GLOBALKRATOM.ORG · Evidence-based policy resources
Global Kratom Policy Review icon
Global Kratom Policy Review
Research · Analysis · Policy
Home Evidence For Lawmakers Action Center

State Policy Landscape

Kratom regulation, retail suppression, and public health outcomes across the United States – combining policy strength with CDC surveillance data and peer-reviewed findings.

Key Finding – Addiction (2026)
“States with consumer protection acts designed to promote safety experienced similar rates of severe outcomes as states with no regulation at all.” Retail bans and local suppression measures were significantly more effective in reducing healthcare utilization and poison center calls.
National kratom policy heatmap – suppression vs. retail normalization
⬆ Click to expand – National heatmap of policy strength & retail suppression ⬆

Ranking Methodology

State tiers are based on a composite score weighting policy strength, SUDORS mortality burden, local restriction authority, and legislative momentum. Data sources: CDC SUDORS (2019-2025), Addiction (2026), FDA Import Alerts, state pharmacy board actions, and pending legislation.

Retail suppression / scheduling / full ban40%
SUDORS mortality & poison center burden25%
Local restriction authority (county/city bans)15%
Youth protections & age restrictions10%
Product restrictions (labeling, testing, extracts)10%

* States with missing SUDORS data are noted separately. “National Failures” reflect policy direction, retail normalization, and avoidable burden — not solely current mortality counts.

NATIONAL LEADERS

Retail suppression achieved
1 California
2 Alabama
3 Arkansas
4 Connecticut
5 Indiana
6 Kansas
7 Kentucky
8 Louisiana
9 Ohio
10 Tennessee
11 Vermont
12 Wisconsin

GETTING THERE

Active movement toward suppression
StateWhy Included
UtahPowder-leaf-only + registration
VirginiaWarning labels + locked storage
New HampshireRejected KCPA
New YorkMultiple pending restrictions
New JerseyCJ's Law pending
DelawareSchedule I pending
MarylandStrict advertising rules + bans pending
North CarolinaConsidering ban
ArizonaConsidering ban
NevadaBoard of Pharmacy voted unanimously to schedule
IllinoisLocal county bans allowed
MichiganConsidering ban
PennsylvaniaLocal ban capability
MississippiLocal restriction authority
WashingtonLocal control potential
MassachusettsExtensive municipal authority
IdahoZero SUDORS deaths + local‑control benefit
MissouriLocal restriction pathways

WEAK SYSTEMS

Partial or inconsistent frameworks
West Virginia
Montana
Maine
Alaska
Oregon
Colorado
Oklahoma
Iowa
Nebraska
South Dakota
Wyoming
New Mexico
Hawaii
District of Columbia

NATIONAL FAILURES

High burden + permissive normalization
Georgia — strongest KCPA + highest detection burden
Florida — KCPA + high autopsy burden
Rhode Island — reversed a functional ban for KCPA; policy failure despite low current SUDORS
South Carolina — very high burden despite retail availability
Texas — massive unrestricted retail market (SUDORS reporting incomplete, but market size and normalization extreme)
Minnesota — broad retail normalization + high burden

States Moving Toward Scheduling

  • Nevada – Board of Pharmacy unanimous vote to schedule mitragynine (2026)
  • Delaware – Schedule I bill pending
  • New Jersey – “CJ’s Law” (kratom ban) advancing
  • Illinois – County‑level bans spreading (e.g., St. Clair County)
  • Ohio – Board of Pharmacy proposed Schedule I (CSI‑BIA analysis)
  • New York – Multiple bills restricting extracts/sales
  • Maryland – Local bans plus pending state restrictions

CDC SUDORS Overlay

States with full bans or strong local suppression have significantly lower mitragynine‑detected deaths per capita. The Addiction (2026) study confirms: “States with at least local restrictions had somewhat lower healthcare utilization compared with unrestricted states.”

Methodological Notes & Caveats