Today : Aug 30, 2025
U.S. News
20 August 2025

Trump Administration Faces Crossroads On Marijuana And Mental Health

As President Trump weighs marijuana rescheduling and pauses mental health parity rules, patients and advocates warn of high stakes for science, safety, and access to care.

On August 19, 2025, a pair of pivotal health policy debates reached a fever pitch in Washington, D.C., as President Donald Trump’s administration weighed two consequential moves: rescheduling marijuana at the federal level and pausing new mental health parity rules designed to bolster protections for millions of Americans. These decisions, though seemingly distinct, are deeply intertwined with the nation’s ongoing struggle to balance public health, regulatory oversight, and the power of industry interests.

For decades, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has been both gatekeeper and roadblock for those seeking to reform marijuana policy. According to ACCESS Newswire, critics have long accused the DEA of writing rules and then ignoring them, promising science but sidelining it, and leaving patients with Huntington’s Disease and Multiple Sclerosis waiting for access to potentially life-changing treatments. The arrival of President Trump’s renewed consideration of marijuana rescheduling marks, for many, the first serious chance in years to break this cycle.

Yet the challenge is formidable. Newly confirmed DEA Administrator Terrance Cole, a law enforcement veteran of over 30 years, has made his stance crystal clear: “Everybody knows my stance on marijuana after 30 plus years in law enforcement, so don’t even ask!” Cole’s priorities are unmistakable—fentanyl, cartels, and violent drug trafficking top his list, not marijuana reform. Still, the debate is not as simple as pitting law enforcement against legalization advocates.

On one side of the cannabis conversation stands the $33 billion marijuana industry, which, according to ACCESS Newswire, has “cloaked itself in medical rhetoric while chasing profits through high-potency recreational products.” Today’s marijuana products—gummies, vapes, and concentrates—can reach THC levels as high as 99%, a far cry from the milder 5% THC cannabis of decades past. Large-scale studies in Denmark and Sweden have demonstrated that such high-potency products carry real risks, including psychosis, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder.

President Trump’s personal history shapes his approach. Having lost his brother Fred Jr. to alcoholism, Trump has famously avoided alcohol and drugs, and he understands firsthand the devastation of addiction. The stakes are high, and the risk of opening the floodgates to “Big Weed” is not lost on him or his advisors.

But there’s another side to the story. As Duane Boise, CEO of MMJ International Holdings, put it, “With all due respect to law enforcement, you can’t fight a disease with a badge. MMJ is developing FDA regulated medicine, not an illicit substance. We are the science, and our mission is to treat patients, not to police a plant.”

MMJ International Holdings is not your typical cannabis company. Unlike recreational marijuana businesses or state dispensaries, MMJ has built a pharmaceutical pathway: two FDA-approved Investigational New Drug applications (INDs) for Huntington’s Disease and Multiple Sclerosis, an FDA Orphan Drug Designation for Huntington’s Disease, and a DEA Schedule I analytical lab registration. Most notably, MMJ manufactures a standardized softgel capsule under FDA directives—a reproducible, pharmaceutical-grade medicine designed for use under physician supervision, not a dispensary product or vape pen.

“Reproducibility has been achieved—the cornerstone of real science,” MMJ asserts. Now, the company seeks to prove efficacy in FDA-authorized human clinical trials. The evidence of benefit, while often anecdotal, is compelling: cancer patients use cannabis to control nausea and pain, MS patients to ease spasticity, and children with epilepsy to reduce seizures. However, as the company and its advocates emphasize, anecdotes are not enough. Only rigorous, FDA-supervised clinical trials can separate myth from medicine.

Yet, despite the DEA’s 2020 pledge to prioritize science in issuing new marijuana licenses—requiring applicants to have FDA protocols, research supply agreements, and the capacity to produce adequate trial quantities—no registrant has delivered. According to ACCESS Newswire, “Some never planted a seed. Others produced trivial amounts. None filed with the FDA.” MMJ BioPharma, the only company meeting the DEA’s published criteria, remains stalled.

The choice facing President Trump and Administrator Cole, then, is not between blanket legalization and prohibition. As the ACCESS Newswire article argues, it’s a choice between “Big Weed’s recreational profiteering that fuels addiction, psychosis, and chaos” and “FDA-regulated, science-driven pharmaceutical research that could deliver safe, effective medicines to patients with no alternatives.” The path forward, advocates say, is clear: support companies like MMJ that are committed to turning anecdotal evidence into approved therapies, and draw a bright line between recreational profiteering and legitimate medicine.

Meanwhile, another health policy flashpoint is unfolding in the realm of mental health. According to ProPublica, the Trump administration has paused new mental health parity rules issued in September 2024 during President Biden’s final months. These rules were designed to strengthen protections and hold insurers accountable for coverage denials, requiring health plans to report detailed data on how they restrict or deny mental health claims and to explain corrective actions if disparities were found.

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC), representing large employers, sued to block the rules just days before Trump’s second inauguration in 2025. A federal judge granted a pause on enforcement during litigation and for 18 months afterward. The administration also asked the court to stay the lawsuit while considering whether to rescind or modify the rules, effectively freezing the new protections.

Complicating matters, Congress has curtailed funding for the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), the small agency responsible for enforcing mental health parity in employer-sponsored health insurance. EBSA’s workforce is projected to drop from 831 employees in 2024 to 687 or fewer by 2026, a nearly 20% reduction. The funding squeeze, largely the result of the expiration of temporary supplemental funds provided under the December 2020 No Surprises Act, leaves the agency with fewer investigators and benefit advisers, and longer waits for patients challenging insurance decisions.

Between February 2021 and July 2024, EBSA conducted 150 investigations and issued 70 violation letters related to mental health parity law enforcement. The agency’s limited resources mean that each investigator is responsible for overseeing thousands of health plans, and as front-line workers told ProPublica, the loss of staff has led to higher caseloads and longer delays for those seeking help. “Imagine if you are a parent calling about lifesaving care your kid needs,” said Ali Khawar, former second-in-command at EBSA. “With less money and fewer employees, the agency isn’t equipped to open new investigations quickly.”

Supporters of the new rules argue that the pause will have real consequences, including more untreated mental illness and growing frustration with insurers. Opponents, like James Gelfand, president and CEO of ERIC, contend the rules were overly vague and burdensome, saying, “While we do support mental health parity generally, we don’t support this rule.”

President Trump’s first term saw significant investments in mental health, including grants to expand community services and support for parity enforcement. But his current administration has moved to roll back several Biden-era initiatives, including the mental health parity rules. The Senate Appropriations Committee has signaled that enforcement remains a priority, but without restored funding, EBSA’s ability to protect patients is diminished.

As the nation watches these policy battles unfold, the stakes for patients—whether seeking cannabis-based medicines for debilitating diseases or fighting for insurance coverage for mental health care—could not be higher. The choices made in the coming months will shape the future of American health policy for years to come.