DEA Closing Brief: Schedule III Case

August 24, 202639 min read

Head Cultivator

On this page

The DEA filed its last written argument on August 17, 2026. Lawyers asked a judge to move the rest of marijuana to Schedule III. That is not federal legalization. It is not a new Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency rule. It is a closing brief in a live case. This post lays out both sides — what the government asked for, what the opposition filed, and what still does not change at a licensed Detroit or Metro Detroit counter. This is general information, not legal, tax, or employment advice.

What Did the DEA Actually Ask the Judge on August 17? #

The government asked Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek C. Julius to recommend — and to do it fast — that marijuana as defined in federal law move from Schedule I to Schedule III. A brief is not a final rule. Julius still has to write a recommendation. DEA Administrator Terrance C. “Terry” Cole still has the last agency call.

Marijuana Moment quoted the agency’s filing this way: marijuana “no longer fits the statutory requirements for Schedule I because it has a currently accepted medical use within the United States and it has an accepted safety for its use under medical supervision.” The same piece says DEA asked Julius to “expeditiously recommend” the transfer.

Cannabis Business Times published the government’s 50-page PDF and walked the ask in its August 19, 2026 brief story. The lawyers’ last line, as CBT reports it: recommend that marijuana, as defined in 21 U.S.C. § 802(16)(A), “be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule III.”

That cap on length is not a rumor. After the hearing closed, Julius’s July 16, 2026 order on transcripts and post-hearing briefs (PDF) set August 17 as the brief date and 50 pages as the max. One brief per designated party. Filing was optional. The government used the full 50.

Piece	What it is	What it is not
Government post-hearing brief (Aug 17)	Closing argument + proposed findings	A Federal Register final rule
Opposed-party briefs (same day)	Their closing arguments	A veto of the April medical order
Julius recommendation (not issued yet)	A written rec to the Administrator	The last word
Cole final order (later, if it comes)	The agency decision	Instant legalization

Who sat in the chairs #

The DEA marijuana rescheduling regulatory actions page lists the designated participants: the National Drug & Alcohol Screening Association; the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation; Smart Approaches to Marijuana; Nebraska, Idaho, Indiana, and Louisiana; DUID Victim Voices; Kenneth Finn, MD; and Phillip A. Drum, PharmD. Louisiana was designated with those states — Marijuana Moment’s June 18 participant list includes it — but it did not join the SAM + Idaho/Indiana/Nebraska August 17 brief. Marijuana Moment notes that Administrator Cole limited those slots to people he treated as “adversely affected.” The government still had to defend the proposal on the record.

Six briefs landed by the deadline, as Marijuana Moment first reported:

The government’s 50-page filing
A joint brief from SAM plus Idaho, Indiana, and Nebraska
A TBI brief
An NDASA brief
A joint brief from DUID Victim Voices and Dr. Kenneth Finn
A pro se statement from Dr. Phillip Drum

If you want the hearing-close calendar instead of this brief fight, that is already here: DEA rescheduling hearing ends, July 2026. The August 14 dual-system snapshot — briefs were due, not yet unpacked — is the aftermath post.

Think of a long union grievance. People talk. Then they write. Then a recommended decision lands. Then someone upstairs signs. Julius is the recommended-decision writer. Cole is upstairs. Courts may still get a turn after that.

A Michigan shopper does not need the docket number. You do need this: the August 17 brief is the government’s last word to the judge, not a new law on your jar.

Is Adult-Use Cannabis Schedule III Now? #

No. Typical Michigan adult-use flower is not federally Schedule III as of August 24, 2026. FDA-approved marijuana medicines and state-licensed medical products already moved in April. This proceeding is about whether the rest of the plant — the adult-use eighth most Metro Detroit shoppers buy — follows. It stays a controlled substance either way.

The two-lane fact is the whole story. Mix the lanes and every headline after that is noise.

Lane	What moved	Federal status now	Who feels it at a Michigan shop
A — April 2026 order	FDA-approved marijuana drug products + marijuana under a qualifying state medical license	Schedule III	Medical-card patients and medical licensees
B — this hearing / these briefs	Broader marijuana, including typical adult-use plant and products	Still unfinished	Adult-use 21+ shoppers waiting on a later rule
Legalization	Congress wiping the Controlled Substances Act clean	Did not happen	Nobody. Rescheduling is not legalization.

Lane A is in the April 28, 2026 Federal Register final rule and the DOJ Office of Public Affairs announcement. Lane B is the April 28 hearing notice sitting on top of the May 21, 2024 NPRM (89 FR 44597). After the April order, DEA opened a medical-marijuana registration path — Marijuana Moment reports that as paperwork for qualifying medical operators, not a change at an adult-use Detroit counter.

Michigan LARA’s April 23, 2026 press release shows the state saw the federal order. It did not hand the Michigan Cannabis Regulatory Agency counter keys to Washington.

What “Schedule III” still means #

Schedule I is the federal box that says no accepted medical use and a high abuse concern. Schedule III is a lower control box that still regulates the drug. Moving a plant down a schedule is not deleting it from the Controlled Substances Act.

You still need a license to handle it in the federal system.
Research rules get easier than Schedule I. They do not become a free-for-all.
Interstate adult-use shipping does not become legal because a brief was filed.
A Detroit adult-use pre-roll is still a state-law product until a final broader rule says otherwise.

If you want the longer primer, stay with the Schedule III guide and the May follow-up on medical-only Schedule III. This post does not redo those. It unpacks the briefs.

The barbecue test #

Two people can leave the same Dearborn or Warren shop with different federal stories in the bag:

Medical card + licensed medical product → already in the April Schedule III lane.
Adult-use only → still waiting on Lane B.

The government wants Lane B to join Lane A. The opposition wants Lane B to stay Schedule I. Neither brief changes what the budtender scans tomorrow.

The Government's Case for Moving the Rest of the Plant #

The government’s case is simple once you strip the lawyer clothes: Schedule I requires no accepted medical use. HHS already found three uses. The Justice Department’s lawyers say that finding binds the science, and even some opposition witnesses helped prove medicine is real. You can disagree with that math. You should hear it the way they wrote it.

This is their steelman — not a Divine Toke endorsement.

The Schedule I door they say is already open #

Federal law puts three locks on Schedule I. One of them is “no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.” The government’s brief treats that lock as broken.

The 2023 HHS scheduling recommendation found a currently accepted medical use — for CSA purposes — in three places:

Anorexia related to a medical condition
Nausea and vomiting (the chemo example is the one HHS names)
Pain

HHS says one accepted use is enough to leave Schedule I. The 2024 NPRM repeats that CAMU line almost word for word. Cannabis Business Times notes the brief “hammered” those three findings.

Then the brief adds head-count arithmetic. Marijuana Moment quotes DEA:

“Currently there are over 30,000 practitioners treating more than six million patients in 43 U.S. jurisdictions.”

The agency’s next sentence, in that same report: those practices show there is no longer a “lack of accepted safety for use of marijuana under medical supervision.” CBT’s write-up of the same brief paraphrases the count as more than 30,000 doctors and more than 6 million patients in 38 states. The number we can quote from the brief itself, via Marijuana Moment, is 43 jurisdictions.

Government building block	What they say it proves	Source they lean on
Three HHS medical uses	Schedule I’s “no medical use” box fails	HHS 2023 recommendation
OLC 2024 opinion	DEA owes HHS significant deference; five-part test is too narrow	OLC opinion (DOJ)
30,000+ practitioners / 6 million+ patients / 43 jurisdictions	Real doctors, real patients, real supervision	Government brief, quoted by Marijuana Moment
Abuse vs. opioids	Dependence and withdrawal look more like III than I or II	HHS comparison + hearing testimony

Deference: they say Julius should not redo HHS science #

The 2024 Office of Legal Counsel opinion is the legal engine. OLC said DEA’s old five-part “currently accepted medical use” test is “impermissibly narrow.” OLC said HHS’s two-part inquiry is enough to show accepted medical use even without FDA approval of the whole plant. Marijuana Moment reports DEA now says it must give “significant deference” to HHS’s ten-month science review.

In plain English: the government is telling Julius, you are not supposed to become a second FDA in Arlington.

Abuse and dependence — why they want III, not II #

Getting out of Schedule I is half the job. Landing in III takes more pages. Marijuana Moment quotes the brief saying there is “substantial evidence” that marijuana’s abuse and dependency profiles “better align with Schedule III substances than Schedule II” or Schedule I, and that “the vast majority of individuals who use marijuana do so in a manner that does not result in dangers to themselves or to their communities.”

High Times’ brief analysis says that comparison sits on the HHS stack against heroin, fentanyl, cocaine, and prescription opioids, plus government witness Dr. Corey Burchman. Coverage of his testimony: opioid withdrawal is “horrific”; cannabis withdrawal rarely sends anyone to a hospital. That is relative risk talk. It is not “safe for every shift.”

The concessions they harvest from the other table #

The government also argues the other side’s own witnesses helped them. CBT and Marijuana Moment both quote the brief on these points:

Dr. Bertha Madras (Harvard; SAM’s addiction expert): scientific evidence of efficacy for neuropathic pain, though she believes the science is weak. Her demonstrative, as the brief describes it, also noted benefits for wasting, appetite and pain in cancer patients, and severe nausea.
Dr. Deepak D’Souza (Yale / VA): the states offered him in five psychiatry-related areas, then asked about pain management. The brief says that sits outside his own expertise. High Times also says he described a study where a standardized cannabis extract beat placebo for pain.
Dr. Kenneth Finn: he “previously recommended marijuana for his pain patients and currently believes that there is likely a therapeutic benefit.” His concern, the brief says, is dosing and quality. The government also asks Julius to give Finn little weight over a sequestration fight — then, in a fallback, uses those patient-recommendation lines if the judge keeps him.
Dr. Phillip Drum: he told the tribunal there is no medical use for plant-based marijuana. The same brief notes he also said Schedule II “would be potentially more appropriate” because of how fast it absorbs. Schedule II is stricter than III. It is still not I.

The government’s punchline, as CBT quotes it: the opposed parties’ evidence “boils down simply to the fact that Schedule III marijuana poses employment and enforcement difficulties, the same as any other controlled substance in Schedules II – V.”

They agree marijuana should stay controlled. They say the right box is III.

How they want Julius to treat the rest of the witness list #

Starting around page 43, High Times reports, the last eight pages sort “so-called expert witnesses.” CBT quotes that phrase from the brief. The government’s sort:

Outside expertise — D’Souza on pain; Drum on pregnancy and veterans, per CBT.
Wrong question — workplace-testing witnesses on future hurdles; a TBI agent talking “deregulation” and “legalization”; Humboldt County Sheriff William Honsal, whom the brief says the states never properly noticed as an expert and who “has no meaningful connection to Nebraska, Idaho or Indiana.”
Sequestration — Ed Wood of DUID Victim Voices and Finn, the brief says, read earlier transcripts before they testified. The government calls that taint “unable to be cured” except by giving the testimony little or no weight.
One note of grace — of Laura Stack, who testified about losing her son, the government “acknowledges the personal impact” and “commends her testimony,” then goes back to relevance.

That is the government’s case at full volume. The next section is the other table’s full volume. Do not flatten either one.

The Opposition's Case for Keeping Schedule I #

The opposition’s case is also simple once you strip the slogans: the two-part medical-use test was built for this fight, the old five-part test should still control, the plant has no stable chemistry, harms have grown since the last denial, and moving marijuana to III could knock the floor out from under federal drug testing. You can disagree with that stack. You should hear it the way they filed it.

This is their steelman — not a Divine Toke endorsement.

Marijuana Moment published the opposed briefs’ own words. High Times mapped who signed what. Six filings, several theories. They do not all sound the same.

Filer	Main ask	Main tool
SAM + Idaho + Indiana + Nebraska	Keep Schedule I	Old five-part test; nine prior denials; “made-up” two-part test
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation	Kill the NPRM, keep I	Procedural defect: AG signed after authority was delegated
NDASA	Keep I (or save testing)	Schedule I–II testing floor; transportation safety
DUID Victim Voices + Dr. Kenneth Finn	Keep I	Human cost; DUID; novel test never went through notice-and-comment
Dr. Phillip Drum (alone)	Keep I (and deny “medicine”)	Product chaos; “not a medicine”

SAM and three states: nine denials and a “made-up” test #

The joint brief from Smart Approaches to Marijuana and Idaho, Indiana, and Nebraska is the legal spine of the no vote. High Times reports it is signed by Patrick Philbin of Torridon Law — former deputy White House counsel.

It opens, in Marijuana Moment’s telling, by noting DEA and HHS have considered rescheduling “at least nine times,” most recently in 2016, and each time kept marijuana in Schedule I: high abuse risk, no currently accepted medical use, no accepted safety under medical supervision. High Times’ phrasing of the same opening: the government considered it “no fewer than nine times, most recently in 2016,” and refused.

Then the brief attacks the new test. Marijuana Moment quotes:

“So the Government now proposes to reschedule marijuana not based on the facts, but rather based on new and different standards — standards that are not found in the Controlled Substances Act, that run contrary to previous HHS and DEA practices, and that were devised solely for purposes of this rescheduling.”

And the closer: the tribunal should reject “newfound standards dreamt up only for this proceeding.” Under the “established legal standards,” they write, “Marijuana must remain in Schedule I.” High Times says a section header calls the two-part standard a test “That Was Made Up for This Proceeding.”

Their steelman in one breath: you do not get to change the exam after the student has failed it nine times.

They also argue abuse and mental-health harms have worsened since 2016. That is their public-health half. The legal half is the test.

Dr. Luli Akinfiresoye: the five-part test from inside DEA #

SAM called a DEA pharmacologist. That is the opposition’s science card.

Dr. Luli Akinfiresoye works in DEA’s Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section. She helped write the agency’s own scientific review. Coverage of her stand, including High Times and CBT, says she applied the old five-part test and found cannabis lacks currently accepted medical use. Two load-bearing lines attributed to her:

Marijuana is not consistently reproducible — not a single, stable chemical product.
There was no clear data supporting cannabis for chronic pain under that old test.

High Times says the SAM/states brief cites her 25 times. If Julius keeps the five-part test, she is the opposition’s best witness. The government mostly stepped around her. That fight gets its own section below.

TBI: the NPRM was signed by the wrong officer #

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation brief, as Marijuana Moment and High Times both report, leads with procedure.

TBI’s claim: the Attorney General long ago delegated scheduling authority to the DEA Administrator. The Attorney General still issued the rescheduling proposal. “That alone is enough,” they write, to hold the NPRM “deficient and keep marijuana in Schedule I.”

On the merits, TBI says the evaluation skipped diversion from state-licensed cannabis, “marijuana-related violent crime,” and traffic deaths from impaired drivers. High Times calls that a “procedural knife” with less science. TBI would say procedure is how you keep a rule from being lawless.

NDASA: the testing floor #

The National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association represents the testing industry. Their brief, quoted by Marijuana Moment, is blunt:

“If the transfer of marijuana to Schedule III is finalized, the authority of the Federal government to test for it will end.”

They list air-traffic controllers, Secret Service, cleared federal workers, pilots, mechanics, locomotive engineers, school-bus drivers, truck drivers, transit operators, mariners, and pipeline operators. High Times says their theory is that the federal testing framework defines illegal drugs by reference to Schedules I and II. Pull marijuana into III, they warn, and the legal floor under DOT’s program — “the largest in the world,” their witness called it — drops out.

The government calls that a hypothetical future hurdle. DOT’s own ODAPC marijuana notice still tells labs and employers to follow 49 CFR Part 40. Both things can be in the record: NDASA’s fear, and DOT’s current instruction. Steelman NDASA as risk to the legal basis, not as a claim that every Detroit shop already stopped testing.

DUID Victim Voices, Finn, Drum: the human-cost file #

The joint DUID Victim Voices / Finn brief, quoted at length by Marijuana Moment, opens on the fentanyl memorial wall at DEA headquarters. They write that a similar “memorial roll of young people” could be built for minds and lives they say marijuana has destroyed. They accuse the agency of “institutional inaction.”

On law, they say DEA “failed to carry its burden.” They call the two-part framework a “novel analytical framework that has never been subjected to notice-and-comment rulemaking” and was “engineered to reach a predetermined outcome.” They say the government underweighted psychosis, schizophrenia, suicide, heart harm, impaired driving, diversion, and workplace risk.

Finn is also the doctor the government quotes as having recommended marijuana to his own patients. The opposition would say that is not the same as a standardized, labeled, physician-controlled Schedule III drug. Drum, filing alone, opens by calling plant marijuana “not a medicine” and numbering industry claims as “fraudulent statements.” He also, on the stand, floated Schedule II as “potentially more appropriate.” The government uses that line. Drum’s brief still argues the public is being told a safety story the products do not earn.

The government says Wood and Finn broke sequestration by reading earlier transcripts. The opposition would say the human cost is the point of the hearing, not a side show. Julius has to weigh both.

One-sentence opposition close #

If you only remember their case: keep the old test, keep Schedule I, and do not knock out workplace testing and road safety to bless a plant the agency denied nine times.

Two-Part vs Five-Part: The Legal Test This Case Turns On #

If the two-part test governs, the government’s arithmetic is built to win. If the five-part test survives, Dr. Akinfiresoye is the ballgame. High Times reports Julius separately asked the parties to brief whether the OLC opinion binds him. That is the fork. Everything else hangs off it.

You do not need a law degree. You need the two tests in plain words.

The five-part test (the old DEA exam) #

For decades, DEA treated “currently accepted medical use” as something like a drug-approval cousin. Coverage of the OLC opinion and the 2024 NPRM describes five demands:

The chemistry is known and reproducible
There are adequate safety studies
There are adequate, well-controlled studies proving efficacy
Qualified experts accept the drug
The scientific evidence is widely available

Under that exam, a jar of Michigan adult-use flower — even a clean, lab-tested one from a CRA shop — looks like a bad student. Different farms. Different batches. Different THC numbers. Akinfiresoye’s “not consistently reproducible” line is this test talking.

The two-part test (the HHS / OLC exam) #

HHS, in the 2023 recommendation, asked two questions instead:

Are licensed practitioners actually using this under medical supervision in the United States? (state medical programs are the main evidence)
Is there credible scientific support for at least one of those uses?

HHS answered yes for anorexia, chemo nausea, and pain. OLC said that two-part inquiry is enough under the Controlled Substances Act. OLC said the five-part test and an “FDA approval only” path are impermissibly narrow. The government brief, as CBT quotes it, says HHS built the two-part inquiry because neither FDA approval nor the five-part test asked whether doctors are actually using the drug and whether state regulators allow that use.

Question	Five-part test	Two-part test
Does chemistry have to be one reproducible drug?	Yes — that is part 1	No — not the hinge
Do you need FDA-style controlled trials?	Basically yes	No — “credible scientific support” can be enough
Do state medical programs count?	Weakly, if at all	Yes — that is part 1
Who wrote the exam?	DEA practice over decades	HHS 2023, blessed by OLC 2024
What SAM/states call it	The lawful, established standard	A test “dreamt up only for this proceeding” (Marijuana Moment)
What the government calls it	Impermissibly narrow	Required deference to HHS science

Does OLC bind Julius? #

That is the question High Times says the judge flagged.

If OLC binds the tribunal, Julius is supposed to treat the two-part test as good law and HHS’s CAMU finding as science he should not rebuild from scratch. Government arithmetic (three uses + 30,000 practitioners + 6 million patients + 43 jurisdictions) does the rest.
If OLC does not bind him, he can still apply the five-part test the agency used in those nine prior denials. Then Akinfiresoye’s chemistry and chronic-pain lines become the fight, not a footnote.

SAM and the states say an OLC memo cannot silently replace decades of DEA precedent without a real rulemaking on the test itself. DUID/Finn say the new framework never went through notice-and-comment. The government says the CSA never required the five-part test, so dropping it is not lawlessness — it is reading the statute.

Nobody in this file gets to skip that fork. Not the government. Not Philbin. Not a Detroit shopper reading a headline on a smoke break.

Why this is not a culture-war quiz #

The fork is a legal question about who decides what “accepted medical use” means. It is not “are you pro-weed.” A person can want easier research and still think the five-part test is the honest exam. A person can want Schedule I gone and still admit the plant is chemically messy. Steelman both, then wait for Julius.

The Witness the Government Did Not Attack #

Dr. Luli Akinfiresoye is a DEA pharmacologist. SAM put her on the stand. She applied the old five-part test and said cannabis fails it. The government’s 50-page brief did not take her science apart the way it took apart almost everyone else. Cannabis Business Times called her the lone opposition witness the DEA did not pick apart.

That silence is the tell. Against the sheriff, the pharmacist, the DUID advocate, and the Harvard addiction expert, the government litigated credibility. Against its own scientist, it changed the question.

Who she is #

Akinfiresoye works in DEA’s Drug and Chemical Evaluation Section. She is an author of the agency’s scientific review of marijuana. SAM subpoenaed her. She testified. The official transcript, High Times notes, even misspelled her name as “Akinfire-Soye” on day ten. Julius’s correction order fixed it.

She is not an industry witness. She is not a SAM staffer. She is a federal scientist the opposition used against the federal proposal.

What she said, as coverage reports it #

Point	Why the opposition loves it	Why the government can live with it
Cannabis fails the five-part CAMU test	That is the test used in the nine prior denials	Government says OLC retired that test
No consistent, reproducible chemical profile	Flower is not one drug product	Brief cites her once, High Times says, to agree marijuana is not a single molecule — then argues that fact does not control under the two-part test
No clear data for chronic pain under the old test	Undercuts HHS’s pain CAMU if five-part governs	Government says HHS already found pain plus two other uses under the new test

High Times says the SAM/states brief cites her 25 times. The same analysis says she appears in the government’s 50 pages exactly once, and the eight pages of witness attacks never name her. CBT’s first-report piece said the DEA “did not mention” her. The safer read: they did not fight her on the merits of the five-part exam.

What the government did instead #

They argued the exam is the wrong exam.

CBT quotes the brief defending the two-part inquiry: neither FDA approval nor the five-part test asked whether practitioners are actually using the drug under state rules. FDA, the brief says, found that ignoring that real-world use “is at odds with the plain meaning of Section 812(b).”

So Akinfiresoye can be right on her test and still lose the case — if Julius accepts OLC. She can be right on her test and win the case — if Julius keeps the five-part test.

That is why this section sits next to the fork. She is not a side character. She is what the five-part path looks like in a person.

What a Michigan reader should take #

If you work a union shop in Detroit and you only remember one name from this file, remember hers for this reason: the strongest scientific attack on Schedule III, as the briefs now sit, came from inside DEA. The government did not call her a “so-called expert.” It asked the judge to rule that the question she answered no longer matters.

Workplace Tests, Trucks, and Union Shops #

A Schedule III win would not automatically kill THC tests for truckers, plant workers, or union shops. NDASA told the judge the legal floor for federal testing could collapse. DOT’s own office still says the test panel has not changed. If your rent rides on a clean Clearinghouse file, believe the handbook and the federal testing rule — not a brief.

This is the section Metro Detroit trades actually asked about on smoke breaks. Honest answer first. Nuance second.

What NDASA told Julius #

NDASA is a designated party. Their 2024 public comments already asked DEA to leave marijuana in Schedule I for transportation safety. Their August 17 brief, quoted by Marijuana Moment, goes further: if the transfer to III is finalized, “the authority of the Federal government to test for it will end.”

They name the jobs that scare people in this region: airline pilots, school-bus drivers, truck drivers, transit operators, plus air-traffic controllers and cleared federal workers. High Times says they trace federal testing from Reagan’s 1986 executive order through the 1987 Conrail crash, then warn that the framework defines illegal drugs by Schedules I and II.

That is a real argument about legal architecture. Steelman it: they are not claiming every Wayne County shop already tossed its cups. They are claiming the statute-and-schedule hook that makes those cups mandatory could snap.

What DOT says right now #

The DOT Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance marijuana notice is the consumer-facing federal bookmark: for now, the DOT testing process has not changed. Marijuana use is still unacceptable in safety-sensitive transportation jobs. Labs, medical review officers, and substance-abuse professionals should keep following 49 CFR Part 40. Marijuana Moment’s brief roundup also notes Pentagon / DoD guidance still bars service-member use after the April medical Schedule III order. ATF draft Form 4473 talk — the gun-buy form — is about medical vs. recreational, not adult-use legalization.

FMCSA’s substances-tested page still lists marijuana metabolites on the standard panel. Cutoffs live in Part 40, not in the DEA brief.

The government’s brief, per CBT, calls NDASA witness Patrice Kelly’s testimony “hypothetical, future hurdles that may or may not present themselves,” and says Jo McGuire’s opposition rests on a “hypothetical assumption” that workplace testing may become difficult — “though not impossible.”

Question	NDASA brief	DOT / government record now
Does Schedule III auto-delete THC from the five-panel?	They warn the authority to test could end	Part 40 still lists marijuana; ODAPC says follow Part 40
CDL / Clearinghouse positive	Treated as a program-ending event in their safety story	Still a verified positive under current rules
Medical card as a defense	They fear pressure to carve out state-legal use	DOT has said medical use is not an excuse for a safety-sensitive positive
Private union shop in Detroit	Not DOT — but the same political pressure, they imply	Michigan MRTMA still lets private employers keep drug policies

Union halls, CBAs, and Michigan law #

Most Divine Toke readers are not on a CDL. They are on a CBA, a hospital badge, or a contractor policy. MRTMA’s employment language in MCL 333.27954 still preserves employer rules and adverse action for policy-breaking use. Federal rescheduling talk does not rewrite that statute.

If you need the long consumer version — private employers, medical cards, and “can they fire me?” — that is already written: Can you get fired for legal weed in Michigan?. This brief fight does not retire that post.

Practical habits that still make sense on an afternoon shift in Detroit, Warren, or Dearborn:

Read the handbook and the union contract, not a headline.
Treat DOT / CDL rules as unchanged until DOT publishes a new Part 40 rule.
Do not let anyone tell you a filed brief is a clean test.
Impairment on the tools is a safety issue whether the plant sits in I or III.

The government told Julius employment friction is “the same as any other controlled substance in Schedules II – V.” NDASA told Julius this one is different because the testing laws were written around I and II. Julius and, later, DOT — not a blog — will decide how much of that fear is law.

What Still Does Not Change at a Michigan Dispensary #

Nothing about the August 17 briefs changes the licensed Michigan counter tomorrow. The Cannabis Regulatory Agency still runs IDs, labels, testing, and purchase limits. Adult-use is still a state-law buy. Adult-use operators are still on the unfinished federal track for 280E. You still cannot legally mail an eighth to Ohio.

This is the “don’t rearrange your paycheck” section.

CRA still has the keys #

LARA’s April 2026 federal-order release was the state bookmark for “we saw Washington move.” It was not a rewrite of Michigan’s adult-use or medical programs. Briefs filed in Arlington do not retune a Detroit budtender’s scanner.

What you still do on a normal Metro Detroit run:

Show ID. Adult-use is 21+. Medical is a card lane with different limits and tax treatment.
Buy inside CRA possession and purchase caps.
Take home lab-tested, labeled product — the state rule, not a federal schedule sticker.
Do not treat the parking lot like a consumption lounge unless the license says so.

Medical vs adult-use is still the split that matters at the register. A medical card can change tax and limits. It does not turn an adult-use pre-roll into a Schedule III federal commodity. It does not write you a pass for a private employer’s cup.

280E: medical lane vs adult-use Track B #

Section 280E blocks ordinary business deductions for trafficking in Schedule I or II drugs. Once an activity is Schedule III, that claw generally drops for that activity.

Medical operators in the April order lane are where federal tax-relief talk is real. Treasury and the IRS announced a process for tax guidance after the DOJ final order.
Adult-use operators are still on Track B — the unfinished broader file. A filed brief is not a 280E vacation.
Dual-license shops (common in Michigan) will keep messy allocation fights. Accountants argue. Your eighth does not automatically get cheaper on Tuesday.

Deep dive stays here: 280E tax explained. Do not budget a statewide price cut on this news cycle.

Topic	Medical lane (April order)	Adult-use lane (these briefs)
Federal schedule	III for qualifying state-licensed medical product	Not final III as of Aug 24, 2026
280E pressure	Relief pathway in play for covered activity	Still the I/II problem until a final broader rule
CRA shop rules	Still Michigan rules	Still Michigan rules
Interstate shipping	Still not a consumer right	Still not a consumer right

What you still cannot do #

Fly with it. TSA and airports run on federal rules, not a CRA receipt.
Drive it to Indiana or Ohio as if the map vanished. Neighbor-state law and federal trafficking theory did not take August 17 off.
Assume your CDL or badge is safe. See the testing section above.
Treat “Schedule III” as “legal like beer.” Controlled is controlled.

Congress has not frozen the file either. On May 14, 2026, the House Appropriations Committee voted a FY 2027 funding rider that would bar using appropriated money to reschedule or deschedule marijuana. That is a budget instruction in a bill, not enacted law. Marijuana Moment’s brief roundup reports bipartisan staff doubt it becomes the final statute. A committee vote is not a stay, a Julius order, or a Cole final rule.

Congress’s own overview shop, CRS product LSB11424, framed the April move as easing medical controls — not as a national adult-use statute. That is still the honest consumer read.

If a headline says “weed is legal federally now” because lawyers filed paper, put the phone down. The August 14 aftermath post already said the briefs were due. This post says they are in. Neither one restocks a shelf.

What Happens Next #

Next: a corrected public transcript by August 26, then Julius writes a recommended decision on his own clock, then parties can file exceptions, then Administrator Terrance Cole decides, and the D.C. Circuit is still sitting on a motion to stay the April medical order. There is no stamped date for the recommendation. Anyone selling you one is guessing.

The near calendar #

Julius ordered the official hearing transcript corrected. Marijuana Moment quotes the 13-page order: the fully corrected transcript goes on DEA.gov “by no later than August 26, 2026,” with fixes in red and strikethroughs for deletions. The DEA PDF of that order is the primary file. Cannabis Business Times reports 294 corrections on a roughly 2,500-page record from an 11-day hearing. Marijuana Moment says the draft is at least 2,470 pages.

Some fixes are spelling. Some are not. Marijuana Moment flags “there’s adulterants” becoming “there’s no adulterants.” High Times flags day-eight “illegal” becoming “legal,” and day-one “Touhy” (the rule on federal-employee testimony) typed as “DUID.” That is why Julius wanted a clean record before he writes.

The decision clock that is not a clock #

After briefs and the transcript, federal hearing rules tell the ALJ to prepare a recommended decision. High Times’ process read is “as soon as practicable,” with no deadline attached. The July 16 transcript-and-brief order (PDF) did not add a date either.

Then comes exceptions — written objections to Julius’s recommendation — under DEA’s Part 1316 hearing rules. High Times describes a 20-day exceptions window and a record that does not go to Cole earlier than 25 days after service. Treat those day counts as process coverage, not a new Julius scheduling order. The durable fact: parties get a written shot at the recommendation before the Administrator rules.

Step	Status on Aug 24, 2026	Hard date?
Evidentiary hearing	Done (July 15)	Locked
Post-hearing briefs	Filed Aug 17	Done
Corrected transcript posted	Ordered	No later than Aug 26
ALJ recommended decision	Not issued	No public deadline
Exceptions	Not open yet	After the recommendation is served
Administrator final rule	Not issued	No public deadline
Court review	April-order petitions pending (26-1106, 26-1130, 26-1136)	Not a stay (yet)

Who Terry Cole is #

DEA’s own biography page identifies Terrance C. “Terry” Cole, sworn in as Administrator on July 23, 2025. He is the official who receives Julius’s recommendation and issues the agency’s final scheduling order — if and when he does. He is not the April medical-order author. That order came from the Acting Attorney General. Cole is the person this broader file is built to reach.

The D.C. Circuit — pending, not granted #

Do not write “the April order was stayed.” That is not what the record shows.

Reuters legal coverage and later reporting describe consolidated petitions for review of the April 2026 medical Schedule III order. A stay motion was filed. As of August 24, 2026, that motion in consolidated D.C. Circuit cases 26-1106, 26-1130, and 26-1136 is still undecided. High Times, writing after the briefs, says the D.C. Circuit is “still sitting on a motion to stay April’s order.” A pending motion is a live risk. It is not a freeze.

If a stay later lands, it could scramble Lane A without finishing Lane B. Watch the court docket, not a group chat.

How to read the next headline #

Does it cite a Federal Register final rule for broader marijuana? If no → adult-use is not done.
Does it only say briefs are in? That is this week. Not a schedule change.
Does it mix April medical facts into a Lane B victory lap? Separate the lanes.
Does it promise you can fly, ship, or skip a DOT test? Almost always wrong.

The Schedule III pillar is still the backbone for “what a schedule even is.” This post is the brief fight. When Julius writes, that will be a new story — not a silent update of this one.

Frequently Asked Questions #

No, the August 17 briefs did not finish adult-use Schedule III — they are the last written arguments before Judge Julius recommends and Administrator Cole decides. Short answers below. Details and links sit in the sections above.

Did the August 17 brief make adult-use cannabis Schedule III? #

No. A post-hearing brief is a closing argument, not a final Schedule III rule for adult-use marijuana. The government asked Judge Julius to recommend the transfer. He has not issued that recommendation. Administrator Cole has not published a broader final rule. Typical Michigan adult-use flower is still on the unfinished Lane B track as of August 24, 2026. Marijuana Moment’s brief roundup is the clearest public walk-through of what was actually filed.

What did the DEA ask Judge Derek C. Julius to do? #

Recommend — “expeditiously” — that marijuana move from Schedule I to Schedule III. Cannabis Business Times posted the 50-page government PDF and quotes the request that marijuana, as defined in 21 U.S.C. § 802(16)(A), “be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule III.” Julius’s July 16 order (PDF) had already capped each party at one 50-page brief due August 17.

Is medical cannabis already Schedule III? #

Yes — for FDA-approved marijuana medicines and marijuana products under a qualifying state medical license, via the April 2026 final order. That is Lane A. It is in the Federal Register rule and the DOJ announcement. It is not a free pass for every adult-use SKU on a Michigan shelf. LARA noted the federal order without rewriting CRA retail rules.

What is the two-part test versus the five-part test? #

The five-part test is DEA’s old “accepted medical use” exam (reproducible chemistry, controlled trials, expert acceptance). The two-part test is HHS’s 2023 exam (real-world doctor use + credible science for at least one use). OLC’s 2024 opinion called the five-part test “impermissibly narrow” and said the two-part inquiry is enough. SAM and three states told Julius the two-part test was “dreamt up only for this proceeding,” per Marijuana Moment. Which test Julius applies is the case.

Who is Dr. Luli Akinfiresoye, and why does she matter? #

She is a DEA pharmacologist who testified that cannabis fails the old five-part test — no consistent chemical profile, no clear chronic-pain data under that exam. SAM used her heavily. CBT called her the lone opposition witness the government did not pick apart. If the five-part test survives, she is the opposition’s best scientific witness. If the two-part test governs, the government treats her exam as the wrong exam.

Will truckers and union shops stop testing for THC if marijuana moves to Schedule III? #

No automatic stop. NDASA told the judge federal testing authority could end. DOT still says follow Part 40. NDASA’s brief, as quoted by Marijuana Moment, warns that a III transfer would end the federal government’s authority to test for marijuana. The DOT ODAPC notice says the testing process has not changed. Private Michigan employers still have MRTMA’s employment carve-outs. Read the contract.

Does 280E still hit Michigan adult-use shops? #

Yes, for pure adult-use activity, until a final broader Schedule III rule actually lands. 280E targets Schedule I/II trafficking. The April order opened a relief path for qualifying medical activity; Treasury announced guidance work after that order. Adult-use is still Track B. Dual-license Michigan shops will keep messy books. Your jar is not a tax coupon.

Did the D.C. Circuit freeze the April medical Schedule III order? #

Not as of August 24, 2026. A stay motion is pending in consolidated D.C. Circuit cases 26-1106, 26-1130, and 26-1136. A stay has not been granted. Reuters covered the challenge. High Times, after the briefs, said the court is “still sitting on a motion to stay April’s order.” Pending is not frozen. Watch the docket.

Can Congress freeze rescheduling after the briefs? #

Not with the May 14, 2026 House Appropriations rider alone. That rider is a proposed FY 2027 funding bar, not enacted law. The committee vote would block appropriated funds from being used to reschedule or deschedule marijuana. Marijuana Moment’s brief roundup reports bipartisan staff doubt it becomes the final statute. A budget rider in committee is not a stay, a Julius recommendation, or a Cole final rule.

When does Judge Julius issue a recommended decision? #

There is no public deadline. Briefs are in. The corrected transcript is due on DEA’s site by August 26, 2026, per Julius’s order as quoted by Marijuana Moment. Process coverage says he writes “as soon as practicable.” Anyone giving you a month on a calendar is forecasting, not citing an order.

Can I drive Michigan flower to Ohio if Schedule III wins? #

No. Rescheduling is not a passport. Even a future broader Schedule III rule would keep marijuana federally controlled. It would not create a consumer right to carry adult-use product across a state line into a prohibition state. Michigan’s licensed market stops at Michigan’s rules. The CRA receipt is not a bill of lading.

Who is Terry Cole, and what does he decide? #

Terrance C. “Terry” Cole is the DEA Administrator. He gets Julius’s recommendation and issues the agency’s final scheduling decision on the broader plant. DEA’s biography page says he was sworn in on July 23, 2025. He is not a court. After his final order — if it comes — parties can still sue. The April medical order was an Acting Attorney General action; this hearing file is built to reach Cole.

Does this change the counter at a Detroit dispensary tomorrow? #

No. ID checks, CRA labels, adult-use vs medical taxes and limits, and “don’t fly with it” all stay in place. Michigan CRA still writes the shop rules. The August 17 briefs are paper in a federal case. They are not a new menu.

What This Means If You Shop Sun-Grown Flower in Michigan #

If you only remember one thing: the DEA asked a judge to move the rest of the plant to Schedule III. That is a real ask. It is not adult-use legalization, and it does not change a licensed Michigan counter tomorrow. Both sides now have their last written shot. Julius has to pick a legal test. Cole has to decide later. Courts may still get a vote on the April medical order.

Divine Toke grows sun-grown organic flower for people who already shop this market — Detroit trades, union shifts, everyday adults who want a clean jar and a straight story. We are not going to cheer a brief or dunk on a witness. We will keep separating Lane A from Lane B until a final rule says otherwise.

If you want the backbone on what a schedule even is, start with the Schedule III guide. If you want the April medical-only split, use what happens next after medical-only III. If your question is the time clock, stay with can you get fired for legal weed in Michigan.

This article is general information about a federal proceeding. It is not legal, tax, or employment advice. If your job, your license, or your taxes are on the line, talk to a lawyer, a tax pro, or your union — not a headline.

Share

DEA Closing Brief: The Full Case For and Against Schedule III

Questions this article answers