House File 978 — Medical Use of Psilocybin

Meet­ing Time:	3/18/26 2:00 PM
Loca­tion:	Sen­ate Lounge

Because psilo­cy­bin is an ille­gal sub­stance under fed­er­al law, House File 978 requires employ­ees to “engage in con­duct which is in vio­la­tion of the crim­i­nal laws of the Unit­ed States.” HF 978 § 4, at page 5, lines 12–21.  This is exact­ly the same prob­lem the Med­ical Cannabid­i­ol Board has been ask­ing the leg­is­la­ture to fix with the med­ical cannabis pro­gram, Chap­ter 124E, for the past sev­en years.  Here is the board’s most recent request from Jan­u­ary 1, 2026:

The Board rec­om­mends that a task force of legal experts be autho­rized, sim­i­lar to the cur­rent board of med­ical experts, to assist the depart­ment in nav­i­gat­ing the legal issues involved with request­ing an exemp­tion for Iowa’s pro­gram from nec­es­sary Fed­er­al agen­cies.  This is relat­ed to a rec­om­men­da­tion in the Board’s 2019 Annu­al Report and the pas­sage of HF2589 in June, 2020.

It is hard to believe law mak­ers are enact­ing laws that require vio­la­tion of the law, but that is how bad this has got­ten.  If fed­er­al law does not allow the med­ical use of a psy­choact­ing plant or fun­gi, the leg­is­la­ture sets up fed­er­al rack­e­teer­ing scheme in the state to run it.

Some­thing this extreme might seem jus­ti­fied if it was the only way to resolve the prob­lem, but there is a much bet­ter way.  A fed­er­al exemp­tion for the reli­gious use of the psy­choac­tive plant pey­ote is autho­rized by 21 U.S.C. § 822(d) which allows the Attor­ney Gen­er­al to waive reg­is­tra­tion require­ments if “con­sis­tent with the pub­lic health and safe­ty.”  The fed­er­al exemp­tion for pey­ote, 21 C.F.R. § 1307.31, is an exam­ple of how Chap­ter 124E could be com­pli­ant with fed­er­al drug law.  The same is true for psy­choac­tive mush­rooms.

The last sec­tion of HF 978 requires the Depart­ment of Health and Human Ser­vices to con­duct a study on the use oth­er psy­choac­tive plants and fun­gi.

Sec. 34.  PSYCHEDELIC COMPOUNDS — STUDY.  The depart­ment of health and human ser­vices shall con­duct a study regard­ing the use of psy­che­del­ic com­pounds oth­er than psilo­cy­bin in the treat­ment of med­ical con­di­tions.  The depart­ment shall sub­mit a report to the gen­er­al assem­bly, includ­ing the department’s find­ings and rec­om­men­da­tions, by Jan­u­ary 1, 2026.

Why can’t HF 978 be amend­ed to include a study on how a church was grant­ed a fed­er­al exemp­tion to use pey­ote and what is required for the state to get the same exemp­tion for the med­ical use of psy­choac­tive plants and fun­gi?  Why would we want to pro­mote orga­nized crime in Iowa if we don’t need to?

This is a path Iowa should not be on.

Pri­or to giv­ing a cur­rent employ­ee an assign­ment or duty that aris­es from or direct­ly relates to an oblig­a­tion under this chap­ter, or hir­ing a prospec­tive employ­ee whose assign­ments or duties would include an assign­ment or duty that aris­es from or direct­ly relates to an oblig­a­tion under this chap­ter, a state employ­er or a polit­i­cal sub­di­vi­sion employ­er shall give the employ­ee or prospec­tive employ­ee a writ­ten notice that the employee’s or prospec­tive employee’s job duties may require the employ­ee or prospec­tive employ­ee to engage in con­duct which is in vio­la­tion of the crim­i­nal laws of the Unit­ed States.

6.  A psilo­cy­bin pro­duc­tion estab­lish­ment may be locat­ed at the same loca­tion as a med­ical cannabid­i­ol man­u­fac­tur­er licensed pur­suant to sec­tion 124E.6 if a sep­a­rate license is obtained for each.

10.  The licens­ing board may, at the dis­cre­tion of the licens­ing board, grant pref­er­ence to an appli­cant who cur­rent­ly holds a med­ical cannabid­i­ol man­u­fac­tur­er license issued pur­suant to sec­tion 124E.6.

4.  A local gov­ern­ment shall not do any of the fol­low­ing:
a.  Revoke from, or refuse to issue a license or per­mit to, a psilo­cy­bin pro­duc­tion estab­lish­ment on the sole basis that the appli­cant or psilo­cy­bin pro­duc­tion estab­lish­ment vio­lates fed­er­al law regard­ing the legal sta­tus of psilo­cy­bin.

1.  A qual­i­fied med­ical psilo­cy­bin provider or a qual­i­fied ther­a­py provider who rec­om­mends or admin­is­ters psilo­cy­bin in com­pli­ance with this chap­ter shall not be sub­ject to a civ­il or crim­i­nal penal­ty, or license dis­ci­pline, sole­ly for vio­lat­ing a fed­er­al law or reg­u­la­tion that pro­hibits rec­om­mend­ing, pre­scrib­ing, pos­sess­ing, or dis­pens­ing psilo­cy­bin or a psilo­cy­bin prod­uct.

This para­graph shall not apply in any of the fol­low­ing cir­cum­stances:
(1)  The employee’s use of psilo­cy­bin jeop­ar­dizes fed­er­al fund­ing, a fed­er­al secu­ri­ty clear­ance, or any oth­er fed­er­al back­ground deter­mi­na­tion required for the employee’s posi­tion.
(2)  The employee’s posi­tion is depen­dent on a license or peace offi­cer cer­ti­fi­ca­tion that is sub­ject to fed­er­al reg­u­la­tions, includ­ing 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3).

It is the pub­lic pol­i­cy of this state that con­tracts relat­ed to the pro­duc­tion, sale, and admin­is­tra­tion of psilo­cy­bin pur­suant to this chap­ter shall be enforce­able.  It is the pub­lic pol­i­cy of this state that no con­tract entered into by a psilo­cy­bin pro­duc­tion estab­lish­ment, qual­i­fied med­ical psilo­cy­bin provider, or qual­i­fied ther­a­py provider, or its employ­ees or agents as per­mit­ted pur­suant to a valid reg­is­tra­tion, or by an enti­ty who allows prop­er­ty to be used by an estab­lish­ment, qual­i­fied med­ical psilo­cy­bin provider, or qual­i­fied ther­a­py provider, its employ­ees, or its agents as per­mit­ted pur­suant to a valid reg­is­tra­tion, shall be unen­force­able on the basis that cul­ti­vat­ing, obtain­ing, man­u­fac­tur­ing, dis­trib­ut­ing, dis­pens­ing, trans­port­ing, sell­ing, pos­sess­ing, or using psilo­cy­bin is pro­hib­it­ed by fed­er­al law.

Thank you for your atten­tion to this mat­ter.

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/committees/meetings/subCommMeeting?meetingID=42584

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/committees/meetingPublicComment?meetingID=42584&action=viewCommitteePublicComments