For the first time in U.S. history, both presidential candidates have spoken in favor of rescheduling cannabis, if not outright legalization. Despite their track records, their current support for cannabis reform is welcomed by the industry. In light of tonight's presidential debate, let's review both candidates' positions and the changes that led to their support of cannabis.
Harris
The vice president has openly supported cannabis legalization, which would make her the first president to back this cause if elected. Her running mate, Tim Walz, is also a strong advocate, having supported multiple cannabis reform measures as governor of Minnesota and signed a comprehensive legalization bill into law in 2023.
However, Harris's record as District Attorney of San Francisco and Attorney General of California has left her open to attacks from the Trump campaign on cannabis issues. Trump has highlighted that more than 1,500 people were jailed for cannabis offenses under Harris. This claim appears exaggerated, with actual figures much lower. In 2010, Harris campaigned against an adult-use ballot initiative but became vocal about her support for legalization in 2018, as speculation about her presidential ambitions grew.
Trump
Historically, Trump has maintained that cannabis policies should be handled at the state level. During his presidency, he did not oppose states regulating the cannabis industry. Recently, Trump expressed support for cannabis rescheduling and even claimed he would vote in favor of a legalization amendment in Florida.
While in office, Trump supported medical cannabis and signed the "Right to Try" law, allowing limited use of unapproved drugs, cannabis included. His stance on cannabis was mixed; he supported certain reforms but maintained a hardline approach to illicit drugs.
Tonight's Debate
Whether cannabis rescheduling or legalization will be discussed tonight remains to be seen. However, both candidates have already exchanged views on the subject.
Trump has criticized Harris's time as DA and AG. "She was a bad prosecutor. She prosecuted Black people," Trump said in an interview on Fox News's The Ingraham Angle. "She put thousands and thousands of Black people in jail over marijuana. But when it came to big crimes—murders and everything else—she was weak." According to The Mercury News, only 45 people were sentenced to state prison for marijuana convictions during Harris's seven years in office, although county jail sentences may not be included in that figure. Attorneys note that many arrested for marijuana during Harris's tenure were not charged or incarcerated. Harris's campaign is reportedly advised not to engage if Trump brings up these points during the debate.
Meanwhile, Harris's campaign has responded to Trump's support for legalization, calling it a lie and stating that he "took cannabis reform backward." However, Trump has largely remained consistent in advocating for state-level cannabis policies without federal interference.
Reaction from the industry
Candidates' recent statements have been met with both praise and skepticism from the cannabis industry.
Sundie Seefried, CEO of SHF Holdings, welcomed Trump's support for rescheduling cannabis but emphasized that it does not solve the significant banking challenges facing the industry. She noted that rescheduling or descheduling doesn't necessarily reduce regulation or risk, highlighting the importance of passing legislation like SAFER Banking. "It's important to note that rescheduling alone will not solve the significant banking challenges facing the cannabis industry," he said in a statement. "During Trump's own administration, the Department of Justice under Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded the Cole memo, creating further uncertainty and obstacles for financial institutions looking to serve the legal cannabis market. Comprehensive federal legalization, coupled with clear regulatory guidance or reduced regulation, is ultimately what's needed to create a stable and thriving banking environment for the cannabis sector. I encourage the former president, and all policymakers, to work in a bipartisan manner to achieve this goal."
Anthony Coniglio, president and CEO of NewLake Capital Partners, called the recent shift in cannabis policy a historic moment, noting that this is the first time both major party candidates have supported cannabis reform. He expressed hope that comprehensive federal legalization would attract institutional investors and create a stable financial environment for cannabis businesses. "We applaud both campaigns for recognizing what 90% of Americans agree on; medical cannabis should be legal in the U.S. Our hope is that comprehensive federal legalization will provide the certainty needed to attract larger institutional investors and create a more stable financial environment for cannabis businesses. We urge policymakers on both sides of the aisle to continue pushing for long-term solutions that will fully integrate the industry into the broader financial system, supporting growth, innovation and most importantly, safe regulated access to cannabis products."
Saphira Galoob, Executive Director of the National Cannabis Roundtable, also welcomed Trump's support for states' rights in implementing their own cannabis policies. She emphasized the importance of responsible, regulated cannabis markets. "We look forward to seeing more progress towards the end of federal prohibition in the coming weeks, months, and years. Legislators on both sides of the aisle need to come together and get something done to end the federal prohibition of cannabis and implement other vital federal cannabis reforms – starting with getting SAFE Banking enacted by year's end."
The skepticism is mainly caused by both candidates' vagueness on the different policies necessary to provide the industry with long-awaited reforms. A skepticism that perhaps may be cleared with tonight's debate. Regardless, it seems there's an intention for things to be different, and the industry appears to be hopeful that whoever will be the president, cannabis will be addressed positively in a bipartisan fashion.