DOJ Policy Shake-Up Heightens Risks for Cannabis Users
DOJ’s move restores broad prosecutorial discretion, heightens legal risks in states where cannabis is otherwise legal, and signals a renewed federal priority on enforcing marijuana laws despite ongoing national reform efforts.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has reportedly delivered a sharp reversal in federal marijuana enforcement policy, signaling a crackdown on low-level cannabis offenses, even in states where the substance is legal. This move, reportedly executed through the rescission of prior administrative guidance, immediately empowers U.S. Attorneys to “rigorously prosecute” simple possession on federal property, directly contradicting recent moves toward leniency and injecting a new dose of uncertainty into the nation’s burgeoning cannabis market.
DOJ Policy Reversal: A Mandate to ‘Rigorously Prosecute’
This dramatic shift stems from a memo issued by Trump’s DOJ on September 29, 2025, which reportedly rescinded unwritten guidance from the previous administration that had directed U.S. Attorneys to generally de-prioritize misdemeanor marijuana possession offenses, particularly on federal lands, such as national parks.
Rescinding the Unwritten Rule
While the full text of the rescinded guidance has not been made public, the intent of the new policy is unequivocally clear. U.S. Attorney Darin Smith for the District of Wyoming was one of the first federal prosecutors to publicly confirm the directive, stating that his office would now “rigorously prosecute” minor marijuana possession violations on federal property. This action specifically reverses a hands-off approach that had been in place and was consistent with the Biden administration’s broader push for cannabis reform, including mass pardons for federal possession convictions.
“Marijuana possession remains a federal crime in the United States, irrespective of varying state laws,” Smith said in a press release last month. “The detrimental effects of drugs on our society are undeniable, and I am committed to using every prosecutorial tool available to hold offenders accountable.”
The ‘Old New’ Federal Stance on Marijuana
The justification for the return to more aggressive forms of enforcement is rooted in ‘public safety.’ A spokesperson for Smith’s office said the Trump administration views marijuana use as a “public safety hazard,” and Smith himself emphasizes that he intends to use every available prosecutorial measure to ensure offenders face consequences. Such stance effectively returns full prosecutorial discretion to federal attorneys, removing any implicit or explicit policy pressure to defer to state legalization laws. It echoes the 2018 action by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who rescinded the Obama-era Cole Memo, signaling a similar elevation of federal drug law over state autonomy.
Federal-State Conflict and Industry Uncertainty
The immediate and primary impact of this policy shift is the heightened risk of arrest and prosecution on the vast network of federal property across the country—national parks, federal courthouses, military bases, and government buildings—even within fully legalized states.
Limited Scope, Unlimited Signal
While the directive primarily targets simple possession on federal lands, its symbolic weight is immense. For the multi-billion-dollar cannabis industry, the contentious tone can be perceived as a major setback, raising concerns about potential federal interference with state-legal cultivation and sales. The move effectively removes a layer of protection that the industry had grown accustomed to, relying on federal resources being directed toward major crimes rather than marijuana.
Backlash and Political Contradictions
The backlash from reform organizations was immediate. NORML’s Deputy Director, Paul Armentano, condemned the change as “inappropriate and misguided,” arguing that it runs contrary to public opinion and the will of voters.
“Nearly half of all US states have legalized cannabis possession and most Americans say that consuming cannabis should no longer be a crime,” Armentano said in a statement. “They certainly don’t want federal resources directed toward these misplaced priorities, particularly during these difficult economic times.”
Armentano added that the policy contradicts Trump’s earlier campaign remarks, in which he argued that adults shouldn’t have their lives upended or taxpayer money wasted over possession of small personal amounts.
What This Means for Consumers and Marijuana Businesses
Increased Risk on Federal Property
For travelers and residents in states with legal cannabis, the risk of federal prosecution is now dramatically higher if they cross into or consume marijuana on federal land. Since federal law, the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), still lists marijuana as a Schedule I substance, state legalization provides zero legal protection on federal property. Consumers must be aware that simple possession could now result in felony charges and severe penalties that are far harsher than state-level misdemeanors.
The Rescheduling Paradox
The timing of this enforcement mandate is particularly confusing given that the proposed rescheduling of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III is still pending but currently on hold. The DEA hearing originally scheduled for January 2025 has been postponed indefinitely pending resolution of an appeal filed by an involved party, leaving the timeline for a final determination highly uncertain.
While rescheduling would be a major victory—acknowledging the substance’s medical value and lower abuse potential—it would not legalize recreational use or protect state-legal businesses from aggressive federal enforcement. It would merely change the regulatory framework for medical use and research, leaving the fundamental federal illegality of adult-use cannabis in place.
Frequently Asked Questions About Federal Marijuana Prosecution
Q: Will the new DOJ policy allow federal agents to raid state-legal cannabis dispensaries?
A: The immediate directive targets simple possession on federal property and does not explicitly threaten the operations of state-legal cannabis businesses. However, it does signal a shift in federal priorities, potentially increasing scrutiny on large-scale cannabis operators, especially for those found not fully compliant with state-level regulation.
Q: Is simple possession of cannabis now a federal prison offense?
A: Yes. Marijuana remains a Schedule I controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act. Simple possession on federal land carries the penalty defined by federal statute. The new guidance directs U.S. Attorneys to exercise their discretion and pursue these charges more aggressively.
Q: Does this new policy affect the legal status of CBD products?
A: No. CBD products derived from hemp (containing less than 0.3% THC) are regulated with the 2018 Farm Bill. The new enforcement guidance specifically targets marijuana (defined as cannabis with over 0.3% THC) and federal statutes concerning controlled substances.
More from Soft Secrets:
S
Stephen Andrews
