Over the years, I’ve written extensively about cannabis labels and packaging. My articles have been a hit, so to speak, and have even led to me being asked to present on the topic at industry events. I am a cannabis consumer that shops at retail dispensaries, and a journalist that’s covered the label industry for going on 16 years – so I love it when these worlds collide. 

One of the reasons I keep coming back to cannabis labeling and packaging is simple: the market never stands still. It’s constantly evolving, driven by regulation, compliance pressures, and operational shifts. And when cannabis makes headlines – which it seems to do frequently – it’s usually a signal that change is coming. That was certainly the case as 2025 drew to a close.

In December, President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order directing federal agencies – principally the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) – to expeditiously complete the federal rulemaking process to reschedule marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.

The move of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act has been framed as both a medical and a financial story. From a medical perspective, moving marijuana to a lower schedule acknowledges its therapeutic potential and opens the door to expanded clinical research, standardized formulations, and broader physician participation in prescribing and treatment protocols. At the same time, the change carries major financial implications: it reshapes tax structures, lowers barriers to traditional banking and investment, and signals greater regulatory legitimacy for cannabis-related businesses. Together, these forces are accelerating industry maturation – transforming cannabis from a fringe, cash-driven market into a more transparent, research-backed, and investment-ready sector with growing implications for healthcare, manufacturing, and consumer packaged goods.

It’s also a labeling story.

This is the kind of regulatory shift that starts quietly, shows up first in legal reviews and copy edits, and eventually lands on pressrooms, prepress departments, and print production schedules.

Cannabis has spent decades in a federal category reserved for substances deemed to have no accepted medical use. That designation shaped everything about how cannabis products have been labeled: state-by-state rules, inconsistent enforcement, creative language that implies benefits without explicitly claiming them, and packaging that often looks more like lifestyle branding than regulated product communication. Moving cannabis to Schedule III doesn’t erase those realities overnight, but it changes how regulators view what’s printed on a package.

Schedule III status acknowledges accepted medical use. And once the federal government does that, the FDA’s interest in how products are described and warned about becomes much harder to ignore.

This is where label and packaging professionals come in.

It’s important to be clear about what rescheduling does and does not do. Schedule III does not federally legalize recreational marijuana, nor does it automatically transform dispensary products into FDA-approved drugs. But it does reposition cannabis into the same federal framework as drugs like codeine and ketamine – substances that carry explicit labeling, warning, and dosage expectations. The mere act of rescheduling brings cannabis closer to the FDA’s regulatory orbit, particularly when products are marketed with suggestions of medical benefit.

And suggestion matters. For years, cannabis labels have lived in a gray zone where state regulators set the rules and federal oversight was largely theoretical. That allowed brands to rely on language that danced around claims such as “relaxing,” “supports sleep,” “promotes balance,” “designed for relief,” and so on.

Under a Schedule I framework, enforcement has been uneven and mostly reactive. Under Schedule III, that ambiguity becomes riskier.

Federal law is very clear on one point: if a product is marketed to diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat, or prevent disease, it is considered a drug and requires FDA approval. That standard doesn’t change, but the likelihood of it being applied does. Once cannabis is officially recognized as having medical use, the FDA has stronger footing to question whether certain label language crosses that line.

That shift alone should get the attention of anyone involved in cannabis label design or production.

Industry experts are already pointing to the downstream effects. 

Adam Stettner, CEO of FundCanna, a source of capital for the cannabis industry nationwide, has said that rescheduling will unlock research pathways that have been blocked for decades, enabling more standardized formulations and clinical studies. 

From a product development standpoint, that’s exciting. From a labeling standpoint, it’s transformative. Standardized formulations demand standardized disclosures. Consistent dosing expectations demand consistent language. Research-backed products invite scrutiny of how benefits are communicated.

Legal analysts, however, are quick to caution that rescheduling doesn’t resolve the underlying conflict between state cannabis laws and federal oversight. 

David Armentano of Cannabis Business Times says that moving cannabis to Schedule III still leaves state legalization frameworks at odds with federal regulation. For label professionals, that means complexity doesn’t go away – it becomes layered. State rules will continue to govern THC symbols, warning statements, and packaging formats, while federal expectations begin to exert pressure on claims, accuracy, and substantiation.

That layered compliance environment is where labels are affected.

From a design and prepress perspective, one of the earliest changes will be how copy is reviewed and approved. In highly regulated categories like pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals, and OTC products, creative teams understand that legal review is not optional and not last-minute. Cannabis brands are heading in that direction whether they realize it or not. Words that once felt harmless will be scrutinized. Fonts, prominence, placement, and hierarchy will matter more. Legibility won’t be a design preference – it will be a compliance expectation.

That doesn’t mean cannabis labels will suddenly resemble prescription bottles, but it does mean that clarity will start to outweigh cleverness. The more cannabis products lean into wellness or medical positioning, the more their labels will need to support those claims with evidence.

Operationally, this has consequences. Many cannabis brands already juggle dozens or hundreds of SKUs due to state-specific labeling rules. Adding a federal compliance overlay increases versioning complexity even further. Warning language may need to change. Dosage expressions may need to be standardized. Backend data fields for batch information and compliance documentation may expand. For converters, this reinforces the value of digital and hybrid print workflows that can handle frequent changes without introducing errors.

It also elevates the role of the label printer.

Converters with experience in regulated markets understand how to flag risky language, how to design modular label workflows that allow compliant text to be swapped without redesigning entire layouts, and how to build workflows that document changes for audit purposes. Those skills are going to matter more as the cannabis market matures.

Materials and packaging formats will also feel the pressure. As cannabis products edge closer to pharmaceutical norms, there will be increased attention on ink migration, adhesive performance, substrate traceability, and durability. Child-resistant and tamper-evident packaging, already common in many states, will likely converge toward more standardized solutions influenced by drug packaging expectations. This pushes cannabis further into what might be described as “pharma-lite” territory, particularly for tinctures, capsules, and other edible products.

Again, this is familiar ground for narrow web converters serving pharma and supplement markets. It may be new territory for cannabis brands, but it’s not new to the label industry.

Marketing and advertising considerations further complicate things. While some have suggested that rescheduling could loosen advertising restrictions, the reality is more nuanced. Platform policies from companies like Google and Meta often operate independently of federal scheduling, and health claims remain tightly controlled regardless of schedule. Rescheduling may increase scrutiny of packaging messaging by raising expectations around substantiation and consistency.

That puts labels in a precarious position. They are both marketing tools and regulated communications. As cannabis moves closer to medical recognition, that balance shifts toward regulation.

From a production standpoint, the implications are clear. Prepress departments will need stronger compliance checkpoints. Documentation and file retention will matter more. Change control will become a necessity rather than a nice-to-have. Quality management practices long associated with pharmaceutical labeling will start creeping into cannabis workflows, whether formally adopted or not.

What rescheduling will not do is simplify the business overnight. Recreational cannabis remains federally illegal. State regulators will continue to enforce their own rules aggressively. FDA approval is not automatic and requires clinical evidence and formal applications. But rescheduling lowers barriers to research, encourages standardization, and signals that cannabis is no longer operating entirely outside the federal regulatory imagination.

And that’s the key point for Label & Narrow Web readers. 

Cannabis labeling is entering a new phase. Less improvisational. More disciplined. More accountable.

Labels will be where this transition shows up first – in the words chosen, the warnings required, the materials specified, and the workflows demanded. Converters and graphic designers who understand regulated labeling principles, who can manage complexity without errors, and who can help customers navigate what’s defensible versus what’s risky will be better positioned as this market evolves.

Because when cannabis finally steps out of regulatory adolescence, it won’t be the headlines that define the transition. It will be the labels. And the pressroom will feel it before anyone else does.

Cannabis rescheduling: Labeling impact at a glance
Schedule I (Today)
• No federally recognized medical use
• Label rules driven almost entirely by state regulators
• Limited FDA involvement in cannabis packaging
• Wide variation in warnings, symbols, and formats
• Primarily recreational-style packaging approaches
Schedule III (Proposed)
• Federally recognized medical value
• Greater FDA influence on medical product labeling
• Tighter scrutiny of claims and disclosures
• Potential for baseline federal labeling standards
• Increased use of medical-style packaging formats
What Doesn’t Change
• Recreational cannabis remains federally illegal
• State labeling rules still apply
• Transition will be gradual, not immediate

Steve Katz is the former editor of Label & Narrow Web and is now a regular contributor. He is focused on helping companies in the label industry share their news and tell their stories. Follow him on X @LabelSteve.