Will the Supreme Court End Federal Cannabis Prohibition? A Long-Awaited Answer Is Near
For the first time in decades, the U.S. Supreme Court could take up a case that directly challenges federal marijuana prohibition potentially doing what Congress and the White House have long failed to deliver for the nation’s $32 billion cannabis industry.
This week, the court set a closed-door meeting for Dec. 12 to determine whether it will hear Canna Provisions et al. v. Bondi, a constitutional challenge filed by four cannabis businesses. If the justices agree to take the case, and if they ultimately rule in the industry’s favor, the decision could reshape federal marijuana policy more dramatically than the Biden or Trump administrations’ rescheduling efforts.
“People in this industry have been told for the better part of a decade that relief is coming and it hasn’t come,” said attorney Josh Schiller of Boies Schiller Flexner, who is arguing the case. “Why is the federal government so far behind more than two-thirds of the country? We don’t know. This case was a way to shake the box a little bit.”
Supreme Court Moves Forward on Challenge to Federal Cannabis Prohibition
According to the court docket, the lawsuit was placed on the Supreme Court’s conference calendar, a key step that positions the justices to formally consider taking the case in January.
Filed in October 2023 by Chicago-based Verano Holdings and three Massachusetts companies — Canna Provisions, Treevit founder Gyasi Sellers, and Wiseacre Farm — the lawsuit argues that federal cannabis restrictions laid out in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) are no longer constitutional.
The last time federal cannabis law reached the Supreme Court was in 2005 with Gonzalez v. Raich, an era when no states allowed adult-use sales. Today, 38 states permit regulated medical or recreational markets, and public support for reform has surged.
Even some conservative justices, notably Clarence Thomas, have questioned the logic of maintaining full federal prohibition when the federal government simultaneously tolerates state-regulated industries.
Why a Successful Supreme Court Challenge Could Do More Than Federal Rescheduling
The core argument is that the factual basis behind the 2005 ruling no longer exists. With Congress and federal agencies increasingly carving out exceptions — such as budget riders preventing DOJ interference in state medical programs, the plaintiffs claim lawmakers no longer intend to fully enforce federal prohibition.
During oral arguments last year, prominent litigator David Boies argued that congressional actions signal a shift in intent and that the CSA’s application to legal intrastate markets violates the Constitution.
So far, district and appellate courts have rejected that argument. But the Supreme Court could see things differently.
If a ruling strikes down federal prohibition as applied to state-legal cannabis markets, operators could see immediate and profound benefits, including:
- Relief from IRS 280E
Eliminating the tax code provision that bars cannabis businesses from claiming standard deductions would save operators millions. - Expanded access to banking and capital
A clear federal greenlight could open the door to mainstream financial institutions, institutional investors and traditional stock exchanges. - Stronger legal footing for ongoing 280E refund claims
Some multistate operators are already arguing that 280E no longer applies to them under evolving federal policy. A Supreme Court ruling could bolster those efforts.
“There would be people in a place to claim refunds that would be substantial,” Schiller said.
What a Supreme Court Win Won’t Do: Interstate Commerce and Hemp THC
While a victory in Canna Provisions v. Bondi could legitimize state cannabis markets at the federal level, it would not automatically legalize interstate cannabis commerce.
The plaintiffs’ argument centers on states’ rights to regulate intrastate markets without federal interference. Because most states currently prohibit importing or exporting recreational cannabis, a ruling against prohibition would not force interstate trade.
The case also won’t alter the federal ban on hemp-derived intoxicating cannabinoids such as delta-8 THC and THCA flower set to take effect in November 2026. Congress explicitly granted itself regulatory authority over hemp THC products in the recent government funding bill signed by President Trump.
Many states have already imposed their own restrictions or bans on those products.
A Landmark Ruling Could Reshape Corporate Cannabis and Consumer Perception
Although interstate commerce is unlikely to open immediately, a Supreme Court ruling that invalidates federal prohibition would dramatically change the business landscape.
Such validation could accelerate the entry of major consumer-packaged goods companies, including alcohol and tobacco giants already eyeing the sector. Even mainstream retailers could follow.
A Decision With National Implications Is Now Weeks Away
Whether or not the Supreme Court hears the case and ultimately rules against federal prohibition, the fact that the justices are even considering revisiting the issue marks a historic moment for the cannabis industry.
For now, cannabis operators and advocates must wait until early 2025 to learn whether the country’s highest court will finally confront one of the nation’s most entrenched and controversial drug policies.
For more information contact at info@cannabisriskmanager.com
OG source Download Article 
