U.S. District Judge Gerald Austin McHugh of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania rejected the nonprofit group Safehouse's argument that the center's ban violated its officers' religious freedom rights. In his seven-page order, McHugh said the public health organization does not qualify as a religious organization, stressing that its charter “does not provide for any religious mission or activities.”
“While the noble intentions of Safehouse and its founders are self-evident and the public health crisis they seek to address continues unabated, their religious inspiration prohibits their operation. “It does not provide a shield against prosecution for federal criminal violations,” he said. I have written.
A judge granted the Justice Department's request to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Safe House seeking to secure the right to operate the facility. The lawsuit claims that Safe House's activities are inspired by Judeo-Christian beliefs about saving lives and caring for the sick. The group argues that the possibility of prosecution has chilled the exercise of religious rights.
The Justice Department declined to comment.
“We respectfully disagree with the judge's opinion and believe that it is federally prohibited for Safehouse to practice its religious beliefs by saving the lives of people in need,” Rhonda B. Goldfein, vice president of SafeHouse, said in a statement. “I believe it is permitted by law,” he said.
Overdose prevention centers (also known as safe ingestion or supervised injection facilities) have been operating successfully for many years in Australia, Canada and Europe. However, in the United States, the number of overdose deaths will exceed 100,000 in 2022 and will rise again in 2022. In 2023, political leaders and communities oppose this concept, just as they oppose relaxing criminal laws for drug possession.
The only government-sanctioned overdose prevention center in the United States operates in New York, where people are given drugs like heroin and fentanyl under the supervision of staff trained in the use of oxygen and the drug naloxone, an overdose-reversing drug. can inject or smoke drugs themselves. Drug consumers can also exchange used needles for sterile needles, get tested for infectious diseases, and connect with outside addiction treatment services. Operators say the facility has prevented more than 1,000 overdoses because it does not provide illegal drugs.
“We have not had a single death at our overdose prevention centers. They have connected people to treatment and housing for substance use and mental and physical health needs,” Goldfein said in a statement. “We might do the same thing in Philadelphia.”
The two New York centers are operated by the nonprofit OnPoint NYC with approval from the city. A federally funded study published by Brown University last fall found that the centers were not associated with a significant increase in neighborhood crime. Researchers also plan to study the impact of a state-licensed center in Rhode Island that is scheduled to open this year.
Some local and state officials across the country have embraced the concept of overdose prevention centers, but concerns about its legality have hindered its implementation. A decades-old federal law known as the “crack house law” prohibits maintaining venues “for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or using controlled substances.”
In Massachusetts, In December, the Department of Health said prevention centers are an “evidence-based, life-saving tool” and recommended state legislation to protect users and private and municipal operators. In Worcester, Massachusetts, the city's Board of Health unanimously supported establishing a testing facility in March. Another city, Somerville, previously allocated $827,000 to establish safe infection sites.
In Philadelphia, which has been hit hard by the scourge of fentanyl and the animal tranquilizer xylazine, plans to open a safe house center have sparked uproar from local residents angry about outdoor drug use, petty theft and needles littering sidewalks. woke up.
Even if Safehouse were successful in federal court, it faced major hurdles. Last fall, the Philadelphia City Council passed a ban on overdose prevention centers in much of the city.
The legal battle over the proposed construction site in Philadelphia has intensified since 2019, when the Trump administration's Justice Department filed a lawsuit seeking to block enforcement of the decades-old law. A federal judge ruled in Safehouse's favor, but an appeals court reversed that decision. In response, Safehouse sued the Justice Department, which under President Biden had unsuccessfully negotiated a settlement with the nonprofit group.
The Department of Justice has inconsistent policies regarding overdose prevention centers. Last fall, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan It has indicated it may close its New York center, but it remains open. In Rhode Island, U.S. attorneys remain silent about their legality. But in Philadelphia, after settlement talks broke down, Justice Department lawyers told a judge to dismiss Safehouse's lawsuit, arguing that Safehouse did not have a religious right to stop enforcement of federal law. asked to do so.
