Then (1992), Food of the Gods
The Illegal Plant Argument: McKenna's Constitutional Challenge
McKenna's philosophical claim, 'the notion of illegal plants is obnoxious and ridiculous in the first place', was a deliberate provocation. He was arguing that scheduling a plant is categorically different from scheduling a pharmaceutical compound; plants exist in nature, have cultural histories, and their prohibition is a form of cognitive liberty violation. He did not pursue this as a legal argument.
partially-confirmed
The 'illegal plant' argument has been operationalized in several legal frameworks. Colorado's Proposition 122 (2022) decriminalized personal possession and use of psilocybin mushrooms, mescaline cacti, and ayahuasca plants, natural plant medicines rather than isolated compounds. The RFRA religious freedom framework (O Centro Espirita v. Gonzales, 2006) protects religious plant medicine use without requiring the government to prove a compelling interest. The UN's UNDRIP (2007) affirms indigenous peoples' rights to their traditional plant medicines. Oregon's Measure 109 created a licensed framework for psilocybin services. The legal architecture for McKenna's 'right to your own plant' argument is being constructed; it has not yet extended to all plants he was discussing.
Sources
- Colorado Prop 122 (2022)
- Gonzales v. O Centro (SCOTUS 2006)
- UNDRIP Article 31 (2007)