ByAlex Stevens, Niamh Eastwood, and Kirstie Douse

In this review article, we develop the case for the decriminalisation of drug possession in the UK by describing our ‘modest proposal’ to repeal the relevant sections of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and its advantages. We defend this proposal against possible critiques from both conservative and radical positions. On the conservative side, these criticisms include that it would increase drug use and harm and that it would be illegal under international law. From the more radical position, we anticipate the criticisms that decriminalisation of possession would leave the harm associated with illegal drug supply to continue, that it would leave in place restrictions on the rights to use drugs, that it would forego the possible tax income from a legally regulated market, and that the drug laws would continue to act as tools of social control. In response, we argue that decriminalisation offers a feasible first step towards reducing the harm of drug control which would not increase drug-related harm.

Drug Science, Policy and Law Volume 10: 1–10

John R. Pamplin II, Saba Rouhani,, Corey S. Davis, Carla King, and Tarlise N. Townsend,

The US overdose crisis continues to worsen and is disproportionately harming Black and Hispanic/Latino people. Although the “War on Drugs” continues to shape drug policy—at the disproportionate expense of Black and Hispanic/Latino people—states have taken some steps to reduce War on Drugs–related harms and adopt a public health–centered approach. However, the rhetoric regarding these changes has, in many cases, outstripped reality. Using overdose Good Samaritan Laws (GSLs) as a case study, we argue that public health–oriented policy changes made in some states are undercut by the broader enduring environment of a structurally racist drug criminalization agenda that continues to permeate and constrict most attempts at change. Drawing from our collective experiences in public health research and practice, we describe 3 key barriers to GSL effectiveness: the narrow parameters within which they apply, the fact that they are subject to police discretion, and the passage of competing laws that further criminalize people who use illicit drugs. All reveal a persisting climate of drug criminalization that may reduce policy effectiveness and explain why current reforms may be destined for failure and further disadvantage Black and Hispanic/Latino people who use drug

Am J Public Health. 2023;113(S1):S43–S48. https://doi.org/ 10.2105/AJPH.2022.307037)

By Tobias Kammersgaard

Background: In 2018 the Norwegian government appointed a committee to prepare the implementation of a drug decriminalization reform. The overall goal of the committee was to propose a model where responsibility for society’s response to the use and possession of illegal drugs for personal use would be transferred from the justice sector to the health service, under the catchphrase ‘from punishment to help’. While the proposal ultimately did not get the necessary backing in parliament, the proposed reform still constitutes a very comprehensive and recent proposal for reforming national drug policy and it provides an ideal case for studying contemporary discourses on ‘drug decriminalization’. Methods: The analysis of this reform proposal is guided by the post-structuralist “What’s the Problem Represented to be” (WPR) approach, which is used for investigating the problem representation(s) in the proposal, as well as the rationalities, practices and deep-seated assumptions underpinning these. In doing this, the paper explores how the strategy represents both changes and continuities in discourses around illicit drugs and the people who use them. Results: Based on the WPR approach, two problem representations in the proposal are identified: the ‘problem of illicit drug use’ and the ‘problem of criminalization’. However, the ‘problem of illicit drug use’ is argued to be the authoritative representation that takes precedence over the other. In that regard, the paper points to how the proposed shift from the justice sector to the health sector would only be partial, given that the role of the police and drug law enforcement would be retained in the reform. Furthermore, the paper points to how illicit drug use continued to be fundamentally pathologized in the proposed reform. Conclusion: The paper concludes with a discussion about the overall ambition of shifting from a crime-centered to a health-centered approach to people who use drugs and some reflections on the potential of an additional rights-based approach is provided.

International Journal of Drug Policy. Volume 113, March 2023, 103963.

By Kellen Russoniello , Sheila P. Vakharia , Jules Netherland , Theshia Naidoo , Haven Wheelock , Tera Hurst and Saba Rouhani

In November 2020, Oregon voters approved Measure 110, a ballot initiative that decriminalized possession of small quantities of all drugs and allocated hundreds of millions of dollars annually to health services for people who use drugs. Implementation of Measure 110 is ongoing, but several effects are noticeable in the first two years since the measure passed. Among these are substantial decreases in possession of controlled substances arrests and an infusion of funding into harm reduction services that have not traditionally enjoyed a sustainable funding source. This paper analyzes the provisions of Measure 110, examines its early impacts, successes, and challenges, and outlines lessons that jurisdictions contemplating decriminalizing drug possession in the U.S. and globally should consider. \

Drug Science, Policy and Law Volume 9: 1–16 , 2023

By Jack K. Reed

In 2013, following the passage of Amendment 64 which allows for the retail sale and possession of marijuana, the Colorado General Assembly enacted Senate Bill 13-283. This bill mandated that the Division of Criminal Justice in the Department of Public Safety conduct a study of the impacts of Amendment 64, particularly as these relate to law enforcement activities. This report seeks to establish and present the baseline measures for the metrics specified in S.B. 13-283 (C.R.S. 24-33.4-516). The information presented here should be interpreted with caution. The majority of the data sources vary considerably in terms of what exists historically and the reliability of some sources has improved over time. Consequently, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the potential effects of marijuana legalization and commercialization on public safety, public health, or youth outcomes, and this may always be the case due to the lack of historical data. Furthermore, the measurement of available data elements can be affected by very context of marijuana legalization. For example, the decreasing social stigma regarding marijuana use could lead individuals to be more likely to report use on surveys and also to health workers in emergency departments and poison control centers, making marijuana use appear to increase when perhaps it has not. Additionally, law enforcement officials and prosecuting attorneys continue to struggle with enforcement of the complex and sometimes conflicting marijuana laws that remain. Finally, the lack of comparable Federal data across many metrics makes it difficult to compare changes in Colorado to other jurisdictions which may have not legalized marijuana. In sum, then, the lack of pre-commercialization data, the decreasing social stigma, and challenges to law enforcement combine to make it difficult to translate these preliminary findings into definitive statements of outcomes.

Denver: Colorado Department of Public Safety Division of Criminal Justice Office of Research and Statistics , 2021. 188p.