By NORML
In recent decades, there has been immense progress toward making cannabis available for both medicinal and recreational use. Generally speaking, Democrats in Congress are much more supportive of cannabis law reform than Republicans. However, even Democrat proponents seldom highlight the longstanding racial disparities that exist in the enforcement of cannabis prohibition. One of the main reasons that I am interning at NORML is to apply my experience with inequality and social policy to cannabis legislation research. In doing so, I wanted to highlight the many ways in which Black Americans have faced disproportionate over-policing of cannabis use and how comprehensive federal cannabis law reform can promote racial equality.
Cannabis and Racial Inequality
As of 2026, 24 states in the U.S. have legalized recreational cannabis use for adults. As an increasing number of states have worked toward some form of cannabis law reform, the number of individuals arrested for possession of cannabis has dropped significantly throughout the country. However, even in this current era of cannabis law reform, many of the racial disparities that have historically existed with regard to arrests for cannabis possession continue to this day. According to a 2020 report from the ACLU, despite the significant drop in total arrests and the fact that Black people and white people use marijuana at similar rates, Black people were still approximately 3.64 times more likely to be arrested than white people for marijuana possession across the United States.
The discriminatory nature of cannabis laws is not unique to states where marijuana is illegal for medicinal or recreational use. In California, for example, marijuana use has been legal for adults since Proposition 64 was passed in 2016. Proposition 64 also entailed providing a legal pathway for those with certain marijuana-related convictions to have their cases re-evaluated. However, this process has largely been at the discretion of California county courts, which have reviewed these cases with varying levels of urgency. Some counties, such as Riverside and San Bernardino, have not even finished one such review as of 2022, even after subsequent legislation was passed in 2018 an attempt to speed up these reviews. Considering that Black Americans are more likely than their white counterparts to be arrested and charged with possession of marijuana, this slow process of re-evaluating convictions is very likely impacting Black individuals disproportionately. By neglecting to provide individual counties with enforceable deadlines to complete their review of convictions, the state of California contributing to the disenfranchisement of Black Californians – making it more difficult for those previously convicted of cannabis possession to further their careers and to vote, amongst other things.
Cannabis enforcement is not only weaponized against consumers in the form of threatening them with arrest, reducing their career prospects, and preventing them from voting. Perhaps most sinister is the weaponization of cannabis enforcement against parents during child custody hearings. Even in states where recreational cannabis use is legal, such as New York, judges often consider cannabis use as a disqualifying factor for being a custodial parent. Even when a parent uses cannabis for medicinal purposes rather than for recreation, courts frequently consider this as evidence of unfit parenting. This is another instance where inconsistencies within the law have the capacity to negatively affect predominantly Black cannabis consumers. As of 2018, almost half of Black children in the US had a parent living outside the household, which is more than double the amount white children experiencing a similar situation. Considering the historical over-policing of cannabis use in Black communities throughout the US and the fact that Black children are much more likely to live with one custodial parent than are children of other races, it is reasonable to presume that these ramifications may disproportionately affect Black families and children.
Policy Recommendation
The current laws regarding cannabis use in the US are implemented and enforced in a way that is fragmented, inconsistent, and discriminatory. Given the voting records of Democrats and Republicans on cannabis-related legislation in recent years, it is highly unlikely that there will be significant cannabis law reform at the federal level under a Republican controlled Congress. However, as the Democratic party looks to regain control of congress later this year, party leadership ought to support comprehensive federal legalization of cannabis for medicinal and recreational purposes. This widespread reform should include a complete removal from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) drug schedule and an immediate re-evaluation of all individuals’ charges within the US for marijuana possession to be completed by a reasonable, specified date. In doing so, congressional Democrats can acknowledge the misstep of previous efforts which failed to include any such deadlines, resulting in delays which are having real time consequences for those with previous cannabis-related convictions. In supporting comprehensive federal cannabis legalization the Democratic party can drastically reduce the likelihood of anyone, regardless of race or class, being incarcerated for possessing marijuana for either medicinal or recreational use.
Conclusion
Federal cannabis law reform is a lofty goal, especially considering the current Republican-controlled Congress. However, progressive Democrats are prevailing in primary elections at the state level all around the country ahead of the 2026 midterms. As progressive policy initiatives are gaining momentum among voters, cannabis law reform is significantly more likely to be considered at the federal level. However, when that does take place, it is imperative that the proposed reforms acknowledge and redress the historical over-policing of cannabis use in Black communities as part of a larger pattern of racially motivated law enforcement in the United States.
