WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HF 2906

Psilocybin therapeutic use program established; protections for registered patients, designated cultivators, registered facilitators, and health care practitioners established; rulemaking authorized; civil actions authorized; fees established; advisory committee established; criminal penalties provided; and money appropriated.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Aisha Gomez and 8 co-sponsors

Minnesota establishes regulated psilocybin therapy program allowing licensed facilitators to administer psilocybin to registered patients, creating state oversight structure with fees, protections, and penalties.

Author added Rymer
#healthandhealthdepartment
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HF 2906

Legislative bill overview

HF 2906 establishes a regulated therapeutic psilocybin program in Minnesota, creating a framework for registered patients to access psilocybin under supervision by trained facilitators. The bill authorizes the state to license cultivators, facilitators, and healthcare practitioners while establishing civil protections, fee structures, and an advisory committee to oversee the program.

Why is this important

This represents a significant shift in Minnesota drug policy, moving psilocybin from Schedule I controlled substance to a supervised therapeutic tool for qualifying patients. The bill creates legal pathways for a currently illegal substance while establishing state oversight mechanisms—a model that could influence other states' psychedelic medicine policies.

Potential points of contention

  • Federal-state conflict: Psilocybin remains a Schedule I controlled substance under federal law, creating legal tension and potential DEA enforcement concerns
  • Access and equity: Program costs, licensing fees, and facilitator scarcity could limit access to wealthy patients, raising fairness questions
  • Safety and quality: Standards for cultivator practices, patient screening criteria, and facilitator training requirements will determine program safety but require detailed rulemaking
  • Scope limitations: Bill doesn't specify which conditions qualify for treatment, potentially leading to disputes over eligible diagnoses
  • Liability protections: Extent of legal immunity for practitioners and the state in adverse outcomes remains a key negotiation point

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.