The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) says a recent federal watchdog report identifying deficiencies in drug scheduling procedures does not undermine the scientific justification for moving marijuana to Schedule III, arguing that the report provides no justification for additional briefing or further delaying the judge’s decision.
In a response dated October 9, the agency defended the scientific evaluations supporting rescheduling while opposing a request from prohibition advocates to allow additional legal arguments concerning a September report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
The DEA said the report “has no bearing on the ultimate issue of whether marijuana should be transferred to Schedule III,” maintaining that additional briefing would serve no purpose.
The government’s response addresses a September 23 GAO report that identified shortcomings in the written policies and procedures used by the DEA and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) when evaluating controlled substances.
According to the DEA, those findings concern how the agencies document their procedures, rather than the validity of the scientific evaluations themselves.
The agency emphasized that GAO made no critical findings about the actual scientific methods used in scheduling decisions and did not recommend replacing those methods with different scientific standards. The government also noted that GAO never challenged the FDA’s conclusion that marijuana should be transferred to Schedule III.
The distinction is central to the government’s argument. Although GAO recommended that the DEA and FDA establish more comprehensive written procedures, the report did not determine that the agencies had incorrectly evaluated marijuana or that the proposed scheduling change lacked scientific justification.
The DEA also pointed to the report’s recommendation that agencies fill gaps in their existing written policies, arguing that such administrative improvements are separate from the scientific determinations already made.
The GAO’s findings included a review of federal scheduling actions from 2020 through 2025. During that period, the DEA considered Department of Health and Human Services evaluations and recommendations for all 95 substances for which they were required. In all 84 cases where a final scheduling decision had been issued, the DEA’s decision aligned with the department’s recommendation.
The report’s release prompted the National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association, DUID Victim Voices and physician Kenneth Finn to request its admission into the marijuana rescheduling hearing record, along with an opportunity to submit additional arguments.
On September 29, Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius temporarily stayed the proceeding while considering their request.
In its response, the DEA did not object to the judge deciding whether the report should be admitted into evidence. Instead, the government argued that admitting the document would not justify reopening legal arguments over the merits of rescheduling.
The DEA’s position does not automatically resolve the pending procedural dispute. Julius must still determine whether to admit the GAO report and whether to authorize additional briefing before proceeding with his recommended decision on the proposed scheduling change.
