This post is part of an ongoing series that summarizes state-based psychedelic reforms, intended for policy professionals.
Iowa
House File 2085, sponsored by state Rep. John Wills (R- District 10), would establish a regulated system for psilocybin production and administration.
The bill creates a psilocybin production establishment licensing board within the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services, requires security systems at regulated sites, sets up registration categories for cultivators, testing labs, qualified medical psilocybin providers, qualified therapy providers, and applies misdemeanor penalties for violations. The bill does not require a medical condition to qualify for psilocybin services.
A version of this bill was introduced in 2025 and passed the Iowa House by a vote of 84-6. It then became the basis for an American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) template bill. ALEC is a membership organization that offers a national forum for state lawmakers to share ideas and vote to endorse generic statutory language as a “model policy” that lawmakers in other states could use as a basis for their own proposals.
The current version of the bill was introduced Jan. 15, referred to the Iowa Senate Health and Human Services Committee, and assigned for consideration at a subcommittee meeting on Jan. 26, which was later canceled. The sponsor requested the cancellation to secure more experts for the next hearing.
House File 978, also by Wills, is a narrowly tailored regulated-access bill for psilocybin services, capped at 5,000 patients. Those patients must be 21 or older, and the psilocybin is obtained from state-certified manufacturers and administered by licensed clinicians. Under a previous bill number, 650, it passed the House and is currently progressing through the Senate.
If HF 978 passes the Senate, provisions in Wills’ other bill, HF 2085, could be added in
Missouri
House Bill 1717, sponsored by state Rep. Richard West (R-District 102), authorizes psilocybin services for veterans who are over 21 and who have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), major depressive disorder, substance use disorder, or end-of-life care needs. It requires enrollment in a psilocybin study, advance notice to the Missouri Department of Mental Health, and supervised use with a qualified facilitator.
The bill also directs the Missouri Department of Mental Health to issue $2 million in research grants (subject to appropriation) and to produce annual reports, while creating confidentiality and liability protections for participating patients and clinicians.
The bill was read into the chamber on Jan. 8 and has not yet been scheduled for a hearing.
House Bill 1643, sponsored by state Rep. Matthew Overcast (R-District 155), would create a broader therapeutic psilocybin carveout for adults and similarly revise Missouri’s “right-to-try” statute to allow access to investigational new drugs that include otherwise controlled substances.
Psilocybin access under HB 1643 is not limited to military veterans and does not require enrollment in a study. Instead, it allows access for adults who are over 21 and who need end-of-life care or suffer from PTSD, major depressive disorder, a substance use disorder, or “any other condition” where psilocybin has shown efficacy in U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-registered clinical trials.
Unlike HB 1717, HB 1643 adds a new registry requirement for manufacturers of investigational drugs that involve a controlled substance, directing the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services to create the registry before Nov. 1, 2026.
The bill was pre-filed on Dec. 1, received its first reading Jan. 7, and was read a second time Jan. 8. It has not yet been scheduled for a hearing.
House Bill 2817, sponsored by Rep. Richard West (R-District 102), would direct the Department of Health and Senior Services to fund tightly regulated ibogaine clinical trials and to capture any resulting intellectual property value for Missouri. The bill requires the Department of Health and Senior Services to award grants only to Missouri‑based entities running FDA‑overseen “certified clinical drug development trials” of ibogaine to treat opioid use disorder, co‑occurring substance use disorders, or other neurological or mental health conditions where ibogaine shows efficacy, with applicants providing matching non‑state funds and submitting regular progress and financial reports.
It creates two special funds: the “Ibogaine Study Fund,” which holds appropriated and donated money used solely for these grants, and the “Ibogaine Intellectual Property Fund,” which receives all revenue from patents, licenses, and other commercial rights arising from the trials and restricts that revenue to programs helping veterans or other at‑risk Missouri populations.
The bill was considered in a committee hearing on Feb. 16 in the Missouri House Emerging Issues Committee, with no publicly planned next steps.
House Bill 2961, sponsored by state Rep. Richard West (R-District 102), would create the “Veterans Mental Health Innovation Act” and establish a state grant program to support FDA-approved ibogaine drug development trials for opioid-use disorder and related conditions. This bill is based on language drafted by Reason Foundation and an ALEC model policy that would allow other states to join a multi-state public-private partnership originating in Texas with the goal of getting ibogaine approved by the FDA as a treatment for opioid-use disorder, traumatic brain injury, or other conditions for which it demonstrates efficacy.
The bill limits grants to an in-state entity with specified clinical capacity and requires a signed agreement with a multistate consortium that has submitted an investigational new drug application and requested a breakthrough therapy designation to the FDA for ibogaine. The award of any state grant is also conditioned on the grant recipients’ receipt of matching funds from other sources.
The bill creates an “Ibogaine Study Fund” for grant dollars and an “Ibogaine Intellectual Property Fund” to capture Missouri’s share of commercialization proceeds, restricting use of those proceeds to programs that assist veterans or other at-risk populations in Missouri.
It does not allocate a specific amount of funding. The bill was read on Jan. 14 and also had a committee hearing on Feb. 16 in the Missouri House Emerging Issues Committee.
There is an emerging plan to consolidate the ibogaine bills.
New Hampshire
House Bill 1796, sponsored by state Rep. Michael Moffett (R-Merrimack-4th), would create the “Therapeutic Psilocybin Act” and allow regulated psilocybin use in approved clinical settings to treat qualified medical conditions. This bill is a version of the ALEC model policy, which Iowa House File 2085 (discussed above) is also based upon.
The bill establishes a medical psilocybin program within the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), creates a licensing board, and directs the department to license qualified medical and therapy providers. Qualifying conditions include depression, PTSD, and other conditions approved by the department.
The bill received a public hearing on Jan. 14, and on Feb. 3, a majority committee report recommended “inexpedient to legislate” (opposing the legislation).
Rep. Moffett is also the primary sponsor of House Bill 1772, legislation that would have New Hampshire join a multistate consortium to conduct clinical trials using ibogaine as an investigational new drug, with a nominal $1 appropriation. As with Missouri House Bill 2961 (discussed above), it is also based on the ALEC model policy “Veterans Mental Health Innovation Act.”
House Bill 1809, sponsored by Rep. Buzz Scherr (D-Rockingham 26th), would authorize medical psilocybin through a DHHS program where approved providers are also approved producers of the psilocybin used in their sessions. Unlike HB 1796, HB 1809 makes implementation contingent on a newly created medical psilocybin advisory board certifying that the program is ready within two years. If the board fails to meet this timeline, the bill’s other provisions would be delayed indefinitely.
HB 1809 received a public hearing on Jan. 14 and was reported “ought to pass” on the House calendar on Feb. 3.
Policymakers seem to have misinterpreted the bill to imply the agency would oversee trials rather than just administering a grant. Passage may be contingent on the agency gaining an improved understanding of the bill.
New Jersey
On Jan. 20, former Gov. Phil Murphy signed S. 2283 into law before leaving office. The new law creates a pilot program in the New Jersey Department of Health overseen by a new Psychedelic Therapy and Research Advisory Board that is designed to support hospital-based psilocybin research compliant with FDA and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) protocols. The Department of Health would select three hospitals to participate, and the bill appropriates $6 million to a Psychedelic Therapy and Research Fund, directing $2 million to each participating hospital, with reporting requirements intended to inform whether the pilot should be continued or expanded.
A prior version of the bill would have established a regulated system of state-licensed clinics offering psilocybin therapy, but that version did not progress following its introduction in Jan. 2024.
New York
A. 3845, sponsored by Asm. Patrick Burke (D-District 142), would establish a psilocybin-assisted therapy pilot program for New York veterans and first responders and create a dedicated pilot program fund to provide access for up to 10,000 patients. Funding would be terminated if the federal government approves psilocybin for medical treatment. The bill is awaiting a hearing in the Assembly Standing Committee on Health.
A. 2142, sponsored by Asm. Amy Paulin (D-88), would allow the regulated adult use of psilocybin for the treatment of certain health conditions and create licensure and certification categories for the supply chain and support services. It allows for any medical condition “where there is evidence of potential use of psilocybin with positive outcomes.” The bill was first introduced Jan. 15, 2025, and was re-referred to the Assembly Standing Committee on Health on Jan. 7.
A. 3775, also sponsored by Asm. Burke, would establish a psilocybin-assisted therapy grant program for members of the public other than the first responders in his other bill, A. 3845. The bill was re-referred to the Assembly Standing Committee on Health on Jan. 7.
A. 628, sponsored by Asm. Linda B. Rosenthal (D-District 67), would legalize adult possession and use of certain “natural plant or fungus-based hallucinogens,” including DMT, mescaline, psilocybin, and psilocyn. It would allow for supportive services, including supervision and harm-reduction-style guidance, as well as religious and other non-commercial organizational use.
Notably, the bill includes ibogaine in the list of included substances that would be lawful. The bill was re-referred to the Assembly Standing Committee on Health on Jan. 7.
Given the lack of progress on these bills, they are unlikely to pass this year, but instead keep the issue open for debate.
Oklahoma
House Bill 3834, sponsored by Rep. Stan May (R-80), would create the “Oklahoma Breakthrough Therapy Act” to support multistate ibogaine drug development clinical trials intended to reach FDA approval. It is a version of the ALEC model policy “Veterans Mental Health Innovation Act.”
As introduced, the bill authorizes the Oklahoma Department of Health to contract with a drug developer that already has an ibogaine drug development agreement with at least one additional state, requires the developer to match the state’s investment and prioritize in-state clinicians, facilities, and participants, and sets reporting and financial verification requirements for the trials.
The bill also creates an Ibogaine Intellectual Property Account in the Office of the State Treasurer to receive Oklahoma’s proportional share of proceeds from commercialization tied to the trials, limits spending to appropriated uses benefiting at-risk populations with conditions treatable with ibogaine, and prohibits adverse licensing action against Oklahoma medical professionals for recommending psilocybin or ibogaine therapy services.
The bill had a public reading on Feb. 3 and received a “Do Pass” by the Human Services Oversight Committee on Feb. 19th. The bill is in the process of being advanced.
Virginia
House Bill 1347, sponsored by Del. Laura Jane Cohen (D-15), would direct the Board of Pharmacy to promulgate regulations allowing the prescribing, dispensing, possession, and use of psilocybin if and once an FDA-approved formulation exists and DEA rescheduling occurs.
As introduced, the bill is limited to FDA-approved psilocybin formulations and would legalize prescription by licensed prescribers, dispensing by pharmacists or other authorized dispensers, and patient possession, transport, and use for legitimate medical purposes, with the Board of Pharmacy initiating rulemaking at its next quarterly meeting following DEA rescheduling.
The bill was heard in the House Health Subcommittee and the Committee on Health and Human Services. It was engrossed during the second reading on Feb. 10.
Washington
Senate Bill 5921, sponsored by state Sen. Jesse Salomon (D-District 32), would place a medical-use program under the Washington Department of Health.
As introduced, the bill requires all psilocybin to be naturally occurring and excludes “synthetic or synthetic analogs,” relies on clinician judgment for adult patients, and restricts dispensing to clinician-to-patient distribution rather than third-party pharmacies.
A previous bill introduced last year by Sen. Salomon would have permitted non-medical, adult use. This version narrows the scope to medical use only.
The bill states that a “qualifying condition” is a diagnosis that is not enumerated in the bill. “The determination of appropriate qualifying conditions rests solely with the prescribing clinician, who assumes all associated professional liability, consistent with state law governing medical conduct, malpractice, and negligence,” reads the bill.
In other words, the bill allows a prescriber to determine whether an individual has an illness that qualifies them to receive psilocybin. Rather than give specific conditions, such as depression, it allows the prescriber to assume the risk of making their own determination. It is unclear how this would affect the ability to obtain liability insurance, since there is little legal precedent regarding what courts have determined to be an appropriate prescription for psilocybin.
The current bill was prefiled on Dec. 19 and referred to the Ways and Means committee on Feb. 4. The bill failed to meet the Feb. 9th committee cut-off deadline, effectively killing it.