Feds Call Marijuana A ‘Deadly’ Drug And Say Even Medical Cannabis Has ‘Serious Consequences’
- barneyelias0
- 2 days ago
- 2 min read
Updated: 16 hours ago
October 02 2025

Federal Agencies Target Cannabis in Drug Crackdown
Overview
Federal officials label cannabis a "deadly" drug, emphasizing seizures and legal consequences. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued warnings amid rising drug seizures and President Trump's cannabis rescheduling proposal.
Key Points
Seizure Surge: CBP reported increased seizures of cannabis, fentanyl, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine from July to August.
Cartel Focus: DHS links cannabis to cartel activity, citing a House Homeland Security Subcommittee hearing on Chinese and Mexican cartels’ illicit operations.
Travel Warning: CBP cautioned travelers against crossing borders with cannabis, citing U.S. federal law that deems it illegal, even for medical use. Consequences include seizures, fines, or arrest.
Rhetoric Clash: Federal stance contrasts with Trump’s comments on CBD benefits and cannabis penalty reform.
Agency Statements
CBP: “Cartels are desperate, but the Trump Administration is stopping their deadly operations.”
DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin: “Fewer families will be torn apart by addiction, fewer lives lost to overdoses, and fewer profits to cartels.”
CBP Social Media: “Think twice before crossing the border with cannabis. It could affect your ability to enter the U.S. #KnowBeforeYouGo.”
Context
Legal Challenges: New Mexico cannabis businesses sued DHS and CBP in January, alleging unconstitutional seizures of state-legal products.
Policy Shift: CBP reduced its employment ineligibility period for past cannabis use from two years to three months in 2023, sparking criticism from a GOP senator.
CBD Concerns: CBP warned that unregulated CBD products may contain THC, risking positive drug tests.
Implications
Despite federal cannabis rescheduling discussions, DHS and CBP maintain strict enforcement, highlighting tensions with state-legal programs and public perceptions.
Comments