Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Has any subsequent administration reversed or modified the Trump-era reclassification and when were any changes implemented?
Executive summary
Available reporting shows the Biden administration proposed moving marijuana from DEA Schedule I to Schedule III but did not finalize the change before leaving office; the Trump administration since January 2025 has put that proposal “on pause” while publicly considering it and Congress has moved to block or limit rescheduling actions [1] [2] [3] [4]. Coverage through late 2025 documents review, pause and debate — not a completed reversal or finalized modification by a subsequent administration in the sources provided [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. What the Biden-era action was — a proposed rescheduling, not a completed reclassification
The Biden administration advanced a proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III with an intent to reduce federal restrictions and criminal penalties and to enable certain tax and research changes; multiple outlets report that the move was proposed but not finalized before the administration left office (PBS NewsHour; TIME) [2] [1].
2. What the Trump administration did immediately after Jan. 20, 2025 — pause and review, not an outright reversal in available reporting
Reporting indicates the Trump administration placed the Biden-era rescheduling effort in indefinite pause upon taking office and publicly said it was “looking at” the proposal, suggesting review rather than an immediate, formal reversal of the proposal in the sources available (TIME; MJBizDaily) [1] [3].
3. Legislative pushback: House Republicans moved to forbid rescheduling funding
Congressional Republicans used appropriations language to try to block the Department of Justice from using funds to reclassify cannabis; the House Appropriations Committee advanced bills with such restrictions, which demonstrates a legislative avenue to prevent or limit administrative rescheduling even if an administration wanted to proceed (Cannabis Business Times) [4].
4. Reporting shows active debate within the Trump White House and promise of a decision timeline
News outlets recorded President Trump saying his administration would revisit and decide on the matter “over the next few weeks” and that he was “looking at” proposals initiated under Biden — coverage frames this as a deliberative posture rather than immediate revocation of the Biden proposal (MJBizDaily; Cannabis Business Times) [3] [4].
5. No sourced evidence here of a completed reversal or implemented modification by a later administration
Available sources in this search set describe the Biden proposal, the pause and review by the incoming Trump administration, and Congressional efforts to block rescheduling, but they do not document a completed Trump-era reclassification to Schedule I or a finalized reversal of Biden’s proposal; the reporting instead shows the issue unresolved or under consideration as of the dates cited [1] [2] [3] [4].
6. Where the disagreement and political incentives lie
Supporters of rescheduling stress lower criminal penalties, research access, tax relief and alignment with state laws (PBS; TIME), while opponents — including some congressional Republicans — argue youth and public-safety risks and have used appropriations riders to constrain agency action; these competing incentives explain why administrations and Congress may take different paths [2] [1] [4].
7. Broader regulatory context: deregulatory momentum in 2025
The Trump administration’s broader deregulatory agenda and use of tools like the Congressional Review Act and executive orders to rescind or limit late Biden-era rules provides a broader context for why rescheduling would be politically prominent — but the specific rescheduling action is treated in the sources as paused and contested, not as already undone (Government Executive; Brookings; White House actions) [5] [6] [7].
8. Bottom line and reporting limits
Based on the documents supplied, subsequent administrations and Congress have influenced the status of the Biden-era rescheduling proposal through pauses, reviews and legislative pushback, but the sources do not show a finalized rescheduling reversal or an implemented change enacted by the Trump administration as of the cited reporting; further developments after the dates in these items are not covered here [1] [2] [3] [4].
If you want, I can search for later documents (official DEA/DOJ notices, Federal Register actions, or congressional enactments) to confirm whether a final administrative rescheduling, statutory prohibition or other implementation occurred after the reports cited above.