By Renee Schofield, TSS CEO
On December 18, 2025, President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order to accelerate the rescheduling of marijuana. There is so much misinformation and misconception around this rescheduling that we feel it necessary to keep clarifying what really happened.
1. The EO instructs the Attorney General to facilitate and fast-track the rescheduling of marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug. Schedule III substances are defined as “drugs with a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence.” This classification includes drugs like Tylenol with codeine, anabolic steroids and testosterone. Drugs in this category are approved and monitored by the Food and Drug Administration.
2. The President stated that he issued this order to broaden the research dollars into marijuana for medical use.
3. The EO does NOT decriminalize or make marijuana use legal on the federal level. It does NOT expunge any criminal history.
In short, all the screening protocols for Department of Transportation modalities are currently still in place. The DOT issued a statement after the EO was signed, stressing that until the reclassification is complete, “the Department of Transportation’s drug testing process and regulations will not change. Transportation employees in safety-sensitive positions will still be subject to testing for marijuana.” Read the full statement here.
Furthermore, officials with DOT have indicated that a provision in the EO suggests that safety-sensitive employees regulated by DOT will still be subject to testing even when rescheduling is complete. We hope they are correct, as there are likely to be challenges from the marijuana industry.
For now, TSS recommends the following:
1. Maintain your existing drug and alcohol screening policy as you have in the past. What you did yesterday is what you must do today and tomorrow.
2. Review your NON-DOT company policy. In the event that something changes in your DOT policy, you will likely still have the ability to test under a NON-DOT policy. Having that policy in place—clearly stating your company’s drug-testing requirements —now will save you time later. Be sure your attorney reviews your policies for compliance with federal, state and local laws.
3. CBD – Use at risk. DOT is clear on its views about CBD. Read the DOT statement here. CBD is NOT medicine, and it is not FDA-regulated. Therefore, CBD may contain ingredients that will show up in a drug screen, creating a non-negative report
4. Update your job descriptions. Be clear about which roles in your business are safety-sensitive and provide details on why each position is a safety-sensitive job.
5. Clearly communicate ALL your screening policies with your employees. Explain the expectations and the consequences of violating your policies. If you need language or talking points to support this conversation, let us know.
We at TSS and our clients still have many questions. Here are a few:
1. What effect will rescheduling have on OSHA regulations?
2. If the regulations remove testing authority from laboratories, will this mean the end of marijuana screening? Is that even something to consider?
3. We know that since legalization took place in some states, there have been more accidents and more positive marijuana screens. Will workers’ comp have a viewpoint on when to pay or not to pay. Will rates be higher for those without a solid NON-DOT policy?
One thing I want to be clear about: This is a SAFETY conversation. For all of us. It is not a judgment call about the use of marijuana or a question of values. Personal feelings about marijuana use don’t matter when we are talking about public safety.
Should you have questions, please contact us. We are monitoring the situation closely and attending all briefings related to the Executive Order.
While the wheels of government usually move slowly, it remains to be seen what level of urgency this issue will have. As a reminder, President Biden started down this path, too, and could not get it across the finish line prior to the end of his term. In any case, how the President’s directive progresses and how policymakers respond are worth paying close attention to.