Marijuana Moment Petitions DEA Judge to Livestream Rescheduling Hearing

Motion Filed Under 21 CFR § 1316.57 Administrative Hearing Rules

Marijuana Moment invoked the DEA's administrative hearing regulations, which grant the presiding administrative law judge (ALJ) discretion to permit recording and broadcast of proceedings. Under 21 CFR § 1316.57, the ALJ may authorize audio or video recording "for good cause shown"—a standard the outlet contends is met by the unprecedented public stakes of the rescheduling determination. The motion was docketed June 23, 2026, weeks ahead of the hearing's anticipated start date.

The petition doesn't request in-person attendance by media beyond existing courtroom capacity. Instead, it seeks a live video feed accessible to the public via the internet, mirroring protocols adopted in high-profile administrative and judicial proceedings. The DEA hasn't yet issued a response or scheduling order addressing the request.

Rescheduling Hearing Background and Procedural Posture

The administrative hearing stems from the DEA's August 2024 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to reschedule cannabis to Schedule III, a move triggered by the Department of Health and Human Services' binding scientific recommendation under 21 U.S.C. § 811(b). A 60-day comment period generated over 43,000 submissions. Multiple parties—including state attorneys general, medical societies, and cannabis industry coalitions—then requested a formal evidentiary hearing under the Administrative Procedure Act.

The DEA granted that request in February 2026, designating an ALJ to preside over witness testimony, cross-examination, and documentary evidence on three statutory criteria:

• Cannabis's accepted medical use in treatment in the United States
• Its abuse potential relative to Schedule I and II substances
• The degree of psychological or physical dependence liability

The hearing record will form the basis of the ALJ's recommended decision to the DEA Administrator, who retains final rulemaking authority. No final rule can be issued until the administrative hearing concludes and the record closes.

Transparency Precedent and Public-Interest Rationale

Marijuana Moment's motion cites transparency precedents from federal courts and administrative agencies that have livestreamed proceedings of comparable public significance. The rescheduling determination affects 38 state-legal medical programs, 24 adult-use markets, and an estimated 55 million cannabis consumers. That scale, the outlet argues, warrants the same level of public access as landmark judicial hearings.

Audio livestreaming has been adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court (beginning in 2020), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and select administrative tribunals including the Federal Trade Commission's adjudicative proceedings. Video broadcast is less common. Still, it's been authorized in cases where the ALJ finds that recording won't compromise witness testimony or decorum.

The regulatory text gives the ALJ broad discretion. The motion doesn't trigger automatic approval; the judge may deny the request, grant it with conditions (such as witness-by-witness determinations), or defer a ruling until the hearing's opening session. Industry observers expect the DEA to file a response within 14 days, either supporting, opposing, or taking no position on the livestream petition.

For full procedural background on the rescheduling timeline and evidentiary standards, see the CannIntel topic hub on DEA rescheduling.

The next procedural signal: the ALJ's ruling on the livestream motion and the finalized hearing calendar, both expected by mid-July 2026. If granted, the livestream would mark the first real-time public broadcast of a federal cannabis rescheduling proceeding in the 54-year history of the Controlled Substances Act.