Saint Louis University Journal of Health Law & Policy
Document Type
Student Comment
Abstract
The opioid overdose epidemic in the United States has prompted the implementation of Overdose Prevention Centers [OPCs] as a harm reduction strategy, despite uncertain legality under federal law and conflicting statutory interpretations. These OPCs face imminent legal challenges, primarily due to the application of the federal “Crack House Statute,” which criminalizes maintaining a drug-involved premises. If unresolved, these legal uncertainties could lead to the prosecution and closure of OPCs, exacerbating the epidemic. To secure the future of OPCs, independent judicial interpretation of the Crack House Statue by certain circuits or legislative action amending the Crack House Statute to authorize OPCs is urgently needed. Recent legal analyses, including those in the aftermath of the Third Circuit’s decision in Safehouse II, have extensively reviewed the statutory interpretations impacting OPCs. However, existing literature lacks a comprehensive analysis of how different judicial circuits might interpret the Crack House Statute. This Note proposes a comprehensive analysis of judicial interpretations across various circuits to assess the potential for legal protection of OPCs. By examining the legal landscape surrounding OPCs and proposing a comparative circuit analysis, this Notes contributes to the discourse on the legality of certain harm reduction strategies amidst the opioid overdose epidemic.
Recommended Citation
Hallie R. Schechter,
From Crisis to Controversy: Examining the Legality of Overdose Prevention Centers in New York and Beyond,
18
St. Louis U. J. Health L. & Pol'y
(2024).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/jhlp/vol18/iss1/7