Colorado harm reduction groups sue over syringe exchange ban
Sara Wilson
(Colorado Newsline) Two harm reduction nonprofits in Pueblo are suing the city over a recently-enacted ordinance that prohibits syringe exchange programs, or SEPs, which the organizations claim are legal in the state and crucial in lessening communicable disease among people who use injectable drugs.
Pueblo City Council last month voted to ban free SEPs, which have operated in the city for over a decade, in an effort to curb used needle litter around the city.
Now, the American Civil Liberties Union is suing the city on behalf of the Colorado Health Network and the Southern Colorado Harm Reduction Association, both of which operated SEPs in the city before the new ordinance.
“Pueblo’s decision ignores basic public health policy and the evidence-based programs that seek to ensure all Coloradans have access to essential healthcare, education, and harm-prevention,” Tim Macdonald, ACLU of Colorado’s Legal Director, said in a statement.
SEPs are community-based programs that offer free sterile syringes and drug injection equipment — as well as safe disposal of those items — in an effort to reduce the spread of HIV and HCV infections in people who use drugs. They also offer wound treatment supplies and overdose reversal medication.
They have been legal in Colorado since 2010 and are backed by public health experts and harm reductionists. The law does not require prior local approval as of 2020. About 20 such programs exist in the state.
Access Point, Colorado Health Network’s SEP, has operated in Pueblo since 2014. Southern Colorado Harm Reduction Association opened in 2017. Both groups also act as a connector to an array of medical, behavioral and recovery services for their participants.
The lawsuit, filed in the Pueblo County District Court, alleges the city’s ban skirts the state law that “expressly allows any qualified nonprofit organization to operate a clean syringe exchange program.”
Though Pueblo is a home-rule city that has the right to self-government, the lawsuit argues that state law supersedes any local ordinance that “conflicts with state law in a matter of either statewide or mixed state and local concern,” according to legal precedent.
“Because the operation of SEPs and their provision of opiate antagonists is a matter of statewide concern, or at a minimum, a matter of mixed state and local concern, and because the Pueblo Ordinance conflicts operationally with the statewide regulation of public health, the Pueblo Ordinance is preempted by State law,” the lawsuit reads.
If the Pueblo ordinance is allowed to stand, the next closest program will be in Colorado Springs, about 50 miles north of Pueblo.
“The passage of the Ordinance is likely to have impact beyond the City’s borders, including increasing risk of outbreak of infectious disease such as HIV and Hepatitis C in Pueblo and other jurisdictions where participants travel from to obtain services in Pueblo. The prohibition of SEP services in Pueblo will also increase health care costs, increase overdose deaths, and result in fewer people entering treatment programs, both in Pueblo and adjacent jurisdictions,” the lawsuit reads.
Also, CHN and SCHRA are at risk of losing funding through the Colorado HIV/AIDS Prevention Program if they cannot meet the requirements of their contract, which the ban makes harder. SCHRA received more than $1.5 million from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment between 2020 and 2024 and CHN received nearly $1 million from the CDPHE between 2022 and 2024.
In addition to the lawsuit, a pair of Pueblo citizens are collecting signatures for a petition to suspend the ordinance, according to the Pueblo Chieftain. They have until June 14 to collect over 1,400 signatures. City Council could then either repeal the ordinance or send the question to voters this November.
City officials declined to comment on the pending litigation.