CONNECTICUT HEARING CHALLENGES PROPOSED KRATOM BAN

What started as a fairly innocuous bill to ban perceived dangerous substances turned into a last-minute effort by the Connecticut legislature to enact a kratom ban. Now, advocates are hoping to overturn that decision before the law is finalized. 

A bill was passed during the final days of the 2025 legislative session that gave Connecticut authorities the ability to add kratom to the list of controlled substances in the state. Instead of automatically adding all kratom products to a specific schedule, the law gave the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) the ability to add the substances included in the bill to “the appropriate schedule.” With that decision looming, advocates are hoping that a public hearing can help create a carve-out for natural leaf kratom and make a clear distinction between products posing as kratom and the actual plant material. 

“This bill went through at the last minute, attaching kratom to a common bill that puts dangerous substances on it, and no one paid much attention, much less the leadership,” Haddow said. 

That hearing took place on Oct. 15 after a coalition of kratom advocates made the case for natural leaf kratom. The American Kratom Association (AKA) was part of that effort, and Senior Fellow Mac Haddow said that the state required 15 residents to petition for a public hearing–they got support from “well over” 80. 

Advocates Push for Regulation

The hearing took more than seven hours and featured perspectives and input from all sides of the kratom question. In addition to the supporters of the original bill, which included local members of the medical community and others who have taken a staunchly anti-kratom stance, a variety of advocates spoke out against implementing the law to lump all kratom products together. 

One of the voices in favor of more measured regulation was Dr. Michael White, who is the chair of the Kratom Consumer Advisory Council. White is also a professor in the Department of Pharmacy at the University of Connecticut and shed light on the current state of kratom discussions, and why a blanket action could have adverse effects on those who use kratom responsibly.  

"What the law is proposing is to schedule all kratom products," White said. "That means banning them in Connecticut. But there's a big difference between the natural leaf, which has been used for centuries, and synthetic 7-OH, which only emerged at the end of 2023."

White testified against the bill earlier this year when it was being debated by the legislature and proposed that the state instead opt to limit the amount of concentration of 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH) among other regulations. As was pointed out by others who testified in favor of natural leaf kratom at the recent hearing, White testified that 7-OH only appears in trace amounts in natural leaf kratom and went as far as to offer to help the legislature craft comprehensive regulations that would leave a carve-out for unadulterated kratom products. 

That same logic was supported by the AKA as the basis for opposing the ban on kratom. Although the proceedings did not allow for the AKA to make a formal presentation to Connecticut lawmakers, Haddow said that experts would be submitting written testimony about the prevailing science surrounding the plant–the same science that led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to change its stance earlier this year to target 7-OH instead of lumping all kratom products together. 

“The criteria in Connecticut are not matched by the evidence and data of science on kratom to demonstrate that it needs to be Schedule I,” Haddow said. “We hope that will be persuasive, and we’ll see how that falls out at the end of that discussion.” 

Targeting the True Risk

The testimony against 7-OH also came from speakers who did not fall into the category of kratom advocates. Peter Shields testified at the hearing as an addiction recovery specialist and agreed that a more comprehensive approach to kratom would best serve the public health needs of Connecticut citizens. 

"I will not pretend that kratom, whole leaf or otherwise, is a truly harmless substance, but the fact is that a ban will not stop opioid abuse," Shields said. "Ban 7-OH. But regulate rather than ban full-leaf kratom. Do not allow it to be sold in gas stations. Do not sell it to children.”

While the law does give DCP the ability to target kratom products on a broad basis, Haddow said that advocates are hoping the personal testimony in favor of kratom will influence lawmakers to hold off on targeting the plant until a more nuanced framework can be put in place. More than 100 people testified at the hearing, and voices on all sides of the issue agreed that 7-OH products were the real threat to public safety. 

A spokesperson for the DCP told CT Insider that the limitations of the bill that passed earlier this year do not allow for the department to make a differentiation between 7-OH and natural kratom products. Instead, any significant modifications to kratom policy or more robust regulations of the plant would need to be taken up during the 2026 legislative session in the state.