Also, what, specifically, is the war on drugs? What does it mean to end it?
I tend to think of it a bit like the Green New Deal: it's a slogan that includes a lot of different aspirational goals. The slogan is, I think, used to justify criminal justice policies relating to drug trafficking. But maybe I'm wrong.
The war on drugs, primarily, is the treatment of drug use/abuse as a criminal matter rather than a public health matter.
When it gets into the nuts and bolts it basically boils down to drug use, in itself, being a "victimless crime". And I realize that you could say that the user is himself/herself a victim, but it's self-victimization by choice and therefore the user has no incentive to report a crime.
As such, policing of the "war on drugs" basically requires law enforcement to have to surveil / identify / stop purely voluntary transactions. This is in contrast to, say, rape or assault or theft where the injured party brings the offending act to the relevant authorities for redress.
From a "social justice" standpoint, there are significant disparities in how the war on drugs is prosecuted depending on where you live. Timmy in the suburbs might get sentenced to a drug treatment program for cocaine possession and have the mark expunged from his record based upon successful completion, because Timmy's dad has a lot of money to hire a hotshot lawyer. Tyrone in the projects, however, gets caught with a dimebag of weed and carries "drug possession" on his rap sheet for the rest of his life, making it harder for him to ever rise out of poverty.
To end the "war on drugs" means to primarily treat drug abuse as a health problem, and not a way to push ever greater numbers of people through "the system" and basically hamstring any efforts they will make to better themselves in the future.
It also means to treat drug use different than drug abuse, much the way we today have legal alcohol but treat
alcoholism as a health issue. Where the "war on drugs" becomes so pernicious is that drug use is basically a normal, if not healthy, part of life for a lot of humanity. People enjoy altered mental states. But we criminalize drug use as if it is synonymous with drug addiction, while we don't criminalize sex even though some people are sex addicts, or criminalize gambling even though some people are gambling addicts, and
don't criminalize alcohol consumption even though some people are alcoholics.
The goal of ending the war on drugs is to treat drug use as a problem, but not a criminal one.
Hence why some people even refer to it as the "War on (Some) Drugs", to highlight the hypocrisy of things like nicotine and alcohol being legal while [likely less-dangerous] drugs like marijuana are illegal. Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances on the planet, and smoking is a HUGE public health issue. Alcohol has enormous negative social impacts. Yet marijuana is not physically addictive, cannot be overdosed, and unlike alcohol doesn't often lead to violent behavior or cause "blackout" behavior.
So while there's not one easy answer to exactly "what does ending the war on drugs mean?", hopefully that kind of gives you the framework for the what and the why.