In early 2019, representatives of the US Department of Justice sued to prevent a nonprofit group from opening a supervised consumption facility in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This case, United States v Safehouse, has drawn considerable attention given its implications for US drug policies; however, one exchange during an August 2019 hearing was particularly disconcerting. After Safehouse president Jose Benitez testified that staff affiliated with a syringe exchange program had reversed more than 500 opioid overdoses with naloxone in 2018, William McSwain, the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, contested whether these overdose reversals counted as “saved lives.” Arguing that a naloxone recipient might use substances later and die anyways, McSwain said, “You’re saying you saved a life when, in fact, someone just died.”

2019年初，美国司法部的代表提起诉讼，要求阻止一个非营利组织在宾夕法尼亚州的费城开设受监管的消费设施。这种情况下，美国诉藏身考虑到其对美国毒品政策的影响，已经引起了相当多的关注；但是，2019年8月的听证会上的一次交流特别令人不安。在Safehouse总裁Jose Benitez证实与注射器交换计划有联系的工作人员在2018年用纳洛酮逆转了500多种阿片类药物过量后，宾夕法尼亚州东部地区的美国检察官William McSwain质疑这些过量的逆转是否算作“挽救生命”。 ” McSwain争辩说纳洛酮接受者可能会在以后使用某些物质并反而死亡，“您是说您实际上是在有人死亡的情况下挽救了生命。”