Federal court examines briefs in case over proposed safe drug use website

Safehouse uses the First Amendment to argue that the proposed facility is protected by the right to religious freedom and that the federal government's opposition prevents members from “fulfilling their deeply held religious beliefs and providing shelter and life-saving care to those suffering from addiction.”

On September 11, a coalition of religious leaders a document submitted with the court in support of Safehouse. The group, made up of 46 religious leaders from 18 states, wrote that “the court should prohibit the government from violating the sincerely held religious beliefs of certain members of Safehouse's board of directors and allow Safehouse to provide the life-saving treatment that countless Philadelphians deserve.”

“The Bible contains numerous passages in which Jesus offers life-saving treatments… People struggling with addiction are not exempt from this calling,” the document continues. “Addiction has historically been stigmatized as a personal choice and a moral failure; this stigma has led to public health failures… The Judeo-Christian faith calls humanity to [impacted people] with love, treatment and care.”

Shelter first announced its plan to open an OPC in 2018 – shortly after Tom Wolf (D), then-governor of Pennsylvania, declared the overdose crisis a public health emergency in the state. But in February 2019, a federal prosecutor appointed by President Trump filed suit to block the site from opening. The Trump administration argued that any OPC would violate the Federal law on “crack houses”a Reagan-era law that criminalizes the “maintenance of premises where drugs are trafficked.”

In February 2020, the Federal District Court in Philadelphia ruled in favor of Safehouse, arguing that the purpose of the OPC was to save lives. But shortly after this court victory Safehouse has temporarily put its plan on hold amid backlash from residents near the proposed site in South Philadelphia.

Then in January 2021, the Third District Court of Appeals overturned the 2020 rulingThe Biden administration inherited the case from the Trump administration and continues to fight it quietly, often losing time.

“We eventually reached an impasse where it was clear we couldn't resolve this,” Ronda Goldfein, a board member of Safehouse and executive director of the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania, told Filter about the background to the new developments. “We told the court that we had to proceed with litigation. We didn't think a settlement was in sight. In response, the Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss our religious freedom lawsuit.”

“At every discovery deadline or status report to the court, we reached out and agreed to the extension because we felt something was moving,” she continued. “Finally, in January 2023, they asked for another extension, and we felt that we could not in good faith grant any more extensions because the death toll in Philadelphia is alarmingly high — three to four people a day. We felt we just had to keep going.”

Although Safehouse initiated mediation with the U.S. Department of Justice, the Biden administration finally took a stand in July, asking the court to dismiss Safehouse's religious freedom claim on the grounds that an OPC would be illegal under federal law.

Carla Sofronski, executive director of the Pennsylvania Harm Reduction Network, described the harrowing current situation in Philadelphia under Mayor Cherelle Parker (D), whose 2023 platform included: Increase in police resources and against harm reduction resources such as OPC. In June, Philadelphia police began Implementation of their “improvement plan” for the hard-hit district of Kensington, drug trafficking, sex workers and “quality of life crimes.” The city recorded almost 1,400 overdose deaths in 2022a record high, with black and Hispanic residents increasingly at risk.

“We are in the midst of a serious public health crisis,” Sofronski told Filter. “Unfortunately [Mayor Parker] does not use evidence-based tools and does not listen to medical professionals to improve the situation … Parker is moving toward law enforcement rather than public health strategies, and we are seeing the impacts that continue to be preventable deaths, people with more [skin] Tissue wounds and treatment centers that the arriving people due to the severity of their [health issues].”

In early September, City Councilor Quetcy Lozada said introduced a bill to further restrict mobile harm reduction services in Kensington.

For an OPC to be successful, Sofronski said, it will require the support of local residents and businesses, as well as educating local people about how the site can alleviate the problems they are experiencing.

“That would get people inside and get them off the streets,” she said. “Right now, our police are moving people around. They walk up to a crowd and say, 'Everyone needs to move.' Everyone moves, and 20 minutes later they leave. There and say, 'Everyone has to move.' They're pushing people out, pushing them off Kensington Avenue and onto residential streets. The residents won't be happy, but they don't understand the benefits an OPC can bring.”

Numerous pieces of evidence have shown that OPCs prevent deaths, including in surrounding areas. In addition to being prepared to respond to overdoses on the ground, OPC staff also offer a range of other resources, services and referrals to improve people's health and well-being. OPCs also reduce problems that concern some residents, such as drug use in public.

So what happens next in the legal dispute? Goldfein explained the possible timeline.

“The Ministry of Justice must respond to our mandate by [roughly] in the first two weeks of October,” she said. “We will file a response in the last two weeks of October, and then it will be before the court.” However, “it could all be delayed a little longer… the Justice Department could theoretically not respond, and the court will base its decision on our arguments and our legal considerations.”

Goldfein declined to comment on how electoral considerations might affect the Biden administration's next steps on the safehouse issue. But the upcoming presidential election cannot be ignored, as Trump and Republicans are likely to attack any concession to OPC as “pro-drugs” or “pro-crime.”

“We have not heard anything from [the Harris campaign]and we haven't contacted them,” Goldfein said. “Are we hoping that if Vice President Harris is elected, her administration will be more willing to engage? Absolutely. I've heard her talk about her values; I think they align with our values.”

This article was originally published by Filter, an online magazine that covers drug use, drug policy and human rights from a harm reduction perspective. Follow Filter on Facebook or Þjórsárdenor sign up for the newsletter.

American Medical Association study: Marijuana use has no effect on working memory and other brain processes

Image courtesy of Dima Solomin.