Justice Department sues Philadelphia over supervised injection facility | TribLIVE.com
Pennsylvania

Justice Department sues Philadelphia over supervised injection facility

The Washington Post
724464_web1_AP19037643017655
U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania William McSwain speaks during a press conference in Philadelphia, Wednesday, Feb. 6, 2019. McSwain has filed a suit to stop a nonprofit from opening the nation’s first supervised drug injection site to address Philadelphia’s opioid problem.
724464_web1_AP19037642974144
Shey Hall, left, 35, and Evan Figueroa-Vargas, 37, hold a banner in protest outside of the U.S. Attorney’s office in Philadelphia, Wednesday, Feb. 6, 2019. U.S. Attorney William McSwain has filed a suit to stop a nonprofit from opening the nation’s first supervised drug injection site to address Philadelphia’s opioid problem.

The federal government has filed a lawsuit to block the city of Philadelphia from opening a site where people can go to illegally use drugs while under supervision, an effort aimed at preventing overdoses amid the nationwide opioid epidemic. The lawsuit sets up a court battle over whether such facilities violate federal law or save lives.

The Justice Department sued Safehouse, a nonprofit organization that planned to open what is known as a supervised injection facility in Philadelphia. Such facilities allow illicit drug abuse but monitor users closely, getting them immediate help in the event of an overdose or adverse reaction. The idea has gained some traction elsewhere — including San Francisco, Seattle and New York — but has not yet resulted in official facilities for illicit drug use.

Philadelphia leaders have warmed to the idea, and the city is closest to opening one. The city’s district attorney has said he would not prosecute those who operate such a facility or those who use drugs there.

Advocates say that such drug sanctuaries could be an important tool in the fight to stem the opioid epidemic. Philadelphia, which has one of the nation’s most active heroin markets, has seen a high toll from opioid abuse. Supervised injection facilities exist in other countries, and advocates contend they save lives by allowing drug users to use in sanitary conditions where they are monitored for signs of overdose rather than overdosing on the street, where help might not be available. Advocates also believe safe injection sites curb the spread of HIV and hepatitis C by limiting needle sharing.

The Justice Department has vowed to aggressively crack down on cities that open the facilities, and it made good on that promise Wednesday. William McSwain, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, claims that Safehouse would violate federal law by allowing the supervised use of illegal drugs.

Opening the facility, McSwain argued in court documents, would violate the Controlled Substances Act. The facilities appear to violate a portion of the law aimed at crack houses that criminalized opening or running places where illegal drugs are knowingly used.

In a news conference, McSwain laid out the ways his office has fought the opioid epidemic, from dismantling so-called pill mills, prosecuting rogue doctors and arresting drug traffickers, particularly those dealing fentanyl, a powerful synthetic opioid that is now driving an increase in overdose deaths in the United States.

McSwain said research into safe injection facilities might not apply to the situation in Philadelphia and that “setting up a drug house is illegal.”

“For purposes of this action, it does not matter that Safehouse claims good intentions in fighting the opioid epidemic,” McSwain wrote in court documents.

Safehouse said it will continue to move forward to open the facility, which it believes will be critical to saving lives in Philadelphia.

“We respectfully disagree with the Department of Justice’s view of the ‘crack house’ statute,” said Ilana Eisenstein, a lawyer for Safehouse. “We are committed to defending Safehouse’s effort to provide lifesaving care to those at risk of overdose through the creation of safe injection facilities.”

The lawsuit was met with dismay by many public health experts, who believe that the facilities are one more tool that could be useful in stemming the tide of overdose deaths.

“This isn’t black and white. There is an entire cannabis industry functioning in blatant violation of federal law. Bottom line is that the federal government is CHOOSING to enter into this battle, just as it’s paying lip service to public health,” Leo Beletsky, a professor of law and health sciences at Northeastern University, wrote on Twitter.

The facilities also appear to be moving forward elsewhere. In California, where former Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown last year vetoed a bill that would have allowed San Francisco to open a safe injection facility, two legislators reintroduced a bill to let the San Francisco site go forward. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has been receptive to the idea of a safe injection facility there.

Categories: News | Pennsylvania
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.