Supreme Court Declines to Hear Dispute Over Supervised Injection Sites

The Supreme Court on Wednesday decided it would not review a not-for-profit group’s petition to open a supervised injection site in Philadelphia. The group, Safehouse, will now have to pursue other arguments in federal district court in its bid to open the first such facility in the United States.

Safehouse intended to argue to the Supreme Court that federal laws against “crackhouses” are not conceived to criminalize the opening of supervised consumption sites, which allow individuals to consume drugs under medical supervision, revive those who overdose, and offer assistance in connecting with addiction treatment services.

More than 100 supervised injection sites are currently in operation around the world, although none are in the US. In July, Rhode Island Gov. Daniel McKee signed legislation authorizing a 2-year pilot program to establish such programs in his state. Organizers in Rhode Island still face additional obstacles before opening any supervised injection sites, however.

Safehouse vice president Rhonda Goldfein tells the Philadelphia Inquirer that her organization is not giving up, despite the Supreme Court’s decision this week. Among the group’s new arguments it will pursue in lower courts is that Safehouse founders’ religious faith compels them save lives and that because Safehouse’s operations are entirely within Pennsylvania, they are not a federal matter.

Goldfein tells the Inquirer that Safehouse’s continued legal pursuit “will be an opportunity to really see what the [Biden administration’s] position is” on supervised injection sites. While the Justice Department under the Trump administration opposed supervised injection sites, under President Joe Biden, the department has stayed neutral on the issue to date.