Are safer places for IV drug users in New York City simply a pipe dream? Not necessarily, from a legal standpoint.
In August, two New Yorkers released a film pushing for the creation of facilities where IV drug users can shoot up in a clean and supervised environment.
In an interview with the Daily News, co-director Matt Curtis said that cities that supply a safe haven for drug users have experienced a decrease in overdose deaths.
The documentary, “Everywhere But Safe,” debuted at Maysles Cinema in Manhattan in August and will be available on Sept. 30. The film leaves an unanswered question: Could safe injection sites ever be legal?
Leo Beletsky, an associate professor of law and health sciences at Northeastern University , said it’s not impossible, but “there’s a variety of major hurdles.”
For instance, drug possession is still illegal.
“Basically where there’s a will there’s a way, legally,” Beletsky said.
Here are four possible ways it could happen:
1. The city could authorize it.
It’s not unprecedented for cities to create local public health programs. Smoking bans, recycling programs, and carbon off-set markets would all fall under this description.
On the city level, there are two possible paths — the health commissioner or mayor could issue an order authorizing it or the city council could pass legislation.
“The downside of doing it through executive action is that it could be easily overturned,” Beletsky said. “[If] de Blasio doesn’t get reelected; the next person who comes in could easily reverse that action.”
Beletskey said that even if the city creates these facilities, their acceptance at the state and federal level wouldn’t guaranteed.
2. The state could authorize it.
This could happen either through an executive order or through legislation.
“The most solid way of doing it,” Beletsky said, “would be through the state legislature. So in Albany we would want something passed that would exempt a facility like this from the state controlled substances act.”
There is some precedent for that, like with syringe exchange programs. Beletsky said that, in that case, “The law is still on the books but you can kind of tweak it and say, ‘This law applies, but if you’re a client of this program then this law doesn’t apply.’ It creates kind of a carve-out, a space for this program to exist.”
Drug possession would still be illegal on a federal level — but so is medical marijuana, and that’s now legal in more than 20 states.
3. The federal government could allow it.
Just like if the state legalized it, federal action would probably mean a carve-out in existing controlled substances legislation.
Beletsky called that a “pie in the sky” idea.
4. It could begin as research.
Beletsky said, “There already is a provision that allows possession of controlled substances for research purposes. So potentially you could use that provision to expand from that and say this is a pilot program and this is being done for research.”
That would require getting a waiver from the DEA and approval from whichever federal agency — likely the Center for Disease Control and Prevention or the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration — offers funding.
Whether or not it becomes legal anytime soon, Beletsky said, “The reality is it’s already happening, meaning that there are places — in New York City, Boston, San Francisco — where people are coming together and injecting drugs.
“So what you’re saying is that in creating a program like this you’re acknowledging that this already takes place and you’re saying let’s do it in a safe environment.”
