Justice Department asks federal court to dismiss Safehouse’s supervised injection site case

The Department of Justice has asked a federal court to dismiss a case from the Philadelphia-based nonprofit Safehouse that seeks to allow it to open a supervised injection site in the city, signaling that months of negotiations have broken down with no deal.

Now, both sides are preparing to square off in court over Safehouse’s contention that its leaders have a religious duty to intervene to stop potential overdose deaths. Federal laws barring the operation of supervised injection sites, Safehouse alleges, unconstitutionally prevent them from practicing elements of their faith.

“We are pained that as the overdose death rate increases every year, the government is preventing us from following our deeply held religious convictions,” Safehouse board member Frank James III said in a statement. “The data show that overdose prevention sites save lives, and we are committed to saving lives.”

But in its filing, the Justice Department alleges that Safehouse, by its own admission, is not itself a religious organization. Additionally, its reasoning for its proposal to open a supervised injection site is “socio-political, medical, and philosophical” rather than based on religious grounds. As a result, the Justice Department argues, not allowing Safehouse to open would not be a violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, which prohibits government entities from infringing on the free exercise of religion.

“Safehouse’s view is an individual, medical, and public health-based judgment, informed by an admittedly ongoing and serious public health crisis, but it is not a religious belief,” the filing states.

The disagreement comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled in 2021 that Safehouse’s proposed facility would run afoul of a federal law commonly known as the “crack-house statute.” Passed during the height of the crack-cocaine epidemic, that law makes it a crime for anyone to operate a facility “for the purpose of unlawfully … using controlled substances.”

Though Safehouse had raised the religious exemption claims earlier in their legal fight, they opted not to pursue them in court until after the Third Circuit ruled against them.

The legal battle began in 2019, when the Justice Department, then led by U.S. Attorney General William Barr, sued to block Safehouse from opening what would have been the first supervised injection site in the country, saying it would violate the “crack-house statute.” Judge Gerald A. McHugh rejected that argument, finding instead that Safehouse’s goal was to reduce drug use rather than facilitate it. But the Third Circuit overturned that decision.

From there, Safehouse supporters returned to court with additional legal claims, including the argument that their religious beliefs require them to offer lifesaving medical care as provided at a supervised injection site. Settlement talks ensued, and initially appeared to be leading to a resolution.

Now, with the Justice Department’s latest filing, those settlement talks appear to have failed. Safehouse is due to respond to the motion by Aug. 15. The Justice Department must reply to that response by Sept. 8.