Five psychedelic compounds. A growing body of scientific research. And another attempt by the DEA to put prohibition ahead of science.

On October 23, Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) joined Mindstate Design Labs and researchers Dr. Benjamin Cummings and Dr. Janelle Lanham in formally requesting a hearing to challenge the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) proposal to place five tryptamines in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.

The filing, submitted by attorneys Robert T. Rush and Brett Phelps, challenges both the scientific evidence behind the proposal and the real-world harm that additional research restrictions could cause.

What’s at Stake?

Tryptamines are a family of compounds that includes substances being studied for their potential therapeutic applications. The five compounds targeted by the DEA — 4-OH-DiPT, 5-MeO-AMT, 5-MeO-MiPT, 5-MeO-DET, and DiPT — are already the subject of ongoing scientific investigation.

Scheduling them would create significant new barriers for researchers, universities, and companies working to better understand their effects and potential medical applications.

Our legal challenge makes three central arguments:

• Psychoactivity isn’t proof of high abuse potential. The DEA must demonstrate that each individual compound meets the legal criteria for Schedule I, rather than relying on chemical similarities, generalized assumptions, or limited reports of adverse events.
• The science deserves to be heard. Researchers have valuable data on these compounds, including controlled human studies and findings relevant to potential therapeutic applications. That evidence deserves meaningful consideration before restrictions are imposed.
• Research barriers cause real harm. Schedule I requirements can delay studies, increase costs, restrict access to research materials, and jeopardize the work of students and early-career scientists. These consequences matter, too.

Science Should Come Before Scheduling

This isn’t SSDP’s first time challenging the DEA’s attempts to restrict scientific research. Our participation in the DOI and DOC scheduling proceedings helped bring the concept of research harm into the formal hearing process: the recognition that drug scheduling itself can have harmful consequences by obstructing legitimate scientific investigation.

Now we’re continuing that fight.

We’re asking the DEA to hold a formal hearing, examine the evidence for each compound individually, and consider the consequences of imposing new restrictions on ongoing research.

Drug policy should be guided by science, not assumptions. And we shouldn’t have to fight the government for the right to conduct research that could improve lives.

Read the Full Legal Filing

SSDP will continue working alongside scientists, researchers, and advocates to protect scientific inquiry and advance drug policies rooted in evidence, compassion, and human rights — policies that make sense.

Help SSDP Stand Up to the DEA

We do this work because we believe the War on Drugs is a War on Us — and because young people deserve a future built on science, compassion, and human rights.

If you believe in that vision, please consider making a donation today.

Your support allows SSDP to continue challenging harmful policies, defending scientific research, training the next generation of advocates, and fighting for drug policies grounded in evidence rather than fear.

If you would like to contribute to legal funds associated with the DEA hearing, please consider making a donation to the Rights and Reason Project.