Cannabis Firms Gave $11.5M to Trump-Linked PAC in June

Photo by Towfiqu barbhuiya via Pexels.

Four checks for $2.5 million apiece landed in the same PAC's account last month, and they came from four of the biggest names in American cannabis. New filings with the Federal Election Commission show Trulieve, Curaleaf, Verano and a Green Thumb Industries subsidiary each wrote identical seven-figure donations to America First Agriculture Action Inc., a group with close ties to Donald Trump's political operation. Add a few smaller contributions from other multi-state operators, and the industry poured $11.5 million into Trump-aligned political infrastructure in a single month.

The timing is hard to ignore. These donations arrived weeks after the Justice Department, under Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, moved forward with a plan to shift marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act — a rescheduling push Trump promised during the 2024 campaign and later reinforced with an executive order. Combine June's giving with earlier contributions to Trump-connected committees, and cannabis companies have now funneled roughly $15.05 million toward his political network, according to a review of FEC records.

That figure is drawing scrutiny not because the donations are illegal — they aren't — but because of what's still sitting on the DEA's desk. A rescheduling decision that could reshape tax policy, banking access and interstate commerce for the entire industry now rests partly with a Trump-appointed administrator, and the money trail leading to his boss's political committees is impossible to separate from the pending outcome.

Who Gave What in June

Photo by Romain Dancre via Unsplash.

The June filings read almost like a lineup of the cannabis industry's biggest players. Trulieve Inc., Curaleaf Inc., Verano Holdings LLC and Vision Management Services LLC — a subsidiary of Green Thumb Industries — each cut a check for exactly $2.5 million to America First Agriculture Action Inc. That kind of round-number uniformity across four separate companies isn't an accident; it suggests coordination, or at minimum a shared understanding among competitors about what buying a seat at the table costs right now.

Arboretum Bidco LLC, an entity tied to AYR Wellness Inc., added $1 million to the same PAC. Ascend Wellness Holdings Inc. also contributed, rounding out a group of five companies that together account for the bulk of the $11.5 million total logged in June alone.

These aren't small regional operators. Trulieve, Curaleaf, Verano, Green Thumb and Ascend are among the largest multi-state cannabis companies in the country, operating hundreds of dispensaries and cultivation facilities across dozens of states. When companies of this size move in lockstep on political spending, it tends to reflect a calculated bet — in this case, a bet that a favorable relationship with the Trump administration is worth eight figures at a moment when the DEA is weighing the industry's federal future.

Tallied against earlier donations to Trump-affiliated committees going back to last year, the industry's total giving now sits at approximately $15.05 million. That number will likely keep climbing as more rescheduling milestones pass and companies with the deepest pockets look to protect investments that could be worth far more depending on how the DEA rules.

The Treasurer Who Ties It All Together

Photo by Katie Moum via Unsplash.

One name threads through nearly every filing connected to this story: Charles Gantt. He serves as treasurer of America First Agriculture Action Inc., the PAC that just collected the $11.5 million in June donations, and he holds the same role at MAGA Inc., Trump's own political committee. That dual position puts one person at the financial center of both the receiving group and the Trump-aligned entity benefiting from related cannabis money.

MAGA Inc. itself has received $2.05 million from the American Rights and Reform PAC, a committee backed by cannabis industry money. The treasurer of that PAC is Matt Harrell, a Curaleaf executive — meaning a sitting company officer is directly managing the finances of a group funneling cash toward Trump's committee.

The pattern isn't new. Last year, the American Rights and Reform PAC sent $1.5 million to America First Agriculture Action, essentially mirroring the flow that just repeated in June. Separately, Trulieve and Curaleaf previously gave a combined $1 million to Trump's 2024 inaugural committee, well before rescheduling reached its current stage.

Taken together, these overlapping roles and repeat transfers describe less a series of one-off donations than an established pipeline — cannabis companies and their executives feeding money through a small number of interconnected PACs, with the same handful of treasurers signing off on both ends. Whether that's business as usual for a heavily regulated industry seeking political protection, or something closer to a coordinated influence campaign, is a judgment call. But the structure itself, with Gantt and Harrell sitting at the financial hubs of both sides of the transaction, is documented fact straight from FEC disclosures.

Money Flowing as Rescheduling Moves Forward

Photo by Andy Feliciotti via Unsplash.

The political spending isn't happening in a vacuum — it's tracking almost exactly with the federal rescheduling timeline. In April, the Justice Department under Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche advanced a proposed rule moving state-licensed medical marijuana and FDA-approved cannabis-derived products from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. That action built on a promise Trump made repeatedly during the 2024 campaign and later formalized with an executive order.

The bigger prize for the industry, though, is what happens with adult-use marijuana more broadly, and that question has been playing out at DEA headquarters in Arlington, Virginia. A formal administrative hearing on rescheduling ran from June 29 through July 15, 2026, gathering testimony from industry representatives, medical experts and prohibition advocates alike. That hearing has now concluded.

Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius made a notable procedural call at the close of proceedings: no time was set aside for closing arguments. Instead, all parties involved must submit post-hearing briefs by August 17. Those written arguments will form the record Julius uses to draft his recommendation.

That recommendation, once finished, goes to DEA Administrator Terrance Cole, who holds final authority over whether and how marijuana gets rescheduled. Neither Julius nor the agency has offered a public timeline for when Cole might act after receiving the recommendation, which means the industry — and the political money still flowing around it — is now in a waiting period with no clear end date attached.

A Court Fight Still Looms

Photo by Michael D Beckwith via Unsplash.

Even a clean recommendation from Judge Julius and a favorable ruling from Administrator Cole wouldn't end this fight. Nine parties opposed to rescheduling have already filed a challenge to the DOJ's April order in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, arguing the process itself was flawed or that the underlying scientific and legal justification doesn't hold up.

That appellate case runs on a completely separate track from the DEA's administrative hearing process. Cole could sign off on rescheduling, and the D.C. Circuit could still vacate or stall the rule while the litigation plays out — a scenario that's happened before with major regulatory changes challenged in federal court.

In effect, the industry now faces two distinct chokepoints where things could go sideways: the DEA's internal decision-making, still working through post-hearing briefs and an unscheduled recommendation, and a federal appeals court proceeding that doesn't answer to the agency's timeline at all. Companies betting millions on a favorable outcome are gambling on both fronts landing right, not just one.

Critics Say the Timing Isn't a Coincidence

Photo by Clint Patterson via Unsplash.

Kevin Sabet, president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, made the political-money angle explicit during the DEA hearing, pointing directly at donations from industry executives like Trulieve CEO Kim Rivers. His argument: contributions of this size put the federal government in an uncomfortable spot, effectively asking it to reverse roughly 50 years of prior legal and scientific positioning on marijuana at the same moment the industry funding that reversal is writing checks to the president's political network.

The dollar amounts support the timing argument. The American Rights and Reform PAC sent $1 million to MAGA Inc. in March 2025, then followed with a combined $1.05 million more around January 2026 — right before Trump signed his rescheduling-related executive order in December 2025. Each jump in giving lines up closely with a rescheduling milestone, whether that's an executive order, a DOJ filing or a DEA hearing date.

None of this means rescheduling is settled law, or that adult-use marijuana is legal nationwide. It isn't. Legality still varies significantly by state, medical and recreational markets operate under very different rules depending on where you live, and federal reform remains genuinely unresolved pending the DEA's decision and the D.C. Circuit litigation. Readers should confirm the current law in their own state before assuming anything has changed at the federal level.

Set aside the scientific debate over cannabis's proper drug schedule for a moment — the political optics here are rough no matter how you slice them. Fifteen million dollars in cannabis industry money has flowed into Trump-linked PACs while a Trump-appointed DEA administrator sits on a decision that could reshape the industry's tax burden, banking access and legal standing overnight. Even if every donation followed the letter of campaign finance law, the appearance of pay-to-play isn't going away, and critics like Kevin Sabet will keep pointing to the timeline as proof that money bought a seat at the table.

A win at the DEA wouldn't even close the book. The D.C. Circuit challenge from nine anti-rescheduling parties runs on its own clock, and a favorable ruling from Administrator Cole could still get tied up or reversed in federal court long after the agency's own process wraps. That leaves the industry — and everyone watching the political money behind it — facing months, maybe years, of uncertainty even in a best-case scenario.

For now, the date to watch is August 17, when post-hearing briefs are due. What Judge Julius does with those briefs, and whether he or Administrator Cole offers any hint of a timeline afterward, will say more about where this actually heads than any single campaign finance filing can.