FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:

Kat Murti

Executive Director

Students for Sensible Drug Policy

kat@ssdp.org

One Year After the HALT Fentanyl Act, Scientists Are Still Waiting for Promised Research Access. SSDP Releases Roadmap to Reduce Research Harms.

A new policy paper written by members of SSDP’s Science Policy Committee outlines recommendations for fixing the research barriers Congress intended to address but federal agencies have yet to implement.

July 16, 2026 – Washington, D.C.  — One year after President Trump signed the Halt All Lethal Trafficking of Fentanyl (HALT Fentanyl) Act into law on July 16, 2025, the federal government has yet to implement key research provisions that Congress required to make studying Schedule I substances easier.

Rather than waiting indefinitely, members of Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP)’s Science Policy Committee have published a new policy memo in the Journal of Science Policy and Governance outlining concrete recommendations for reducing research harms and ensuring the law fulfills its promise.

The paper, Reducing Research Harms: Analysis and Recommendations for Researching Schedule I Substances Under the HALT Fentanyl Act, examines the Act’s research provisions, the regulatory uncertainty that has followed, and practical policy reforms to reduce unnecessary barriers facing scientists studying Schedule I substances. 

While SSDP opposed the HALT Fentanyl Act’s permanent scheduling of fentanyl-related substances, the organization worked throughout the legislative process to help secure provisions intended to improve scientific research. One year later, those reforms remain largely inaccessible because the federal government has yet to publish the rules necessary to implement them.

“The War on Drugs has long treated scientific research as collateral damage,” said Kat Murti, Executive Director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy. “Although SSDP opposed the expansion of Schedule I under the HALT Fentanyl Act, we worked to ensure researchers would at least gain meaningful new pathways to study controlled substances. One year later, those pathways still exist largely on paper. Our Science Policy Committee isn’t just identifying the problem—we’re providing policymakers with a roadmap to finally reduce research harms and allow evidence, rather than bureaucracy, to guide scientific progress.”

The U.S. Attorney General has already missed a legally mandated deadline to issue interim research guidelines required under the law as of January 16, 2026. As of today, one year later, no interim rules have been published establishing new processes for Schedule I research registration, along with an opportunity for public comment and a request for a hearing.

“The Science Policy Committee has been working on this policy paper since the passing of the HALT Fentanyl Act while simultaneously pushing for the interim rules to be posted,” said Dr. Alaina M. Jaster, neuropharmacologist, lead author of the paper, and Chair of SSDP’s Science Policy Committee. “Since the Attorney General refuses to act, we have worked with a myriad of experts and legislators to inform our policy recommendations to address the gaps in HALT and reduce the onerous processes required to perform scientific research. Our ultimate goal is to reduce research harms and allow scientists to continue their important work furthering scientific advancement in the U.S.”

What the HALT Fentanyl Act Was Supposed to Do

The HALT Fentanyl Act permanently placed more than 100 fentanyl-related substances into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. While SSDP strongly opposes the expanded criminalization of any drug, the law also created new pathways intended to streamline Schedule I research, including:

• Expedited registration for researchers who already hold Schedule II licenses
• Expedited amendments to existing Schedule I registrations
• Permitting a single registration to cover multiple related research sites under certain circumstances
• Authorization for registered researchers to conduct limited manufacturing activities without obtaining a separate manufacturing license

Congress explicitly required the Attorney General and by proxy the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to clarify how these provisions would function in practice. One year later, that guidance still has not been issued.

“This paper represents years of work by grassroots advocates, students and scientists at SSDP advocating for reducing research harms associated with studying Schedule I substances,” said Joseph Hennessey, a member of SSDP’s Science Policy Committee and one of the paper’s authors. “While we were encouraged by the federal government’s willingness to relieve some regulatory burden through the HALT Fentanyl Act, the DEA is a year past its statutory deadline to issue new rules with no indication of when they will be released. Schedule I research is critical to our nation’s health, security, and well-being, and until our federal policies reflect as much, our research enterprise will continue to suffer.”

New Policy Recommendations to Reduce Research Harms

SSDP’s Science Policy Committee is a multidisciplinary body of scientists, clinicians, and policy experts dedicated to advancing evidence-based drug policy. The Committee evaluates how drug scheduling, enforcement, and regulatory frameworks affect scientific research and public health, and provides expert guidance to policymakers on reducing research barriers and harms. 

“The HALT Fentanyl Act addresses several longstanding procedural challenges, but further reforms are necessary to remove persistent barriers to research,” the authors write in the new paper published in the Journal of Science Policy & Governance.

The paper’s principal recommendations include:

1. Revising the “currently accepted medical use” requirement for Schedule I substances to explicitly recognize biomedical research as a legitimate form of medical use.

2. Updating DEA procedures or enacting legislation requiring periodic external review of emerging scientific literature on drug classes, specific compounds, and modern research techniques to ensure that the required Health and Human Services (HHS) review of research reflects current scientific standards, including the “gold standard” of understanding abuse potential. 

 3. Amending section 3 of the HALT Fentanyl Act (21 U.S.C. § 823) to replace separate Schedule I and Schedule II research registrations with a single registration covering research involving any controlled substance.

In June,  Rep. Steve Cohen introduced legislation in the House that would require a cost-benefit analysis as part of the scheduling process, which would include consideration of utility in scientific research as a benefit. The proposal represents an important step toward addressing the paper’s first recommendation.

“For decades, drug policy in the United States has treated legitimate scientific research as collateral damage,” said Dr. Tanner Anderson, a neuroscientist, member of SSDP’s Science Policy Committee, and a co-author on the paper. “Schedule I barriers slow down scientists and create a cascade of effects that restrict insights needed to understand public health risks, develop new treatments, and create evidence-based policy. We argue for a more rational system: one that can still maintain accountability while removing hindrances to scientific inquiry.”

Ongoing Confusion For Scientists

The consequences of the federal government’s delay continue to negatively impact researchers. Members of SSDP’s Science Policy Committee have attempted to use the new process outlined in the HALT Fentanyl Act by notifying the Attorney General of their intent to conduct Schedule I research using an existing Schedule II license, but continue to receive no assistance.

Further illustrating the confusion, Dr. Jaster spoke at the International Society for Psychedelic Research (ISRP) annual meeting in February 2026 about the importance of research chemicals 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine (DOI) and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-chloroamphetamine (DOC) for understanding serotonin systems, SSDP’s ongoing fight to keep psychedelic research legal, and the implications of the HALT Fentanyl Act.

“Several people at the conference were not even aware of the HALT Fentanyl Act,” said Dr. Jaster. “The lack of guidance is extremely confusing to those who are trying to remain compliant with their research and registrations, especially those working with novel psychoactive substances. Several researchers and program directors spoke to me after my presentation regarding the new regulations posed by HALT, but unfortunately there was nothing I could tell them due to the lack of follow through by the AG and DEA. Hopefully, these recommendations will inspire them to release their interim rules soon.”

SSDP continues to push for transparency in policies affecting scientific research and urges the Attorney General and the DEA to immediately publish the interim rules governing Schedule I research registrations under the HALT Fentanyl Act. Until those rules are issued, a law intended to reduce burdens on researchers continues to create uncertainty and perpetuate research harms.

Have You Experienced Research Harms?

While the Attorney General and DEA have yet to implement the research provisions of the HALT Fentanyl Act, SSDP’s Science Policy Committee is collecting stories from researchers who have experienced research harms caused by drug scheduling or other related regulatory barriers.

By sharing your experience — either anonymously or by name — you can help inform policymakers and strengthen the case for meaningful reform.

Share your story with SSDP today!

###

With chapters on campuses and in communities across the country, Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) is the largest youth-led network dedicated to replacing 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.