The fate of federal cannabis rescheduling may hinge on a personnel decision inside the White House, and the record of the man reportedly under consideration for Attorney General is not reassuring for reform advocates.

President Trump is said to be weighing a replacement for Attorney General Pam Bondi, with EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin emerging as a possible successor, according to a report from The New York Times. The reason cited for Trump’s frustration with Bondi centers on her handling of files related to Jeffrey Epstein, not cannabis policy. But the potential shake-up lands at a particularly delicate moment for rescheduling, and the cannabis industry is paying attention.

More than three months have passed since Trump signed an executive order directing Bondi to complete the process of moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act, and to do so in what the order called “the most expeditious manner.” That transfer has not happened. The rescheduling proposal has been sitting at DOJ while cultivators, dispensary operators, and multi-state companies wait for the federal tax relief that Schedule III status would trigger by releasing cannabis businesses from the grip of IRS code 280E.

For licensed farmers in California, the wait is not abstract. A cultivator paying full 280E liability while selling flower at $250 to $400 a pound wholesale is operating on margins that make normal business accounting almost irrelevant. Schedule III status would allow deductions that every other agricultural business takes for granted. Every additional month of delay is a month of full federal tax exposure on top of state licensing fees, water board compliance costs, and a wholesale market that has spent years below sustainable prices for most legacy operators.

Bondi’s history on cannabis is not without complications. She opposed reform efforts in Florida during her time as that state’s attorney general. But she received the executive order from Trump and, at minimum, the rescheduling process has not been visibly derailed under her tenure. A change at the top of DOJ introduces new uncertainty at exactly the wrong time.

Zeldin’s voting record on cannabis-related legislation during his years in the House offers a detailed, if mixed, picture. He voted against the MORE Act in 2020, the federal legalization and taxation bill that passed the House on a largely party-line vote. He was absent for a subsequent version of the bill in 2022. He voted against amendments in 2015, 2019, and 2020 that would have extended federal protections to state recreational cannabis programs, though he did vote in favor of 2015 amendments protecting state medical programs and CBD policies from federal interference.

On veterans’ access to cannabis recommendations through the VA, Zeldin twice voted yes, in 2015 and 2016. On banking access for cannabis businesses, he voted in favor of an early version of the SAFE Banking Act in 2019 but missed the 2021 vote. He voted against amendments in 2019 and 2021 aimed at easing restrictions on psychedelics research. In 2022, he voted against an amendment that would have retroactively prevented cannabis use from being the basis for denying or revoking a federal security clearance.

As a New York state senator, Zeldin voted against the bill that legalized medical cannabis in New York in 2014.

His public comments on cannabis during a 2022 gubernatorial run offer the clearest window into his personal position. In a debate with Gov. Kathy Hochul, he complained about the smell of cannabis in public spaces and expressed opposition to drug overdose prevention centers. The comment about public cannabis smell is the kind of framing that signals aesthetic and cultural discomfort with the plant rather than a nuanced policy position grounded in public health data.

None of this makes Zeldin a certainty to block rescheduling. The executive order exists, and the political pressure from within the Republican coalition to deliver at least Schedule III status is real. Trump has made the rescheduling directive part of his record, and reversing course entirely would draw attention from cannabis-friendly voters his administration has already courted. But Zeldin’s appointment could slow the process further, introduce new procedural complications, or result in a DOJ that takes a less active role in pushing the rescheduling through the required administrative steps.

The rescheduling process requires DOJ to finalize the rule change following the DEA’s earlier proposal and a public comment period that drew an enormous volume of responses, including substantial opposition from prohibitionist groups. Without leadership at DOJ that is willing to move the process forward, the timeline extends. Months become years. For a cannabis farmer who went through the cost and paperwork of obtaining a state license, who built infrastructure for the regulated market, and who has been waiting for federal policy to catch up, that is not a small thing.

The White House has not confirmed any personnel change, and Trump told The Times that Bondi “is a wonderful person and she is doing a good job.” But in this administration, that kind of public statement has not always predicted what comes next. The industry will be watching the DOJ closely this spring.