Cannabis Law: The Diverging Views of President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris
Cannabis legalization has become one of the most contentious issues in American politics. Over the past decade, the country has seen a significant shift in public opinion regarding the use of cannabis for both medicinal and recreational purposes. However, federal law still prohibits the possession and distribution of cannabis, classifying it as a Schedule I controlled substance—on par with drugs like heroin and LSD. This classification has led to a patchwork of state laws that differ dramatically in terms of legality and regulation.
As the debate over cannabis legalization continues to intensify, two political figures stand on opposing sides of the issue: former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris. Their stances on cannabis law reflect broader ideological differences that go beyond the substance itself, encompassing issues like criminal justice reform, states' rights, and public health.
President Trump's View on Cannabis
Donald Trump’s stance on cannabis has been inconsistent and often contradictory. During his time as President, Trump rarely made cannabis policy a central focus of his administration. However, his actions and comments on the subject provide insight into his general approach.
1. States’ Rights vs. Federal Law
Throughout his presidency, Trump was often seen as a proponent of states' rights. In theory, this would suggest support for allowing states to determine their own cannabis laws without interference from the federal government. In fact, during his 2016 campaign, Trump repeatedly emphasized that he believed the decision to legalize cannabis should be left up to individual states.
However, his administration's actions often contradicted this rhetoric. For instance, Trump appointed Jeff Sessions as Attorney General in 2017, a known opponent of cannabis legalization. Sessions wasted no time in rescinding the Obama-era Cole Memo, which provided guidance to federal prosecutors to limit enforcement actions against individuals complying with state cannabis laws. By rolling back these protections, the Trump administration essentially left the door open for federal intervention in states where cannabis was legal, signaling a reluctance to fully embrace the states’ rights argument when it came to cannabis.
2. Criminal Justice and Cannabis
Although Trump was responsible for signing the First Step Act—a criminal justice reform bill that reduced sentences for certain non-violent offenses, including some related to drug crimes—his stance on cannabis-related criminal justice reform remained vague. While he claimed to support criminal justice reform in general, his administration did little to address the thousands of people incarcerated for cannabis-related offenses.
Trump's apparent lack of a comprehensive cannabis policy led to mixed results. He never actively pushed for either full legalization or a significant federal crackdown on cannabis. This ambivalence made it difficult for industry stakeholders and activists to predict whether his second term, had he been reelected, would have brought further reforms or setbacks for the cannabis movement.
3. Medical Cannabis and Voter Sentiment
Trump expressed support for medical cannabis on several occasions, often framing it as a matter of compassion for those suffering from chronic illnesses or terminal conditions. However, he never made a concerted effort to pass federal legislation expanding access to medical cannabis. His approach to medical cannabis largely mirrored his general strategy: he voiced support but avoided taking substantive action.
Despite the growing public support for cannabis legalization (with recent polls showing nearly 70% of Americans in favor of legalizing the substance), Trump did not make it a campaign priority. His reluctance to engage deeply with the cannabis issue may have stemmed from his desire to appease his conservative base, which tends to be more skeptical of legalization efforts.
Vice President Kamala Harris' View on Cannabis
Vice President Kamala Harris has taken a much more progressive stance on cannabis law compared to Trump, especially in recent years. Harris’s position on cannabis has evolved over the course of her political career, reflecting the broader shift in public opinion and her increasing focus on criminal justice reform.
1. The Early Years: A Tough-on-Crime Approach
During her tenure as District Attorney of San Francisco and later as California’s Attorney General, Harris was known for her tough-on-crime policies, which included prosecuting individuals for cannabis-related offenses. This earned her criticism from progressive activists and advocates of cannabis reform, who viewed her actions as out of step with California’s shifting views on the substance.
At the time, Harris was reluctant to endorse cannabis legalization. In 2010, she opposed California’s Proposition 19, which aimed to legalize recreational cannabis in the state. While Harris’s early record on cannabis may seem at odds with her current position, it reflects the more conservative stance on drug policy that was prevalent among many law enforcement officials at the time.
2. A Shift in Stance: Advocating for Legalization
As Harris's political career progressed and public opinion on cannabis shifted, so did her views. By the time she was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2016, Harris had become a vocal advocate for cannabis legalization. In 2019, she co-sponsored the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act, which aimed to decriminalize cannabis at the federal level, expunge past convictions, and reinvest in communities disproportionately affected by the War on Drugs.
The MORE Act represented a significant step forward in terms of federal cannabis reform. Harris framed her support for the bill in terms of social justice, arguing that communities of color had borne the brunt of discriminatory drug policies and that cannabis legalization was a necessary component of broader criminal justice reform. Harris's advocacy for the MORE Act helped to solidify her reputation as a champion of cannabis reform among progressives and reform advocates.
3. Criminal Justice Reform and Social Equity
One of the key aspects of Harris’s cannabis policy is her focus on social equity. Unlike Trump, who rarely emphasized the social justice dimensions of cannabis reform, Harris has made it a central pillar of her advocacy. She has frequently highlighted the racial disparities in cannabis-related arrests and convictions, arguing that legalization must be accompanied by efforts to repair the damage done by the War on Drugs.
In this vein, Harris supports expunging the criminal records of individuals convicted of non-violent cannabis offenses and ensuring that minority communities have a fair opportunity to participate in the legal cannabis industry. These policies reflect a broader commitment to addressing systemic racism in the criminal justice system, a theme that has become a central part of Harris's political identity.
4. Public Health Concerns
While Harris has emerged as a staunch advocate for cannabis legalization, she has also expressed concern about ensuring that any legal framework prioritizes public health and safety. Harris supports regulations that limit youth access to cannabis and ensure that products sold in the legal market are properly tested and labeled.
Her nuanced approach reflects an acknowledgment of the potential risks associated with cannabis use, particularly among young people, while also recognizing the broader benefits of legalization in terms of reducing arrests and generating tax revenue.
The contrasting views of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris on cannabis law reflect the broader ideological divide between the two political figures. While Trump’s approach was largely characterized by ambivalence, inconsistent statements, and a reluctance to push for comprehensive reform, Harris has embraced cannabis legalization as a key part of her platform, framing it as a matter of both criminal justice reform and public health.
Trump’s position, marked by a hands-off approach and a focus on states' rights, left many questions unanswered about the future of federal cannabis policy under his leadership. Meanwhile, Harris’s more proactive stance suggests that she would support comprehensive cannabis reform at the federal level, with a particular emphasis on social equity and criminal justice.
As the debate over cannabis legalization continues to evolve, it’s clear that these two leaders represent fundamentally different paths forward for U.S. cannabis policy. For cannabis advocates, Harris’s commitment to reform provides hope for meaningful change, while Trump’s legacy remains one of missed opportunities and ambivalence on an issue that has already reshaped much of the American legal and cultural landscape.
