Two Models of Legalization of Psychedelic Substances: Reasons for Concern

Introduction

In 1973 psychedelics were classified as schedule I substances at the federal level, which effectively made possession illegal and restricted research except under tightly regulated circumstances. Although these constraints limited clinical investigation for decades, a recent revival of research has generated renewed interest in therapeutic applications. Parallel to this scientific resurgence, several states and localities have pursued measures to legalise possession and use of psychedelic substances, prompting debate about regulatory approaches and public-health implications. This Viewpoint examines two prominent policy paths to legalisation: Oregon's approach to broad clinical psilocybin services and California's proposed bill to legalise personal possession and noncommercial sharing of psychedelics. Smith and colleagues frame the analysis by comparing these models and drawing lessons from prior experiences with the legalisation and commercialisation of other controlled substances, with the aim of identifying potential risks that policymakers and the public should consider.