As of 2025, President Donald Trump’s posture on cannabis is best described as incremental federal reform paired with a strong state-by-state framing, rather than a clear embrace of comprehensive federal legalization.
During the 2024 campaign, Trump publicly supported a Florida ballot initiative to legalize adult-use cannabis, a notable statement from a Republican nominee and a departure from the party’s historically more restrictive rhetoric. At the same time, his broader commentary has consistently emphasized federalism—arguing that legalization decisions should largely be left to individual states—while also signaling comfort with access to medical cannabis.
That “states decide” theme matters because full federal legalization typically requires Congress to remove or substantially revise federal prohibition. This includes changing cannabis’s status under the federal Controlled Substances Act, addressing interstate commerce, reforming federal tax policy, and resolving conflicts tied to immigration, firearms ownership, employment law, and banking. Trump has not advanced or consistently promoted a comprehensive federal legalization bill that would establish a national adult-use regulatory framework.
Instead, the most concrete policy lane associated with President Trump has focused on rescheduling cannabis under federal law. In 2024 and continuing into 2025, Trump signaled support for moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III, framing the move as a step that better reflects accepted medical use, expands research opportunities, and reduces regulatory friction for legitimate businesses. By late 2025, industry observers and legal analysts widely viewed rescheduling as the most plausible near-term federal cannabis action tied to the White House.
Rescheduling, however, is not legalization. Even if cannabis is placed in Schedule III, federal criminal prohibitions would not automatically vanish, and states without legal medical or adult-use programs would not suddenly become legal markets. Interstate commerce would remain restricted, and federal agencies would still retain enforcement authority. In practical terms, rescheduling eases scientific research and may improve financial and tax conditions for operators, but it stops well short of creating a federally legal adult-use marketplace.
Trump has also expressed openness to cannabis banking reform, particularly measures that allow state-legal cannabis businesses to access traditional financial institutions. Supporters of this approach argue it would improve public safety by reducing cash-based operations and increase regulatory oversight and transparency. Within the industry, pairing rescheduling with banking reform is widely viewed as a politically achievable compromise compared to sweeping legalization.
Taken together, Trump’s 2025 position reflects a pragmatic willingness to modernize select aspects of federal cannabis policy without fully endorsing nationwide legalization. For regulators, investors, and cannabis operators, that distinction is critical. The trajectory points toward targeted federal reforms—such as rescheduling and banking access—while comprehensive legalization remains dependent on congressional action and broader bipartisan alignment.