Debate Desk
Should Drugs Be Decriminalized, and Why Do Conservatives Disagree?
Some conservatives want to end drug prohibition on liberty grounds, others want enforcement; Oregon's 2020 experiment and its 2024 reversal shape the debate.
The claim
Advocates of decriminalization say the war on drugs filled prisons without ending drug use, that addiction is better treated by doctors than by courts, and that a free society should let adults make choices about their own bodies, with treatment offered instead of jail.
The answer in three points
- Conservatives are split, and honestly so. Libertarian-minded conservatives hold that the government should not punish a person for what he does to himself. Others hold that drug use harms families and communities, and that law shapes behavior and sets standards.
- Oregon tried decriminalizing possession of small amounts of hard drugs in 2020 through Measure 110. By 2024 the legislature had restored criminal penalties after overdose deaths rose and the promised treatment system was slow to appear. The experiment is a caution against assuming that removing penalties is enough.
- Whatever the legal status, treatment, accountability and enforcement against dealers are needed. Drug courts, which use the court's authority to require treatment, have a good record and are favored by many conservatives. The tool of the court can be used to help.
Policies should be judged by whether fewer people die and more recover. States are free to try different approaches and the public can watch the results.
The numbers
- Oregon voters approved Measure 110 in November 2020, and the legislature recriminalized possession of small amounts of hard drugs in 2024, according to the Oregon Legislative Assembly.
- The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported about 108,000 drug overdose deaths in 2022.
- Gonzales v. Raich (2005) held that Congress may regulate marijuana grown at home under the Commerce Clause, according to the Supreme Court's opinion.
What they will say next
"Portugal decriminalized and did well." Portugal paired decriminalization with substantial treatment and a system of referral, and its experience has been debated. It is a model of a package, and the package matters.
"Prohibition did not work with alcohol." Alcohol was a widely used drink with a long history, and the comparison is imperfect. The more relevant lesson is that rules must have public support and be enforceable.
"Marijuana legalization has not caused disaster." On marijuana, states have gone their own way, and conservatives who favor federalism can accept state differences. Hard drugs such as fentanyl and methamphetamine present a different level of danger.
"People should be free." Freedom matters, and so does the harm to children, spouses and neighbors of people with addiction. The weighing of these is the heart of the debate.
Conservatives can disagree here and still agree on this: treat addiction with seriousness, punish traffickers, and let states test policies and learn.
"Locking up users costs more than treatment." In some cases treatment is cheaper and more effective, and drug courts show how coercion and care can be combined. The law can distinguish users from dealers and offer paths to recovery.