SYNTHETIC KRATOM LAWS ADVANCE IN MISSISSIPPI LEGISLATURE AMIDST FLURRY OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION

Mississippi’s approach to regulating kratom in this legislative session could best be described as throwing a handful of bills at a wall and seeing what sticks.

Following a flurry of committee hearings and floor discussions, a pair of bills are emerging as a likely path forward to address the concerns surrounding kratom. 

What started as a set of four potential kratom regulations has been trimmed to two, and both of those proposed laws have passed in one chamber of the Mississippi legislature. That sets the stage for a frantic end to the session to try and figure out the framework of kratom policy in the state, as the legislature attempts to find a solution that protects customers. 

At the start of the session, three bills that included kratom regulations were introduced in the Mississippi House of Representatives, with a fourth popping up in the state’s Senate. All four took drastically different approaches to regulating kratom, with two looking to solidify protections for customers and the other two attempting to criminalize the plant. 

Both sets of bills came down to the level of regulation legislators were looking for. 

Seeking Regulation

On the positive side for kratom consumers, two bills to protect access were introduced in the House. One bill included an age requirement for purchase, while the other was a full-fledged version of a Kratom Consumer Protection Act (KCPA). It was similar to laws that have passed in more than a dozen states that set restrictions on adulterants and specific kratom products to create a robust regulatory structure to weed out bad actors in the industry. 

Those attempting to restrict access also took drastically different approaches. The bill introduced in the House was a ban on kratom, including pure leaf, and is similar to bans that started the kratom discussion at the state level nearly a decade ago. In the Senate, the only bill introduced took an approach that is completely new in terms of proposed or enacted laws around kratom. 

A handful of states have attempted to use legislative or other public mechanisms to schedule kratom. Mississippi’s attempt to find a compromise came in the form of a law that would schedule any synthetic kratom product as Schedule III based on the potency of the active alkaloids.  

The situation created conflict among the bills due to the proposed laws covering similar subject matters and regulatory structures. 

Mississippi’s version of a KCPA included language that would set the same age requirement as the bill that simply added age requirements to purchase kratom. The KCPA bill also included a limitation on alkaloid content, stating that it was illegal to sell a product that contained an alkaloid fraction that is “greater than two percent of the alkaloid composition of the kratom product.” 

In the Senate bill that would add synthesized kratom products to Schedule III, the specific language called for “any chemically synthesized compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of mitragynine…in excess of one percent of the total alkaloid composition of the product.” 

That bill was introduced by Sen. Angela Turner-Ford, who spoke to the Judiciary Committee during the brief hearing. Turner-Ford did not clarify the text of the bill, officially Senate Bill 2355, but instead testified that she was told naturally occurring kratom products contain a concentration near 0.5 percent of the total alkaloid composition, and said the 1 percent would be a “safer level.” 

Synthetic Kratom Becomes the Target

What is unclear in the language of the proposed bill is exactly what products Turner-Ford is targeting. The bill was amended to include language that mentioned “any quantity of mitragynine” but then included “(7 hydroxymitragynine and/or 7-OH-mitragynine)” in the same clause. 

In the last year, there has been pushback from the research community against semi-synthetic 7-hydroxymitragynine products, including products containing unknown chemicals. From the way the law is worded, it appears Turner-Ford’s bill would only target synthetically created kratom compounds. 

If the two conflicting bills had both gained progress, it’s unclear how those clashing percentages would affect kratom consumers, however, it didn’t get that far. The bill to establish a KCPA in Mississippi, House Bill 1553, received a third reading on Feb. 12, then died on the calendar the next day. 

The good news for kratom consumers is that the bill to ban kratom was dismissed on the same timeline. That bill, House Bill 1121, would have scheduled any product that contained any form of kratom as Schedule III in the state. Both bills came through the Business and Commerce Committee and received third readings, then died on the calendar the same day. 

Oppositely, the two bills with more specific language passed out of their respective chambers. 

Rep. Lee Yancey introduced House Bill 1077 to implement a required age of 21 years old to purchase kratom. The original bill was replaced by a substitute in committee that expanded the scope of the measure. In addition to the same age requirements, the bill added language to limit the concentration of kratom products and would make it illegal to sell adulterated kratom products or kratom products containing synthetic alkaloids. 

With the additions to the bill, the measure was approved by a vote of 119-0 by the House of Representatives. 

Likewise, SB2355 passed on the same day in the Senate, also by a unanimous vote.

With time ticking down on the legislative session in Mississippi, kratom advocates are keeping a keen eye on how the crusade against synthetically crafted kratom products plays out with the dueling bills. The bills were assigned to different committees at each stop, meaning it is unclear whether both bills could be passed side by side, or if the two bills would need to be combined to avoid conflicting language. 

The legislative session in Mississippi ends on April 6.