through V](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section812&num=0&edition=prelim). Either Congress (by legislation) or DEA (by rulemaking) can [alter the status](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section811&num=0&edition=prelim) of a substance under the CSA by adding a substance to one of the schedules, moving it to a different schedule, or removing the substance from control altogether. A lower schedule number carries greater restrictions, meaning that controlled substances in Schedule I are subject to the most stringent controls. [Placement in Schedule I](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section812&num=0&edition=prelim) reflects a finding that a substance has a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use, and "a lack of accepted safety for use … under medical supervision." Because Schedule I controlled substances have no accepted medical use, they may not legally be dispensed by prescription. By contrast, controlled substances in [Schedules II through V](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) have accepted medical uses and pose progressively lower risks of abuse and dependence. Unlike substances in Schedule I, those substances [may be dispensed by prescription](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section829&num=0&edition=prelim) for medical purposes. Although some drugs subject to the CSA may colloquially be called "illegal drugs," the CSA does not fully ban any substances. It is legal to produce, distribute, and possess Schedule I substances in the context of [federally approved scientific studies](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section823&num=0&edition=prelim), subject to [CSA regulatory requirements](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) designed to prevent abuse and diversion. For example, DEA-registered researchers must maintain records of transactions involving controlled substances and establish security measures to prevent theft of such substances. If a registrant [violates the CSA's requirements](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948), DEA may take administrative enforcement action. In the event of a knowing violation, the Department of Justice (DOJ) may bring criminal charges. Activities involving controlled substances not authorized under the CSA are federal crimes that may give rise to large fines and significant jail time. Penalties vary according to the nature of the unauthorized activity and the type and amount of the controlled substance at issue. With regard to marijuana specifically, [unauthorized simple possession](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section844&num=0&edition=prelim) may prompt a minimum fine of \$1,000 and a term of up to a year in prison, or a civil penalty for possession of a small amount for [personal use](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title21-section844a&num=0&saved=%7CZ3JhbnVsZWlkOlVTQy1wcmVsaW0tdGl0bGUyMS1zZWN0aW9uODQ0%7C%7C%7C0%7Cfalse%7Cprelim). Illicit [distribution of large quantities of marijuana](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section841&num=0&edition=prelim) carries a prison sentence of 10 years to life and a fine of up to \$10 million for an individual or a fine of up to \$50 million for an organization. Penalties increase for subsequent offenses or if use of the substance causes death or serious bodily injury. If marijuana were moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, it could in theory be dispensed and used by prescription for medical purposes. However, prescription drugs must be approved by FDA. Although FDA has [approved some drugs](https://www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/fda-and-cannabis-research-and-drug-approval-process) derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. If one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions from medical providers to comply with federal law. Cannabis Under State Law In addition to the federal CSA, each state has its own controlled substance laws. State substance control laws often roughly mirror federal law, and such laws are relatively uniform across states, because many states have adopted versions of a model statute called the [Uniform Controlled Substances Act](https://www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=9873a9bf-7335-4be7-855d-b17c9e8ff3dd). However, there is [not a complete overlap](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17359543929331018150&q=473+F.3d+1072&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p1078) between drugs subject to federal and state control. States have sometimes opted to impose state law controls that are either more or less strict than those of the CSA. One area where federal and state controlled substance laws diverge significantly is marijuana regulation. While every state once broadly prohibited the production, distribution, and possession of marijuana, in the past few decades many states have repealed or limited such prohibitions. As of May 2024, the District of Columbia, three territories, and all but three states have changed their laws to permit the use of [cannabis for medical purposes](https://www.ncsl.org/health/state-medical-cannabis-laws). In addition, 24 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia have repealed prohibitions on [recreational marijuana](https://norml.org/legal/legalization) use by adults age 21 or older. State laws relaxing controls on cannabis vary in scope. Some states permit medical use of cannabis only for [certain medical conditions](https://dph.georgia.gov/low-thc-oil-registry) or restrict the means of administration by, for example, [limiting THC content](https://guides.sll.texas.gov/cannabis/compassionate-use) or [forbidding the use of smokeable cannabis](https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2015/title-16/chapter-12/article-8/section-16-12-191) for medical purposes. With respect to non-medical marijuana, some states have [broadly repealed criminal prohibitions](https://cannabis.colorado.gov/legal-marijuana-use/laws-about-marijuana-use) on adult use of marijuana and fostered a state-legal recreational cannabis industry. Other states have more narrowly [decriminalized marijuana](https://norml.org/laws/decriminalization/), removing some criminal prohibitions but maintaining civil penalties for marijuana-related activities. Following these changes to state law, medical and recreational cannabis businesses have begun operating openly in some parts of the United States. The Federal-State Divide and Its Legal Consequences Notwithstanding the foregoing state laws, any activity involving marijuana that is not authorized under the CSA remains a [federal crime](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) anywhere in the United States, including in states that have purported to legalize medical or recreational marijuana. The Supreme Court has held that state laws authorizing medical marijuana use [do not affect the CSA's restrictions](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15647611274064109718&q=545+U.S.+1&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p29). Thus, when states "legalize" a federally controlled substance such as marijuana, the sole result is that the substance is no longer controlled under state law. As discussed in another [Legal Sidebar](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11105), moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would have some impact on marijuana users and businesses but would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law. Activities that violate the CSA may give rise to federal criminal prosecution. As a practical matter, however, DEA and DOJ [lack the resources to prosecute all violations](https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/674464.pdf#page=14) of the CSA. [DOJ](https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/legacy/2009/10/19/medical-marijuana.pdf) [guidance](https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/oip/legacy/2014/07/23/dag-guidance-2011-for-medical-marijuana-use.pdf) [memoranda](https://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/3052013829132756857467.pdf) from the Obama Administration broadly affirmed federal authority to prosecute such activities but also indicated that DOJ would generally not prioritize prosecution of activities involving medical marijuana that complied with state law. Under the Trump Administration, DOJ [rescinded that guidance](https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1022196/download), instead reaffirming the authority of federal prosecutors to exercise prosecutorial discretion to target federal marijuana offenses "in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and appropriations." DOJ has not issued formal guidance on marijuana policy during the Biden Administration, but Attorney General Merrick Garland has [indicated](https://www.congress.gov/event/117th-congress/senate-event/332392/text) that the agency will not prioritize prosecuting individuals for personal use of marijuana. Notwithstanding the changes in guidance, [data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission](https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/quick-facts/Marijuana_FY22.pdf) indicate that the number of federal marijuana trafficking prosecutions decreased every year between FY2018 and FY2022. The reference to appropriations in the DOJ guidance is significant, because in each budget cycle since FY2015, Congress has passed an [appropriations rider](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10694) barring DOJ from using taxpayer funds to prevent states from "implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana." The appropriations rider thus prohibits federal prosecution of state-legal activities involving medical marijuana. However, it poses no bar to prosecution of activities involving recreational marijuana. Moreover, the rider does not remove criminal liability; it merely prevents enforcement of the CSA in certain circumstances. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has [explained](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14800733384205205829&q=833+F.3d+1163&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#%5B5%5D), if Congress repealed the appropriations rider, DOJ would be able to prosecute violations of the CSA that occurred while the rider was in effect, subject to the applicable statute of limitations. Even absent criminal prosecution or conviction, individuals and organizations engaged in marijuana-related activities in violation of the CSA—including participants in the state-legal cannabis industry—may face collateral consequences arising from the federal prohibition of marijuana. Other federal laws impose legal consequences based on criminal activity, including violations of the CSA. For example, a financial institution handling income from an illegal marijuana business may violate federal [anti-money laundering laws](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45726). The presence of income from a marijuana-related business may also prevent a bankruptcy court from [confirming a bankruptcy plan](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title11-section1129&num=0&edition=prelim) (though courts [have](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1285469564547447585&q=922+F.3d+1031&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p1032) [split](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11696028104615878729&q=484+B.R.+799&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p809) on the issue). Likewise, marijuana businesses may be [ineligible for certain federal tax deductions](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title26-section280E&num=0&edition=prelim). (This restriction applies only to activities involving substances in Schedule I or II, so moving marijuana to Schedule III would allow marijuana businesses to [deduct business expenses](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46709) on federal tax filings.) For individuals, participation in the state-legal marijuana industry may have [adverse immigration consequences](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-316/section-316.10). Violations of the CSA may also affect individuals' ability to receive [certain](https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/sowing-the-seeds-of-marijuana-60882/) federal [government](https://www.barrons.com/articles/army-veteran-marijuana-job-pension-51556595661)[benefits](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R42394). In addition, federal law [prohibits gun ownership and possession](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section922&num=0&edition=prelim) by any person who is an "unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance," with no exception for users of state-legal medical marijuana. Considerations for Congress Either Congress or DEA has the authority to change the status of marijuana under the CSA. DEA is currently considering whether to reschedule marijuana via [formal rulemaking](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section811&num=0&edition=prelim). DEA's proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III will be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget and will then be released and subject to public comment, meaning that final action will likely take months after a proposed rule is published. Congress possesses broad authority to change the status of marijuana by legislation before or after DEA makes any final scheduling decision. If Congress seeks to regulate marijuana more stringently, it could, among other options, repeal the appropriations rider discussed above, increase DOJ funding to prosecute CSA violations, or [limit federal funds](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5323/text) for states that legalize marijuana. However, most [recent proposals](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) before Congress seek to relax federal restrictions on marijuana or mitigate the disparity between federal and state marijuana regulation. Some proposals would [remove marijuana from regulation under the CSA](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6028/text) entirely or move itto a [less restrictive schedule](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/610/text). Other proposed legislation would leave marijuana in Schedule I but [limit](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6673/text)[enforcement](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6673/text) of federal marijuana law in states that elect to legalize marijuana. Additional proposals would seek to address specific legal consequences of marijuana's Schedule I status by, for example, enabling marijuana businesses to access [banking](https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1595)[services](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2860/text) or removing collateral consequences for individuals in areas such as [immigration](https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/4390/text), [federally assisted housing](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7094/text), and [gun ownership](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2772/text). Changes to the status of marijuana under the CSA could raise additional legal questions. For instance, FDA regulates certain cannabis products under the [Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title21/chapter9&edition=prelim), so Congress might also consider whether to alter that regulatory regime. In addition, it is possible that relaxing the CSA's restrictions on marijuana could implicate the United States' [international treaty obligations](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948). For further information on proposed reforms and legal and policy issues related to marijuana's status under the CSA, see CRS In Focus IF12270, [The Federal Status of Marijuana and the Policy Gap with States](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12270), by Lisa N. Sacco, Joanna R. Lampe, and Hassan Z. Sheikh; CRS Legal Sidebar LSB11105, [Legal Consequences of Rescheduling Marijuana](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11105), by Joanna R. Lampe; and CRS Report R45948, [The Controlled Substances Act (CSA): A Legal Overview for the 118th Congress](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948), by Joanna R. Lampe. Disclaimer: These documents were prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. # [![Congress.gov](https://www.congress.gov/img/svg/congress-gov-logo-no-color.svg)](https://www.congress.gov/) ## Site Content - [Legislation](https://www.congress.gov/legislation?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%7D) - [Committee Reports](https://www.congress.gov/committee-reports) - [Committee Meetings](https://www.congress.gov/search?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%2C%22source%22%3A%22committee-meetings%22%7D) - [Committee Publications](https://www.congress.gov/search?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%2C%22source%22%3A%22committee-publications%22%7D) - [Congressional Record](https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record) - [Congressional Record Index](https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/congressional-record-index) - [Members](https://www.congress.gov/members?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A119%7D) - [Nominations](https://www.congress.gov/nominations) - [Treaty Documents](https://www.congress.gov/treaties) - [House Communications](https://www.congress.gov/house-communications) - [Senate Communications](https://www.congress.gov/senate-communications) - [Legislative Process](https://www.congress.gov/legislative-process) - [About Congress.gov](https://www.congress.gov/about) ## Help - [Help](https://www.congress.gov/help) \\| [Feedback](https://www.congress.gov/survey) \\| [Contact Us](https://www.congress.gov/contact-us) - [Glossary](https://www.congress.gov/help/legislative-glossary) - [Search Tools](https://www.congress.gov/help/search-tools-overview) - [Ask a Law Librarian](https://ask.loc.gov/congressdotgov) - [Webinars](https://www.loc.gov/law/learning/us-webinars.php) - [Video](https://www.congress.gov/video) ## Ways to Connect - [@congressdotgov on X (external link)](https://x.com/congressdotgov) - [Congress.gov on YouTube (external link)](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpAGnumt6iV6j07liSyksxaQe_KmPbeow) - [Get Email Alerts and Updates](https://www.congress.gov/get-alerts) - [Blog – In Custodia Legis: Law Librarians of Congress](http://blogs.loc.gov/law/) ## Resources - [Congressional Web Archive](https://www.loc.gov/collections/united-states-congressional-web-archive/about-this-collection/) - [CRS Products](https://www.congress.gov/crs-products) - [U.S. Code](http://uscode.house.gov/) - [GPO govinfo](https://www.govinfo.gov/) - [Law Library of Congress](http://www.loc.gov/law/) - [Guide to Law Online](https://www.loc.gov/research-centers/law-library-of-congress/researcher-resources/guide-to-law-online/) - [Teacher Lesson Plans](http://www.loc.gov/law/find/educational-resources/) - [State Legislature Websites](https://www.congress.gov/state-legislature-websites) - [Bill Status Bulk Data](https://www.congress.gov/help/using-data-offsite) - [Congress.gov API](https://api.congress.gov/) - [Roll Call Votes](https://www.congress.gov/roll-call-votes) - [Constitution Annotated](https://constitution.congress.gov/) - [Law Library Reports](https://www.loc.gov/research-centers/law-library-of-congress/legal-reports/) - [GAO Reports](https://www.gao.gov/reports-testimonies) ## House Links - [House.gov](http://www.house.gov/) - [Floor Activities](http://clerk.house.gov/floorsummary/floor.aspx) - [Representatives](http://www.house.gov/representatives/) - [Committees](http://www.house.gov/committees/) - [Hearings (Video)](https://www.congress.gov/committees/video) - [Bills to Be Considered](http://docs.house.gov/floor/) - [Leadership](https://www.house.gov/leadership) - [History, Art & Archives](http://history.house.gov/) - [More House Resources](https://www.congress.gov/help/house-of-representatives) ## Senate Links - [Senate.gov](http://www.senate.gov/) - [On the Senate Floor](http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/floor_activity/floor_activity.htm) - [Senators](http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm) - [Committees](http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/committees/d_three_sections_with_teasers/committees_home.htm) - [Hearings (Schedule)](http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/committees/b_three_sections_with_teasers/committee_hearings.htm) - [Leadership](http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/senators/a_three_sections_with_teasers/leadership.htm) - [History, Art & Statistics](http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/g_three_sections_with_teasers/reference_home.htm) - [More Senate Resources](https://www.congress.gov/help/senate) - [Legal](https://www.loc.gov/legal) - [Accessibility](https://www.loc.gov/accessibility) - [Help](https://www.congress.gov/help) - [Contact Us](https://www.congress.gov/contact-us) - [External Link Disclaimer](http://www.loc.gov/global/disclaim.html) - [USA.gov](http://www.usa.gov/) - [![Library of Congress](https://www.congress.gov/img/svg/loc-gov-logo.svg)](http://www.loc.gov/) - [![Copyright.gov](https://www.congress.gov/img/svg/copyright-logo.svg)](http://www.copyright.gov/) [Back to top](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10482) Loading...
Readable Markdown	State Marijuana "Legalization" and Federal Drug Law: A Brief Overview for Congress State marijuana laws have changed significantly in recent years, and federal law appears poised to change in the coming months. At the state level, many states have [enacted laws](http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-medical-marijuana-laws.aspx) authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. A smaller but growing number of states have also amended their laws to legalize or decriminalize marijuana use. At the federal level, in April 2024, news outlets reported that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) planned to [change the status of marijuana](https://apnews.com/article/marijuana-biden-dea-criminal-justice-pot-f833a8dae6ceb31a8658a5d65832a3b8) under the [Controlled Substances Act](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title21/chapter13&edition=prelim) (CSA) by moving it from Schedule I to the less restrictive Schedule III. Under current law, many cannabis-related activities that comply with statelaw may nonetheless violate the federal CSA. Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not bring state-legal marijuana markets into compliance with federal law. In light of recent and proposed changes to state and federal marijuana regulation, this Sidebar provides an overview of the divergence between federal and state marijuana law. It then briefly discusses the legal consequences of the divergence and outlines certain related considerations for Congress. Classifying Cannabis Under Federal Law The plant Cannabis sativa L. and products derived from that plant have a number of uses and may be subject to several overlapping legal regimes. Some of the chemicals found in cannabis, known as cannabinoids, produce a psychoactive effect. Thus, varietals of cannabis containing significant amounts of those chemicals, particularly the psychoactive cannabinoid [delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol](https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/media-guide/glossary) (THC), may be used as a [recreational drug](https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana). Cannabis and cannabis derivatives—including the non-psychoactive cannabinoid [cannabidiol](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46189) (CBD)—may also be used for [medical purposes](https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-drug-comprised-active-ingredient-derived-marijuana-treat-rare-severe-forms). In addition, low-THC varietals of cannabis, often called [hemp](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R44742), have varied commercial and industrial applications including use in building materials, fibers, and personal care products. Cannabis generally falls within one of two categories under federal law: marijuana or hemp. Unless an exception applies, the CSA classifies the cannabis plant and its derivatives as [marijuana](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section802&num=0&edition=prelim). However, the CSA definition of marijuana excludes (1) products that meet the legal definition of hemp (discussed below) and (2) the mature stalks of the cannabis plant; the sterilized seeds of the plant; and fibers, oils, and other products made from the stalks and seeds. Federal law defines [hemp](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title7-section1639o&num=0&edition=prelim) as the cannabis plant or any part of that plant with a THC concentration of no more than 0.3%. Cannabis that contains such low levels of THC is [not psychoactive](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R44742) and does not produce the "high" associated with marijuana. Notwithstanding the lack of psychoactive effect, until late 2018 most cannabis, including hemp, was legally classified as marijuana regardless of THC content, making it subject to regulation under the CSA. In December 2018, Congress enacted the [2018 farm bill](https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2/text), which amended the CSA to provide that hemp that meets the foregoing legal definition is not a controlled substance. Although hemp is no longer a controlled substance under the CSA, it remains subject to federal regulation. For instance, the [Department of Agriculture](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF11088) regulates hemp production, and the [Food and Drug Administration](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF11250) (FDA) regulates some hemp-derived consumer products. Marijuana Under the CSA If a substance falls within the CSA's definition of marijuana, it is a [Schedule I controlled substance](https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/orangebook/c_cs_alpha.pdf#page=13) under the statute and is subject to the [most stringent federal substance controls](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section823&num=0&edition=prelim). As background, the CSA imposes [comprehensive regulatory controls](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) on drugs and other substances that pose a risk of abuse and dependence. The CSA applies to both medical and recreational drugs and aims to protect public health from the dangers of controlled substances while also ensuring that patients have access to pharmaceutical controlled substances for legitimate medical purposes. Substances become subject to the CSA through placement in one of five lists, known as [Schedules I through V](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section812&num=0&edition=prelim). Either Congress (by legislation) or DEA (by rulemaking) can [alter the status](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section811&num=0&edition=prelim) of a substance under the CSA by adding a substance to one of the schedules, moving it to a different schedule, or removing the substance from control altogether. A lower schedule number carries greater restrictions, meaning that controlled substances in Schedule I are subject to the most stringent controls. [Placement in Schedule I](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section812&num=0&edition=prelim) reflects a finding that a substance has a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use, and "a lack of accepted safety for use … under medical supervision." Because Schedule I controlled substances have no accepted medical use, they may not legally be dispensed by prescription. By contrast, controlled substances in [Schedules II through V](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) have accepted medical uses and pose progressively lower risks of abuse and dependence. Unlike substances in Schedule I, those substances [may be dispensed by prescription](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section829&num=0&edition=prelim) for medical purposes. Although some drugs subject to the CSA may colloquially be called "illegal drugs," the CSA does not fully ban any substances. It is legal to produce, distribute, and possess Schedule I substances in the context of [federally approved scientific studies](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section823&num=0&edition=prelim), subject to [CSA regulatory requirements](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) designed to prevent abuse and diversion. For example, DEA-registered researchers must maintain records of transactions involving controlled substances and establish security measures to prevent theft of such substances. If a registrant [violates the CSA's requirements](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948), DEA may take administrative enforcement action. In the event of a knowing violation, the Department of Justice (DOJ) may bring criminal charges. Activities involving controlled substances not authorized under the CSA are federal crimes that may give rise to large fines and significant jail time. Penalties vary according to the nature of the unauthorized activity and the type and amount of the controlled substance at issue. With regard to marijuana specifically, [unauthorized simple possession](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section844&num=0&edition=prelim) may prompt a minimum fine of \$1,000 and a term of up to a year in prison, or a civil penalty for possession of a small amount for [personal use](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title21-section844a&num=0&saved=%7CZ3JhbnVsZWlkOlVTQy1wcmVsaW0tdGl0bGUyMS1zZWN0aW9uODQ0%7C%7C%7C0%7Cfalse%7Cprelim). Illicit [distribution of large quantities of marijuana](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section841&num=0&edition=prelim) carries a prison sentence of 10 years to life and a fine of up to \$10 million for an individual or a fine of up to \$50 million for an organization. Penalties increase for subsequent offenses or if use of the substance causes death or serious bodily injury. If marijuana were moved from Schedule I to Schedule III, it could in theory be dispensed and used by prescription for medical purposes. However, prescription drugs must be approved by FDA. Although FDA has [approved some drugs](https://www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/fda-and-cannabis-research-and-drug-approval-process) derived from or related to cannabis, marijuana itself is not an FDA-approved drug. If one or more marijuana products obtained FDA approval, manufacturers and distributors would need to register with DEA and comply with regulatory requirements that apply to Schedule III substances in order to handle those products. Users of medical marijuana would need to obtain valid prescriptions from medical providers to comply with federal law. Cannabis Under State Law In addition to the federal CSA, each state has its own controlled substance laws. State substance control laws often roughly mirror federal law, and such laws are relatively uniform across states, because many states have adopted versions of a model statute called the [Uniform Controlled Substances Act](https://www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=9873a9bf-7335-4be7-855d-b17c9e8ff3dd). However, there is [not a complete overlap](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17359543929331018150&q=473+F.3d+1072&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p1078) between drugs subject to federal and state control. States have sometimes opted to impose state law controls that are either more or less strict than those of the CSA. One area where federal and state controlled substance laws diverge significantly is marijuana regulation. While every state once broadly prohibited the production, distribution, and possession of marijuana, in the past few decades many states have repealed or limited such prohibitions. As of May 2024, the District of Columbia, three territories, and all but three states have changed their laws to permit the use of [cannabis for medical purposes](https://www.ncsl.org/health/state-medical-cannabis-laws). In addition, 24 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia have repealed prohibitions on [recreational marijuana](https://norml.org/legal/legalization) use by adults age 21 or older. State laws relaxing controls on cannabis vary in scope. Some states permit medical use of cannabis only for [certain medical conditions](https://dph.georgia.gov/low-thc-oil-registry) or restrict the means of administration by, for example, [limiting THC content](https://guides.sll.texas.gov/cannabis/compassionate-use) or [forbidding the use of smokeable cannabis](https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2015/title-16/chapter-12/article-8/section-16-12-191) for medical purposes. With respect to non-medical marijuana, some states have [broadly repealed criminal prohibitions](https://cannabis.colorado.gov/legal-marijuana-use/laws-about-marijuana-use) on adult use of marijuana and fostered a state-legal recreational cannabis industry. Other states have more narrowly [decriminalized marijuana](https://norml.org/laws/decriminalization/), removing some criminal prohibitions but maintaining civil penalties for marijuana-related activities. Following these changes to state law, medical and recreational cannabis businesses have begun operating openly in some parts of the United States. The Federal-State Divide and Its Legal Consequences Notwithstanding the foregoing state laws, any activity involving marijuana that is not authorized under the CSA remains a [federal crime](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) anywhere in the United States, including in states that have purported to legalize medical or recreational marijuana. The Supreme Court has held that state laws authorizing medical marijuana use [do not affect the CSA's restrictions](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15647611274064109718&q=545+U.S.+1&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p29). Thus, when states "legalize" a federally controlled substance such as marijuana, the sole result is that the substance is no longer controlled under state law. As discussed in another [Legal Sidebar](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11105), moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, without other legal changes, would have some impact on marijuana users and businesses but would not bring the state-legal medical or recreational marijuana industry into compliance with federal controlled substances law. Activities that violate the CSA may give rise to federal criminal prosecution. As a practical matter, however, DEA and DOJ [lack the resources to prosecute all violations](https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/674464.pdf#page=14) of the CSA. [DOJ](https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/legacy/2009/10/19/medical-marijuana.pdf) [guidance](https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/oip/legacy/2014/07/23/dag-guidance-2011-for-medical-marijuana-use.pdf) [memoranda](https://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/3052013829132756857467.pdf) from the Obama Administration broadly affirmed federal authority to prosecute such activities but also indicated that DOJ would generally not prioritize prosecution of activities involving medical marijuana that complied with state law. Under the Trump Administration, DOJ [rescinded that guidance](https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1022196/download), instead reaffirming the authority of federal prosecutors to exercise prosecutorial discretion to target federal marijuana offenses "in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, and appropriations." DOJ has not issued formal guidance on marijuana policy during the Biden Administration, but Attorney General Merrick Garland has [indicated](https://www.congress.gov/event/117th-congress/senate-event/332392/text) that the agency will not prioritize prosecuting individuals for personal use of marijuana. Notwithstanding the changes in guidance, [data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission](https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/quick-facts/Marijuana_FY22.pdf) indicate that the number of federal marijuana trafficking prosecutions decreased every year between FY2018 and FY2022. The reference to appropriations in the DOJ guidance is significant, because in each budget cycle since FY2015, Congress has passed an [appropriations rider](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10694) barring DOJ from using taxpayer funds to prevent states from "implementing their own laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana." The appropriations rider thus prohibits federal prosecution of state-legal activities involving medical marijuana. However, it poses no bar to prosecution of activities involving recreational marijuana. Moreover, the rider does not remove criminal liability; it merely prevents enforcement of the CSA in certain circumstances. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has [explained](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14800733384205205829&q=833+F.3d+1163&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#%5B5%5D), if Congress repealed the appropriations rider, DOJ would be able to prosecute violations of the CSA that occurred while the rider was in effect, subject to the applicable statute of limitations. Even absent criminal prosecution or conviction, individuals and organizations engaged in marijuana-related activities in violation of the CSA—including participants in the state-legal cannabis industry—may face collateral consequences arising from the federal prohibition of marijuana. Other federal laws impose legal consequences based on criminal activity, including violations of the CSA. For example, a financial institution handling income from an illegal marijuana business may violate federal [anti-money laundering laws](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45726). The presence of income from a marijuana-related business may also prevent a bankruptcy court from [confirming a bankruptcy plan](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title11-section1129&num=0&edition=prelim) (though courts [have](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1285469564547447585&q=922+F.3d+1031&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p1032) [split](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11696028104615878729&q=484+B.R.+799&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47#p809) on the issue). Likewise, marijuana businesses may be [ineligible for certain federal tax deductions](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title26-section280E&num=0&edition=prelim). (This restriction applies only to activities involving substances in Schedule I or II, so moving marijuana to Schedule III would allow marijuana businesses to [deduct business expenses](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46709) on federal tax filings.) For individuals, participation in the state-legal marijuana industry may have [adverse immigration consequences](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-316/section-316.10). Violations of the CSA may also affect individuals' ability to receive [certain](https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/sowing-the-seeds-of-marijuana-60882/) federal [government](https://www.barrons.com/articles/army-veteran-marijuana-job-pension-51556595661)[benefits](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R42394). In addition, federal law [prohibits gun ownership and possession](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section922&num=0&edition=prelim) by any person who is an "unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance," with no exception for users of state-legal medical marijuana. Considerations for Congress Either Congress or DEA has the authority to change the status of marijuana under the CSA. DEA is currently considering whether to reschedule marijuana via [formal rulemaking](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title21-section811&num=0&edition=prelim). DEA's proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III will be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget and will then be released and subject to public comment, meaning that final action will likely take months after a proposed rule is published. Congress possesses broad authority to change the status of marijuana by legislation before or after DEA makes any final scheduling decision. If Congress seeks to regulate marijuana more stringently, it could, among other options, repeal the appropriations rider discussed above, increase DOJ funding to prosecute CSA violations, or [limit federal funds](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5323/text) for states that legalize marijuana. However, most [recent proposals](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948) before Congress seek to relax federal restrictions on marijuana or mitigate the disparity between federal and state marijuana regulation. Some proposals would [remove marijuana from regulation under the CSA](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6028/text) entirely or move itto a [less restrictive schedule](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/610/text). Other proposed legislation would leave marijuana in Schedule I but [limit](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6673/text)[enforcement](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6673/text) of federal marijuana law in states that elect to legalize marijuana. Additional proposals would seek to address specific legal consequences of marijuana's Schedule I status by, for example, enabling marijuana businesses to access [banking](https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1595)[services](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2860/text) or removing collateral consequences for individuals in areas such as [immigration](https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/4390/text), [federally assisted housing](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7094/text), and [gun ownership](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2772/text). Changes to the status of marijuana under the CSA could raise additional legal questions. For instance, FDA regulates certain cannabis products under the [Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act](https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title21/chapter9&edition=prelim), so Congress might also consider whether to alter that regulatory regime. In addition, it is possible that relaxing the CSA's restrictions on marijuana could implicate the United States' [international treaty obligations](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948). For further information on proposed reforms and legal and policy issues related to marijuana's status under the CSA, see CRS In Focus IF12270, [The Federal Status of Marijuana and the Policy Gap with States](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12270), by Lisa N. Sacco, Joanna R. Lampe, and Hassan Z. Sheikh; CRS Legal Sidebar LSB11105, [Legal Consequences of Rescheduling Marijuana](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11105), by Joanna R. Lampe; and CRS Report R45948, [The Controlled Substances Act (CSA): A Legal Overview for the 118th Congress](https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45948), by Joanna R. Lampe.
Shard	30 (laksa)
Root Hash	3496167000299666030
Unparsed URL	gov,congress!www,/crs-product/LSB10482 s443