SEEK HELP Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Neguse, Joe [D-CO-2]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 22, 2025
Bottom line
This bill aims to reduce overdose fatalities by encouraging individuals to seek medical help without fear of legal repercussions for drug possession, while also promoting public awareness and training on these protections and evaluating their impact.
What it actually does
This bill establishes federal civil liability protections for individuals who administer opioid overdose reversal drugs in good faith and criminal liability protections for individuals who seek medical assistance for an overdose, preventing prosecution for controlled substance possession based solely on seeking help. It also mandates a public awareness campaign by HHS/DEA and allows states to use existing block grant funding for awareness and training related to Good Samaritan laws. Additionally, it requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to report on the effectiveness and implementation of these laws.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that fear of arrest and prosecution for drug possession is a significant barrier to individuals seeking life-saving medical assistance during an overdose, leading to preventable deaths. They contend that these protections will encourage timely intervention, saving lives, and that the public awareness campaigns will ensure these protections are widely known and utilized, thereby maximizing their impact.
Opponents contend
Potential opponents might argue that providing immunity for drug possession, even in overdose situations, could be seen as condoning drug use or weakening drug enforcement efforts, potentially leading to unintended consequences regarding public safety or drug policy. However, given the bipartisan sponsorship, strong opposition might be limited to specific aspects or interpretations rather than the core intent.
The bill is concise and clearly written, making it accessible for a quick but thorough understanding of its provisions.
Section 3(a)
Civil Liability Protections for Administering Opioid Overdose Reversal Drugs
This provision protects individuals from civil lawsuits if they administer an opioid overdose reversal drug (like naloxone) in good faith to someone experiencing or appearing to experience an overdose. This protection applies unless the harm caused is due to willful misconduct, gross negligence, reckless misconduct, or flagrant indifference. It also clarifies that this federal protection supersedes state law only if the state does not already offer similar immunity.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is crucial for empowering bystanders to act in an emergency without fear of legal reprisal, thereby increasing the likelihood of timely intervention and saving lives during opioid overdoses.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against this provision, as Good Samaritan laws for overdose reversal are widely supported as public health measures.
Tradeoffs
Balances the need for immediate, life-saving intervention with concerns about accountability for extreme negligence, though the exceptions are narrowly defined.
Section 3(b)
Criminal Liability Protections for Seeking Medical Assistance for an Overdose
This section protects individuals from prosecution for controlled substance possession, civil asset forfeiture, or supervised release revocation if they, in good faith and a timely manner, seek medical assistance for themselves or another person experiencing an overdose. This protection applies only if law enforcement becomes aware of the possession solely because medical assistance was sought, and it does not apply if assistance was sought during the execution of a warrant or other lawful search or seizure.
Section 3(c)
Public Awareness Campaign on Liability Protections
This provision directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), in consultation with the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), to carry out a public awareness campaign. The campaign's purpose is to inform the public about the civil and criminal liability protections established under this Act for overdose responses.
Section 3(d)
Use of JAG Funds for Law Enforcement Training
This section amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to explicitly include "Training programs for law enforcement officers of States and units of local government regarding legal protections for individuals seeking medical assistance in connection with a controlled substance overdose" as an allowable use of Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program funds.
Section 4
Use of Block Grant Funding for State Public Awareness and Training
This section allows states receiving grants under Section 1921 of the Public Health Service Act (Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant) to use those funds for public awareness campaigns about state overdose Good Samaritan laws, training for criminal justice professionals, healthcare providers, emergency medical services, and the general public, and to share data with HHS on the impact of these laws.
Section 5
GAO Report on Effectiveness and Implementation of Good Samaritan Laws
This section mandates that the Comptroller General of the United States (GAO) submit a report within two years of the Act's enactment. The report will evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of Good Samaritan laws for drug overdose, including federal and state efforts, the impact on overdose fatalities and emergency calls, the number of individuals receiving protections, and the effectiveness of grant funding for awareness campaigns. It also requires identifying barriers, best practices, and recommendations for improvement, including a comparative analysis of different state approaches.
The criminal liability protection for seeking medical assistance does not apply if the medical assistance was sought during the course of the execution of an arrest warrant, search warrant, or other lawful search or seizure.
Section 3(b)(1)(B)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to prevent the immunity from being exploited to obstruct ongoing lawful law enforcement operations. It clarifies the boundaries of the protection without undermining existing legal processes.
Case for: Supporters argue this carve-out is necessary to maintain the integrity of law enforcement operations and prevent individuals from using the Good Samaritan protection as a shield against legitimate investigations already underway.
Case against: Critics might argue that this exception could create confusion or hesitation for individuals in emergency situations, potentially deterring them from seeking help if they perceive any law enforcement presence, even if unrelated to their immediate overdose situation.
Estimated impact: Limits the scope of criminal immunity, ensuring it applies specifically to situations where seeking help *leads* to law enforcement awareness, not where law enforcement is already lawfully present.