Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 475A.215 (2026)

Construction of ORS 475A.210 to 475A.722

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      475A.215 Construction of ORS 475A.210 to 475A.722. ORS 475A.210 to 475A.722 may not be construed:

      (1) To require a government medical assistance program or private health insurer to reimburse a person for costs associated with the use of psilocybin products;

      (2) To amend or affect state or federal law pertaining to employment matters;

      (3) To amend or affect state or federal law pertaining to landlord-tenant matters;

      (4) To prohibit a recipient of a federal grant or an applicant for a federal grant from prohibiting the manufacture, delivery, possession or use of psilocybin products to the extent necessary to satisfy federal requirements for the grant;

      (5) To prohibit a party to a federal contract or a person applying to be a party to a federal contract from prohibiting the manufacture, delivery, possession or use of psilocybin products to the extent necessary to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract or to satisfy federal requirements for the contract;

      (6) To require a person to violate a federal law;

      (7) To exempt a person from a federal law or obstruct the enforcement of a federal law; or

      (8) To amend or affect state law, to the extent that a person does not manufacture, deliver, or possess psilocybin products in accordance with the provisions of ORS 475A.210 to 475A.722 and rules adopted under ORS 475A.210 to 475A.722. [2021 c.1 §4]

 

      Note: As originally enacted by the people, the leadline to ORS 475A.215 read “Construction.” The leadline was changed by editorial action.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: Juniper Institue, LLC v. Deschutes Cnty., 341 Or. App. 674 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Juniper Institue, LLC v. Deschutes Cnty., 341 Or. App. 674 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “” ORS 475A.215(5), (6), (7). We do not construe how those provi- sions interact with a construction of what is a reasonable regulation under ORS 475A.”
Juniper Inst., LLC v. Deschutes Cnty., 341 Or. App. 674 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “” ORS 475A.215(5), (6), (7). We do not construe how those provi- sions interact with a construction of what is a reasonable regulation under ORS 475A.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 475A.215(5): 2 cases
Juniper Institue, LLC v. Deschutes Cnty., 341 Or. App. 674 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “” ORS 475A.215(5), (6), (7). We do not construe how those provi- sions interact with a construction of what is a reasonable regulation under ORS 475A.”
Juniper Inst., LLC v. Deschutes Cnty., 341 Or. App. 674 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “” ORS 475A.215(5), (6), (7). We do not construe how those provi- sions interact with a construction of what is a reasonable regulation under ORS 475A.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.