Religious Liberty as a Shield for Public Health — The Case of Overdose-Prevention Centers
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
11-8-2025
ISSN
0028-4793
Publisher
Massachusetts Medical Society
Language
en-US
Abstract
In numerous legal cases in the United States, going back decades, litigants have asserted religious liberty as a sword to strike down public health measures. Recently, however, courts have recognized that religious liberty can also serve as a shield — including for institutions without religious affiliations.
A federal appeals court ruling in United States v. Safehouse could mark a shift in the way courts treat efforts to prevent drug overdoses and to support public health more broadly.1 In July 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that Safehouse, a Philadelphia-based nonprofit organization seeking to open an overdose-prevention center (OPC), may assert religious-liberty claims to override federal controlled-substances law, despite being a nonreligious organization. Although the decision appears to be narrow — limited to the question of whether a nonreligious entity can bring a claim asserting religious liberty — it may open the door to a new legal defense for harm-reduction interventions in a hostile political climate.
Recommended Citation
Benjamin A. Barsky, Adi Caplan-Bricker & Christopher Robertson,
Religious Liberty as a Shield for Public Health — The Case of Overdose-Prevention Centers
,
393
New England Journal of Medicine
1867
(2025).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/4183
