Connecticut House committee advances psilocybin decriminalization bill despite public safety concerns

In a pivotal Judiciary Committee meeting on April 4, 2025, Connecticut lawmakers discussed a significant proposal aimed at reducing penalties for psilocybin possession. House Bill 7065, which seeks to decriminalize possession of small amounts of psilocybin, was a focal point of the session. The bill proposes to lower the penalty for possessing under half an ounce of psilocybin from a misdemeanor to an infraction, while explicitly maintaining that psilocybin remains illegal to use while driving.

Senator Winfield, who introduced the motion, emphasized that the bill does not legalize psilocybin but merely reduces the penalties associated with its possession. This marks the third consecutive year the bill has been presented to the committee, reflecting ongoing discussions about drug policy in the state.

However, the proposal sparked a robust debate among committee members. Senator Kissel raised concerns about public safety, drawing parallels to the legalization of marijuana and its potential impact on driving under the influence. He expressed apprehension that reducing penalties could lead to a perception of leniency, potentially encouraging risky behavior among young people.

Representative Howard echoed these concerns, noting the limited number of drug recognition experts available in Connecticut to address issues related to impaired driving. He highlighted that the state has only about 60 trained experts for its 169 municipalities, which raises questions about the ability to effectively monitor and enforce laws against driving under the influence of drugs.

The committee ultimately moved to place the bill on the consent calendar, indicating a step forward in the legislative process. As discussions continue, the implications of this bill could reshape Connecticut's approach to psilocybin and its broader drug policy landscape. The committee's decision reflects a growing trend towards reevaluating drug penalties, but it also underscores the ongoing concerns about public safety and the potential consequences of such legislative changes.