A Philadelphia-based nonprofit has asked a federal judge to reject the Justice Department’s recent motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed over the establishment a safe drug consumption area.
DOJ initially blocked Safehouse’s opening of the overdose prevention centre under the Trump administration. The department had hoped that President Joe Biden would end the fight against harm reduction, which is an alternative to criminalization. But so far, they have been disappointed.
It stated in a filing to the court that such sites where people can use illegal drugs under medical supervision violate federal law. The Justice Department asked the U.S. District Court for Eastern District of Pennsylvania to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Safehouse which claimed religious and First Amendment exemptions from the federal statute.
Safehouse filed a brief of 57 pages in response to DOJ’s claim that the religious exemption does not apply.
Attorneys for Safehouse responded to the Department’s claim that Safehouse was not legally entitled to exemption due to its non-religious nature. They said the board of directors is guided by their religious beliefs to provide harm reduction to those in need.
Safehouse’s Tuesday filed brief states that “tens of thousands” of people continue to suffer from opioid addiction and substance abuse disorder. Safehouse’s board members mourn for each life lost due to an overdose. Based on their deeply-held religious convictions they believe that it is their duty to do all possible to keep these individuals alive for even one more day.
The filing states that “instead of allowing vulnerable people to remain in Safehouse’s care at the moment of consumption, DOJ requires that Safehouse and board members either throw these individuals outside or face criminal prosecution for allowing to them remain protected and within immediate access to critical medical treatment.”
“Safehouse’s call to care for those who are in need – when they are most vulnerable – has long been recognized as a central and integral part of religious practices. Safehouse’s beliefs regarding the provision of care for vulnerable people are not novel or unusual. “Judeo-Christian religious belief has led believers to provide care to the poor and sick for centuries.
The group argued that DOJ was violating the First Amendment rights of the nonprofit board members to freedoms of religion by prohibiting them from opening an overdose-prevention site. It also pointed out that businesses like Hobby Lobby that are for-profit have been able claim religious freedom in the U.S. Supreme Court, despite not being primarily religious.
Safehouse asks the court to reject the motion for dismissal. Safehouse is asking the court to deny the motion to dismiss.
In the days leading up to DOJ’s initial response to the lawsuit, local legislators, including Democrats who support marijuana legalization, requested that the federal court block Safehouse’s opening, and also asked for permission to submit a brief. A coalition of 20 Pennsylvania communities also requested that the court permit it to intervene.
The court, however, denied the request of the coalition last month in recognition that the government defends the existing statute while opposing overdose prevention centers.
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 mediation by a magistrate to settle the matter. The discussions were described as “productive,”, leaving some advocates hoping that DOJ would drop the case.
The Supreme Court has rejected a request to hear a case regarding the legality of the establishment of the Safehouse in October 2021.
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.
A federal prosecutor with jurisdiction in Manhattan has recently told The New York Times in statement that these sites are illegal, and that he’s “prepared to use all options, including enforcement,” if the situation doesn’t change soon.
Nora Volkow, Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, has implicitly endorsed the idea to authorize safe consumption sites . She argues that the evidence has shown that these facilities are effective in preventing overdose deaths.
Volkow refused to specify what she thinks should be done with the lawsuit. However, she did say that research on safe consumption sites “has shown that they have saved a significant (percentage) of patients from overdosing.”
Rahul Gupta is the White House Drug Czar. He has stated that the Biden administration is reviewing proposals for harm reduction in drug policy. This includes the authorization of sites with supervised consumption. Rahul even went as far as suggesting possible decriminalization.
The American Medical Association published a study last year that found the newly opened New York City facility has decreased the risk for overdose and discouraged people from using drugs in the public. It also provided other ancillary services to those who use illicit substances.
In December 2021, the National Institutes of Health issued two requests for applications to examine how harm reduction policies and safe consumption sites could be used to address the drug epidemic.
Gupta is the director of White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. He has stated that it’s important to explore “any option” in order to reduce the number of overdose deaths. This may include allowing the use of illegal substances at safe consumption sites if there are sufficient evidence to support their effectiveness.
Read Safehouse’s response short below in the case of overdose prevention sites:
Image by Dima Solomin.
The post Harm reduction advocates urge federal judge to deny DOJ challenge to overdose prevention site appeared initially on Marijuana moment.
