As President Donald Trump signals renewed interest in reclassifying cannabis from a Schedule I drug to Schedule III, a policy goal long championed by liberals and libertarians, the reaction among some partisan progressive advocates is not celebration, but concern.

As first reported by Kyle Jaeger of Marijuana Moment, a political committee known as the Progressive Turnout Project is warning its supporters that President Trump and Republicans could “steal marijuana reform right out from under us.” 

The group’s fundraising email urges Democrats to reclaim the issue before Trump acts and gives the GOP credit for a reform that many on the left have spent decades advancing.  

Progressive Turnout says it supports the creation of a “Marijuana Decriminalization Advisory Board” and is urging Democratic support for the MORE Act, recently reintroduced by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). “Look, anti-marijuana policies wrongfully target Black Americans and have cost the U.S. BILLIONS of dollars,” it says. “Thankfully, House Democrats are working to federally legalize cannabis by sponsoring the Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act.”

For 55 years, ever since President Richard Nixon declared drug abuse “public enemy number one,” voters on the left have decried the moral and economic failures of classifying cannabis alongside heroin and LSD as "drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse."

As IVN reported in Nixon Admitted Weed Wasn’t Dangerous, But Killed It to Crush Political Dissent, Nixon’s own commission on drug abuse concluded that cannabis posed minimal harm compared to other controlled substances. Yet Nixon ignored those findings, using the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 to solidify federal prohibition, a decision whose political consequences shape today’s debate.

The second Trump administration has kept a proposal to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III formally active since the Department of Health and Human Services recommended the change in 2023. The process, as IVN has covered, remains administratively paused by a DEA judge but is alive and awaiting final review. The shift would recognize the accepted medical use of cannabis and ease the tax burdens that have crippled legal operators under IRS code 280E. 

During his April confirmation hearing, Trump’s nominee for DEA administrator, Terrance Cole, declined to commit to moving forward with rescheduling, leaving the industry, investors, and reformers guessing whether the administration would deliver on Trump’s campaign promise.

But The Wall Street Journal and CNN reported August 8 that President Trump said privately at a fundraiser that he was open to reclassifying cannabis under federal law, a move that could have far-reaching implications for the legal industry, the illicit market, national drug policy, and electoral politics in the 2026 cycle. On August 11, in a news conference held in the White House briefing room, Trump made it public:

We're looking at reclassification, and we'll make a determination over the next -- I would say over the next few weeks, and that determination hopefully will be the right one. It's a very complicated subject.”

Celebrities, veterans’ advocates, and patient groups have urged the White House to act, most visibly after Mike Tyson publicly called on President Trump to “make good” on his pledge to reschedule cannabis, calling it “a victory for science and common sense.”

As IVN reported in late August, speculation that Trump could take executive action “within days” sparked a wave of anticipation and unease across both political camps, the first credible sign in decades that federal drug classification might finally shift.

On September 28, President Trump posted a Truth Social video praising CBD as a “game-changer” for seniors. The post sent cannabis stocks soaring, with one company’s shares climbing more than 40 percent.  The video the President shared was created by The Commonwealth Project, a pro-cannabis organization founded by Howard Kessler, who is a friend of the President described in the press as being part of his “inner circle.” Kessler and his wife attended Trump’s 2005 wedding to Melania and are longtime members of his Mar-a-Lago club.

Yet for progressives, the timing of Trump's forward movement is awkward. As Marijuana Moment reported, the Progressive Turnout Project is pushing instead for the passage of a bill that will never pass as long as the GOP controls the House, the Senate, and the Presidency.  “The GOP controls the House, and they want this bill canceled,” the email says. It is the political optics about which side will appear to have liberated cannabis from its decades-long stigma that seems to matter most in today’s political environment.

Surveys show that younger and independent voters, many of whom view cannabis reform as a litmus test for generational progress, could reassess Trump if he enacts a change that Democratic administrations (Carter, Clinton, Obama, Biden) only debated and never accomplished. IVN’s reporting has traced how rescheduling, even without full legalization, could transform the cannabis market overnight, legitimizing medical research, expanding access to banking, and narrowing the gap between state and federal law.

As IVN explored in Why the War on Cannabis Refuses to Die: How Boomers and the Yippies Made Weed Political, cannabis reform has always been about more than policy. It is a measure of cultural identity and political trust. Now, the prospect of a Republican president securing that legacy invites discomfort, even resentment.

As Jaeger’s reporting makes clear, the tug of war over cannabis reform may be less about classification than credit.

“If Democrats don’t act now,” the PAC warned, “Trump and the GOP could steal marijuana reform right out from under us.” That message shows how divided politics can twist incentives until partisans hesitate to celebrate the very progress they once demanded, preferring to lose an issue rather than let the other side win it.

The bigger lesson for independent voters is not about cannabis at all. It is about what happens when a two-party dominated system turns every policy into a contest for political gain instead of an earnest search for solutions. In a healthier democracy, the power of a good idea that makes sense would matter much more than which party is advancing it. Whether it is drug reform, election reform, or anything else that serves the public good, progress should not depend on which party stands to get the credit. Until our system is opened up to include independent voters and give them meaningful participation, the ideas that unite most Americans will keep dying in the crossfire of politics designed to divide us into two groups.