While the Biden administration has emphasized its intention to adopt a harm-reduction approach to the crisis of overdoses, advocates were eager to learn if this would extend to the authorization of safe consumption sites that allow people to consume illegal substances while under medical supervision. The Justice Department has now rejected legal arguments regarding possible exceptions to federal restrictions on such facilities. They are also moving to dismiss a suit on the subject.
The DOJ has asked a federal judge to dismiss a case filed in the last week, in response to a long-running legal challenge. This comes after months and months of negotiations which left supporters hopeful that a solution would be reached that would allow the opening of Safehouse in Philadelphia. It was initially blocked by the Trump administration.
It was this that prompted Pennsylvania lawmakers to work on enacting a statewide ban on harm reduction centers. A bipartisan bill prohibiting their operations passed the Senate in May. This led Pennsylvania lawmakers to consider a statewide prohibition of harm reduction centers. A bipartisan bill prohibiting their operations passed in the Senate.
Some legislators, including Democrats that support marijuana legalization have also asked the federal courts to stop Safehouse’s opening, and asked permission to file a case brief.
A coalition of 20 Pennsylvania communities groups also requested that the court permit it to intervene the lawsuit.
The U.S. District Court of Eastern District of Pennsylvania, however, denied the request of the coalition on Monday in recognition of the clear position taken by the federal government to defend the existing statute.
The group’s Motion that expressed concerns about the DOJ’s representation “misunderstands its current position. And the Government’s Motion to Dismiss, which was filed recently by the Government to enforce Section 856 through vigorously defending Safehouse’s Counterclaims”, Judge Gerald Austin McHugh wrote.
He also rejected the move by lawmakers to file an amicus curiae brief, writing they wanted to give input “regarding this purported settlement, when there is in fact no prospect of settlement at this time.”
In its own motion for dismissal, filed Friday, the Justice Department disputed Safehouse’s legal arguments that their activities should be excluded from enforcement under Controlled Substances Acts (CSA) based upon religious freedom laws. The Justice Department said Safehouse, on its own admission, is not a religion.
The filing states that Safehouse’s newly amended counterclaims are “replete” with allegations showing the motivation behind its proposal to maintain an area for the supervised consumption of drugs. Safehouse’s views are based on individual medical and public health judgments, informed by a serious and ongoing public health crisis. However, they do not represent a religious belief.
DOJ stated that “Safehouse believes maintaining a supervised injecting site for illegal users of heroin and other opioids, would in essence do more good than bad.” Safehouse, as it has stressed throughout its pleadings, believes that this conclusion is based on Safehouse’s opinions regarding social circumstances and medical policies.
It says that “Regardless of the motive, conduct is prohibited in its current form without any provision for discretionary exception.” “For the above reasons, the United States asks that its motion is granted and that Safehouse’s Second Amended Counterclaims are dismissed with prejudice.”
Safehouse has until August 15, 2015 to submit any briefs opposing the Justice Department’s motion for dismissal. DOJ has until September 8th to respond to Safehouse’s arguments.
Frank James, board member of Safehouse, and retired president of Missio Seminary said in a Tuesday statement that the organization was “pained” that the government prevents them from following their deeply held religious beliefs, as the death rate of overdoses increases each year.
He said, “The data shows that overdose prevention centers save lives and we are dedicated to saving lives.”
The Justice Department had previously refused to submit a brief in order to express its position on harm reduction, and asked the court to give additional time to respond to the “complex case. The department stated that it was evaluating “guardrails” for safe consumption sites.
Safehouse and the Department had agreed in January to transfer the case to a mediation to be conducted by a magistrate to resolve the issue. The discussions were described as “productive,”, leaving some advocates hoping that DOJ would drop the case.
Now it is clear that the Justice Department’s opposition to the case will continue.
Marijuana Moment tracks more than 1,000 cannabis and drug policy bills that have been introduced in state legislatures, and Congress. Patreon supporters who pledge at least $25/month gain access to our interactive charts, maps and hearing calendar.
Discover more about our marijuana bills tracker. Become a Patreon supporter to gain access.
—
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an application in October 2021 on the legality for the establishment of the Safehouse facilities.
Researchers from the U.S. Congress highlighted “uncertainty”, referring to the position of the federal government regarding safe drug consumption sites. They also suggested that legislators could resolve the issue temporarily by proposing an amendment similar to the one which allowed the implementation of medical marijuana laws without Justice Department interference.
New York City, which opened its first locally sanctioned harm-reduction centers in the U.S. in late last year, has already seen positive results, with officials reporting that they have saved lives.
The Congressional Research Service pointed out this discrepancy. It stated that “while DOJ actively opposed the operation supervised consumption sites during the Trump Administration, the Biden Administration to date has not attempted to invoke [Controlled Substances Act] to such facilities.”
The report was released just days after Nora Volkow , Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse , tacitly supported the idea that safe consumption sites should be authorized. She argued that evidence had effectively shown that these facilities could prevent overdose deaths.
Volkow refused to say specifically what she would have done if the Trump-era suit was dropped. However, she did state that research on safe consumption sites “has shown that they’ve saved a significant (percentage) of patients from overdosing.”
The comments were one of the strongest in support of Safehouse, and are all the more noteworthy given the government’s stance in the lawsuit which has so far prevented Safehouse from offering the service.
Rahul Gupta is the White House Drug Czar. He has stated that the Biden Administration is examining broader drug policy harm-reduction proposals. This includes the authorization of supervised use sites. In fact, he even suggested possible decriminalization.
The American Medical Association published a study last year that found the newly opened facilities in New York City have reduced overdose risks and discouraged people from using these substances in public. They also provided ancillary services for people who currently use illicit drugs.
In December 2021, the National Institutes of Health issued two requests for applications for funding to support efforts that investigate whether harm reduction policies and other approaches could be used to address the drug epidemic.
Gupta is the director of White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. He said it was important to explore “any option” in order to reduce the number of overdose deaths. may include allowing the use of illegal substances at safe consumption sites if there are sufficient evidence to support their effectiveness.
Xavier Becerra has indicated that the Biden Administration will not block the establishment of safe injection sites. He stressed that “we literally are trying to give users a liveline.”
A department spokesperson then walked back those remarks and stated that “HHS has no position on supervised-consumption sites” and “the issue is a subject of ongoing litigation.”
Rhode Island signed a law in 2021 establishing a Pilot Program to allow the operation of sites for safe consumption.
In both the Senate and the Assembly, bills to allow for safe drug consumption in New York also advanced this year at the committee level .
Last year, the Governor of Vermont vetoed two bills that were meant to create a group to develop a plan for opening safe consumption centers . The governor of California also vetoed last year a bill to allow a pilot program to be run for harm reduction centres.
More than a dozen Democrats in Congress filed a resolution last month to recognize that the country has a “moral obligation” to fulfill its promise to guarantee justice to all, including by legalizing marijuana, establishing overdose prevention centers and expunging records related to drug use.
Below, you can read the Justice Department’s motion for dismissal of the Safehouse case:
Ohio Marijuana Legalization measure falls 679 signatures short of November ballot, but activists now have 10 days to fix that
Image by Dima Solomin.
The post Biden Justice Dept. Asks Federal Court to Dismiss Overdose Prevention Site Case, Rejecting Advocacy Arguments on Legal Exemptions first appeared on Marijuana Minute.
