ON WORLD PSYCHEDELICS DAY, DEA ATTEMPTS TO SILENCE SCIENCE BY RECOMMENDING TO SCHEDULE DOI AND DOC
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:
Gina Giorgio
Director of Strategy and Development
Students for Sensible Drug Policy
gina@ssdp.org
ON WORLD PSYCHEDELICS DAY, DEA ATTEMPTS TO SILENCE SCIENCE BY RECOMMENDING TO SCHEDULE DOI AND DOC
By recommending that 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodo-amphetamine (DOI) and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-chloro-amphetamine (DOC) be added to Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, the Administrative Law Judge is supporting the DEA’s proposal to shut down decades of critical research into some of the nation’s most pressing public health issues, says Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP), a youth-led nonprofit that has been fighting to keep the de facto compounds for understanding serotonin unscheduled since 2022.
[WASHINGTON, D.C., June 23, 2025] — On June 20th, 2025—World Psychedelics Day and the closing day of Psychedelic Science 2025, the world’s largest and most well known psychedelic conference organized by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Administrative Law Judge released a recommendation that scientific research tools DOI and DOC be placed in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This recommendation directly undermines the future of psychedelic science and sets a dangerous precedent for research freedom.
A Question of Timing
“It is not lost on us that the DEA Administrative Judge Paul E. Soeffing waited to issue his opinion until World Psychedelics Day,” said Robert Rush, attorney for Dr. Raul Ramos, co-petitioner in the case.
“The timing is no coincidence,” said Kat Murti, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP). “The DEA has relied on similar shady tricks throughout this process—such as announcing their intent to schedule these substances during the winter holidays in 2023 after withdrawing their 2022 attempt, which SSDP also opposed. Their strategy throughout has been to try to sneak this ruling by unnoticed because they know the American public and anyone who cares about public health is on our side.”
A Blow to Science
DOI and DOC are essential compounds used by scientists to understand serotonin and its role in disorders like anxiety, depression, pain, substance use disorder, and even cancer. These compounds have been studied for decades in controlled environments without any evidence of widespread abuse or diversion.
DOI in particular has been a cornerstone in neuroscience research due to its high selectivity for the 5-HT2A serotonin receptor, a critical component in understanding the therapeutic effects of psychedelics.
DOI’s use in the lab ushered in a new era of psychiatric drug discovery since it was used to map the localization of an important serotonin receptor in the brain critical in learning, memory, pain and psychiatric disease. Over 80% of the antidepressant drugs on the market affect the serotonin system.
Over the past two decades, DOI has been cited in more than 900 research articles, contributing significantly to our understanding of complex neural mechanisms and offering potential pathways for breakthrough treatments. Recent studies utilizing DOI have shown encouraging results in managing pain and reducing opioid cravings, offering a beacon of hope in the ongoing opioid crisis.
“DOI and DOC are crucial tools for understanding how serotonin works in the body,” said Murti. “By adding them to Schedule I, the DEA is forcing medical science into the dark ages.”
The DEA’s ruling disregards extensive expert testimony from preeminent neuroscientists, chemists, and clinicians who rely on these tools for cutting-edge medical research.
“The decision by the administrative judge to recommend a Schedule I placement of DOI/DOC is bewildering,” said Dr. Tanner Anderson, PhD in Neuroscience at Yale University, SSDP Science Policy Committee member, and petitioner in the case. “We organized a team of the World’s leading experts in DOI/DOC research and they all had the same message: these drugs are not used recreationally, they are some of the most important tools in medical research, and their scheduling would have an enormous negative impact on public health. One has to wonder what could possibly be the intent behind ignoring the consensus of the medical and scientific research community that specializes in studying these drugs.”
Dr. Elijah Ullman, PhD in Molecular and Systems Pharmacology, joined SSDP as a highschool student, founded SSDP’s Science Policy Committee, and has spearheaded the fight to keep DOI and DOC legal since 2022.
“The ability to clearly, systematically, and efficiently test hypotheses is what leads to scientific discoveries, and new treatment for mental disorders to patients,” said Dr. Ullman, emphasizing the real-world harm to scientific progress. “The DEA’s decision to substantially limit access to the most widely used research tool to evaluate the serotonin 5-HT2A receptor will have widespread detrimental impact on the future of patient health and cripple the neuroscience community.”
A Flawed Ruling
The ruling reflects what SSDP and its legal team describe as a deeply flawed administrative process.
“The ruling rests on illogical conclusions, ignoring evidence presented by many of the world’s top experts, instead giving almost complete deference to the testimony of a single DEA scientist,” said Robert Rush, attorney for Dr. Raul Ramos, co-petitioner in the case. “The judge afforded excessive deference to the government’s witnesses, accepting their assertions without adequate scrutiny, while unjustifiably discounting the testimony of world-class researchers and experts who are at the forefront of psychedelic science. The evidence presented by our team was extensive and compelling, and was not afforded the weight it deserved.”
Dr. Alaina Jaster, who holds a PhD in Pharmacology/Toxicology with a focus on the effects of classical psychedelics on preclinical models of substance use disorder and serves as co-chair of SSDP’s Science Policy Committee, joined the legal effort to protect DOI and DOC in 2022, and spent two days on the stand during the hearing as an expert witness.
“This decision is disappointing and the almost 120-page record seems to reflect a very different reality than the one I experienced on the stand,” said Dr. Jaster. “Despite the stipulations of fact that themselves state there is no documented use of DOI, no deaths or overdose, no diversion, and it’s impossible to know whether anecdotal reports which the DEA rely upon actually contain DOI, the administrative judge has recommended placing DOI/DOC in schedule I. As someone who has extensively studied the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of DOI and related psychedelics, it’s baffling to me that the government is going after DOI/DOC.”
While the DEA and SSDP/Ramos did not agree on much of the evidence presented during the hearing, they did agree to a specific set of facts, including that there is no diversion of DOI or DOC from legitimate channels, including research laboratories; that there is no evidence of physiological or psychic dependence of DOI and DOC; that there is no documentation in medical literature on the human use of DOI, including no reports of distressing responses or death associated with DOI; and that it is impossible to know if anecdotal reports of people taking or selling the substances are true without analytical confirmation.
Co-petitioner Dr. Raul Ramos, a PhD in Molecular and Cell Biology, who uses DOI to study the neural mechanisms that underlie distortions of touch perception and pain, summed up the overall feelings of the team behind the legal challenge.
“I am profoundly disappointed that after hearing all the logical and rational evidence presented regarding the importance of DOI as a research tool, Judge Soeffing has ruled to schedule DOI,” said Dr. Ramos. “It was clear during the trial that 1) there is no endemic recreational use of DOI; 2) no diversion from legitimate laboratory use; and 3) that the scheduling of DOI is poised to set back serotonin biology research by decades. I can only conclude thus that there was never any intention in truly considering the truth.”
Research Harm at the Forefront
The groundbreaking multi-year long effort by SSDP’s Science Policy Committee to keep crucial medical research legal marked the first time “research harm”—the harm caused to future and ongoing research by onerous regulatory decisions that disincentivize scientific research in a given field—has been formally considered in a DEA scheduling case, setting a powerful precedent for how such decisions impact scientific progress.
““For over a century, United States drug policy has silenced scientific voices and bypassed the facts to create harmful laws rooted in misinformation and fear,” said Murti. “Adding DOI and DOC to Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act would undermine decades of progress in neuroscience and pharmacology and SSDP and the young scientists leading this fight are committed to protecting the future of scientific and medical research.”
Though the DEA had originally attempted to silence expert witnesses and block crucial scientific evidence—including the impact of scheduling on research—from coming to light during the two-week hearing held at the DEA’s administrative court in Arlington, Virginia in November 2024—the first of its kind since MDMA was scheduled in 1986—Judge Soeffing allowed harms to research to be discussed in court testimony and explicitly requested SSDP address how a Schedule I designation would impede critical scientific inquiry in their post-trial brief.
In response, SSDP proposed an updated version of the 8-Factor Analysis required under the CSA, which would incorporate research harm as a crucial consideration for each of the eight factors. SSDP further applied the 8-Factor Analysis to DOI and DOC, revealing at each step that the research chemicals lack the characteristics typically associated with high abuse potential.
“We are using the law to bring science to the forefront, applying the best reading of the statute to ensure decisions align with empirical evidence. The science is so overwhelmingly in our favor that there’s only one logical way to rule on this case, regardless of how one views the Controlled Substances Act (CSA),” says Brett Phelps, Esq, an SSDP alum and legal counsel for the youth-driven drug policy nonprofit. “It would fly in the face of logic to ignore the science.”
SSDP and Dr. Ramos, whose cutting edge neuroscience research relies on DOI, argue that the placement of DOC and DOI in Schedule I would cause research harm in that it would hinder, harm, or discourage research efforts because researchers would be required to obtain a DEA registration to handle Schedule I controlled substances and adhere to the heightened regulatory requirements of the CSA. According to SSDP and Ramos, this would greatly increase the cost of research as well as the time required, and would prevent more experimental or cross-disciplinary research from being conducted.
“The DEA, for reasons that are not fully transparent, is attempting to raise barriers to any and all research on the psychedelic DOI. The evidence presented by the DEA to justify its actions would not withstand scrutiny from any reputable scientific publication or establishment. This action infringes on the rights of the American people, whose tax dollars support NIH-funded research into DOI,” said Dr. Ramos. “The outcomes of this work could lead to novel therapies for various neuropsychiatric conditions. However, if the DEA succeeds in implementing this proposal, the potential knowledge and advancements from this research may never come to fruition.”
Unfortunately, Judge Soeffing ultimately ignored the grievous harms to research that will be caused by his decision in the scheduling case.
“The Judge acknowledged that the scheduling of DOI will cause harm to research but held that this harm is irrelevant. Harm to research is not irrelevant—it is a threat to public health by shutting down critical research, including research involving tackling opioid addiction,” said Rush.
The outcome of this hearing could have long-lasting implications for scientific freedom and public health. DOI and DOC are essential research chemicals in pre-clinical psychiatry and neurobiology whose status as unscheduled compounds has made them de facto tools for researchers studying serotonin receptors.
“I have spent my entire Ph.D. studying DOI,” said Dr. Anderson. “Placing DOI and DOC in Schedule I would be a step backward for neuroscience and public health.”
A Call for Young Scientific Advocates
SSDP’s fight to keep DOI and DOC legal is a testament that the next generation of scientists is leading advocacy roles and actively shaping the policies that impact their fields.
“If not for the young scientists and researchers in SSDP who bravely spoke truth to power and put their burgeoning careers on the line for what is right, DOI and DOC would have been scheduled in 2022, said Murti, who joined SSDP as college student in 2009 and served on the youth-led Board of Directors for over a decade before becoming Executive Director in 2023.
The organization encourages the public, researchers, and students to stand with science and stand against censorship by joining SSDP’s campaign to keep DOI and DOC accessible to legitimate researchers.
“We were just a couple of passionate scientists who wanted to make a difference. Now, our group has gone up in front of the federal government and made our voices heard,” says Dr. Ullman. “Students should not be afraid to challenge proposed rulings or be involved in their government. You’ll find a way to make it all work with the right team. It’s important to bring truth to ‘America: ruled by the people, for the people.’”
The Fight Continues
SSDP, which has led the legal and scientific response to this rulemaking since 2022, vows to continue the fight in federal court and beyond.
“While SSDP is disappointed in the Judge’s recommendation to place DOI and DOC in Schedule I, we know that the fight to protect these valuable research chemicals is not done. We remain dedicated to advocating on behalf of the many students and scientists whose work with DOI has shown incredible potential in benefitting public health,” said Phelps. “The Tribunal’s assessment that DOI and DOC have a high potential for abuse and are a hazard to public safety is not consistent with the evidence presented at the hearing. We look forward to challenging this recommendation on appeal.”
The SSDP/Ramos team is preparing an immediate legal challenge and exploring all available avenues—including appealing the DEA’s final rule.
“We are prepared to continue to fight the completely absurd scheduling of the critical research tools because the stakes for science, medicine, and research freedom are simply too high to concede,” said Rush. “Judges get it wrong, and that’s why we have appeals courts. If the DEA continues with adding these vital research tools to Schedule I, we are prepared to challenge it at every level necessary.”
The fight for psychedelic science, public health, and research freedom continues.
“I am profoundly disappointed in the DEA, but we will not give up the fight to protect neuroscience and medical research,” said Dr. Anderson.
It would fly in the face of logic to ignore the overwhelming evidence and the voices of experts advocating for a science-based approach.
“The fight is not over and I’m going to continue to work towards a world where the War on Drugs is no more,” said Dr. Jaster. “I will continue to work towards a world where research and science is better understood and respected.”
This case isn’t just about two chemicals; it’s about the integrity of science and the health of millions who stand to benefit from these discoveries.
“SSDP will not back down,” said Murti. “This battle is not over—we are committed to taking it to the next level and continuing to fight to keep not just psychedelic research but scientific and medical research writ large legal. Science is not a crime.”
With around 100 chapters on campuses and in communities across the country, Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) is the largest youth-led network dedicated to ending the War on Drugs. Our national staff, Board of Directors, chapters, and alumni work together to replace the disastrous War on Drugs with policies rooted in evidence, compassion, and human rights, at a grassroots level.
###
For more information, please visit: https://ssdp.org/dont-block-psychedelic-research/
