top of page
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
Search

Cannabis Scheduling: Then vs. Now How a 1970s Policy Still Shapes Cannabis Today By Justice | Elevated Club NYC

Cannabis didn’t always carry the stigma it does in U.S. law. In fact, for much of American history, cannabis was used medicinally and industrially. But one decision in the 1970s reshaped everything — and we’re still feeling the effects today.


This is the story of how cannabis went from a Schedule I substance to a plant now on the brink of federal reclassification — and why that matters for consumers, patients, and the legal market.





The 1970s: When Cannabis Was Classified as Schedule I



In 1970, the U.S. government passed the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Under this law, cannabis was placed into Schedule I, the most restrictive category.


Schedule I substances are defined as:


  • Having a high potential for abuse

  • Having no accepted medical use

  • Lacking safety under medical supervision



Cannabis was grouped alongside heroin and LSD — despite its long history of medicinal use and relatively low toxicity.



Politics Over Science



The classification happened during the early years of the War on Drugs, a time driven heavily by political fear rather than medical evidence.


In 1972, a federal commission known as the Shafer Commission recommended decriminalizing cannabis, concluding it was less harmful than alcohol. That recommendation was ignored.


The result?


  • Federal prohibition

  • Severe criminal penalties

  • Minimal research access

  • Decades of stigma






1980s–1990s: Reinforcing the Narrative



Throughout the ’80s and ’90s, cannabis remained Schedule I.


During this period:


  • Mandatory minimum sentencing increased

  • Arrests surged, disproportionately impacting Black and Latino communities

  • Scientific research remained tightly restricted



Ironically, while cannabis was still said to have “no medical value,” the U.S. government quietly acknowledged the therapeutic potential of cannabinoids through patents and limited research allowances.


The contradiction was clear — but the law didn’t budge.





2000s–2010s: The Shift Begins



Public opinion started to change.


States began legalizing medical cannabis, followed by adult-use legalization in places like Colorado and California. International research expanded, and medical patients increasingly spoke out about real benefits.


In 2018, the FDA approved Epidiolex, a cannabis-derived medication used to treat epilepsy — directly contradicting the Schedule I claim of “no accepted medical use.”


Yet federally, cannabis remained Schedule I.


This created a strange reality:


  • Legal at the state level

  • Illegal at the federal level

  • Businesses taxed heavily

  • Consumers navigating inconsistent rules






The 2020s: Reclassification Era



Fast forward to today.


In 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice formally proposed moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III.



What Schedule III Means



Schedule III substances:


  • Have accepted medical use

  • Have a moderate to low risk of dependence

  • Include drugs like ketamine and testosterone



For cannabis, this would mean:


  • Federal acknowledgment of medical value

  • Easier access for scientific research

  • Major tax relief for legal cannabis businesses (ending IRS 280E)

  • A shift away from viewing cannabis as a top-tier dangerous drug



What it doesn’t mean (yet):


  • Full federal legalization

  • Complete removal from drug scheduling

  • Instant nationwide consistency






Then vs. Now: A Clear Contrast



Then (1970s):


  • Cannabis treated as a dangerous narcotic

  • Research suppressed

  • Criminalization prioritized



Now (2020s):


  • Cannabis increasingly recognized for medical and wellness use

  • Science driving policy changes

  • Regulation replacing punishment






Why This Matters at Elevated Club NYC



At Elevated Club NYC, we believe education beats fear and responsibility beats misinformation.


Understanding cannabis scheduling isn’t just about policy — it’s about:


  • Knowing why stigma exists

  • Understanding why regulation matters

  • Supporting a transparent, tested, and legal market

  • Making informed choices as consumers



Cannabis isn’t harmless — but it also isn’t the villain it was once made out to be. The truth lives in balance.

 
 
 

Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
bottom of page