Join our free newsletter to get the latest updates from us.
Hi everyone! This is going to be our first post published in an effort to be a more effective educational resource in the kratom space. One of the common points of feedback we received was that we should focus more on harm reduction and using our platform to educate the public on what exactly is going on in the kratom world, particularly as it pertains to 7-hydroxy.
So, we’ve been digging into what’s been going on in the industry, and today we’re laying the foundation by recapping the major legal battles that have been fought across the nation over the past year in key states.
Also - this was written and scheduled prior to today’s major events regarding 7-OH. Rest assured we will address today’s events thoroughly in a future post. Thanks for your support and feel free to provide any feedback or ideas for future educational articles!
A bitter lobbying battle is erupting across U.S. statehouses over 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), a potent alkaloid derived from the kratom plant. On one side, the Global Kratom Coalition (GKC) – joined, until recently, by the influential American Kratom Association (AKA) – has pushed to ban or tightly restrict 7-OH, arguing it’s a dangerous, synthetic-like opioid analogue. Opposing them are kratom entrepreneurs and advocates like Holistic Alternative Recovery Trust (HART) and the Seven Hope Alliance, who insist 7-OH products can be used safely and fear that bans threaten the broader kratom industry. The clash, described by some as a “civil war” within the kratom community, has played out in multiple state legislatures this year, yielding a patchwork of outcomes. This report examines the key fronts in these lobbying wars – California, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, and beyond – and how each side’s tactics have influenced state policies in 2025.
Opponents of 7-OH have not minced words. The Global Kratom Coalition (GKC), a well-funded nonprofit founded by Feel Free founder J.W. Ross, has raised alarms that purified 7-OH is “as close to an opioid as you can get”, with GKC’s executive director Matthew Lowe noting it “acts in the exact same way as an opioid” . In legislative hearings, anti-7OH lobbyists often liken high-potency kratom extracts to “gas station heroin.” (note: that moniker originally referred to the drug tianeptine, a risky supplement now banned in many states, but 7-OH critics invoke it to similar effect.) “Should you be able to sell an opioid replacement as a dietary supplement in a gas station?” Lowe continues, arguing that 7-OH isolates are “not kratom” but a novel, addictive substance outside traditional use. Supporting this view, some researchers have publicly warned that 7-OH in isolation behaves as a full-fledged opioid. University of Florida pharmacologist Susruta Majumdar, Ph.D., described 7-OH as a “typical opioid” sharing the properties of morphine and heroin – including potentially lethal respiratory depression. Such testimony has armed GKC and its allies with a powerful, fear-driven narrative in state capitols.
7-OH advocates counter that these fears are overblown, even disingenuous. They emphasize that 7-hydroxymitragynine is a naturally occurring trace component of kratom leaf (albeit usually at very low levels) and argue that responsibly manufactured 7-OH products can provide significant benefits, such as effective pain relief, with no greater risk than traditional kratom.
Vince Sanders, a leading 7-OH manufacturer, claims “initial research suggests 7-OH is safe” and notes lab tests where cells showed no toxicity at dosages 1,000 times higher than normal human use. He touts 7-OH as a “superior product” for consumers, even boasting: “anyone who takes kratom, once they try this product, they won’t take kratom again,” implying that 7-OH’s efficacy threatens competitors in the regular kratom markets (source). From this perspective, the drive to ban 7-OH is less about public health and more about market protectionism. “Traditional kratom people see a technological advancement that they can’t achieve, and they’re terrified this is going to end their business,” Sanders says, casting the fight in starkly economic terms. Indeed, internal industry rifts have grown ugly – the AKA in October 2024 accused GKC founder J.W. Ross of orchestrating a “bait-and-switch” to scapegoat 7-OH and distract from safety issues with his own kratom-infused product, a drink called Feel Free that faced lawsuits over addiction claims (source).
The first major clash came in Georgia, setting a tone for 7-OH debates nationwide. In mid-2023, Georgia lawmakers, spurred by emotional testimony from families who lost loved ones with a history of kratom use, unanimously passed a bill tightening regulations on kratom products. Though not an outright ban, the Georgia law (House Bill 181) capped the allowable mitragynine and 7-OH content per serving, banned kratom in vapes, raised the purchase age to 21, and imposed felony penalties for selling adulterated or high-7OH products (source). Opponents had leaned heavily on the narrative of ultra-potent extracts being akin to street opioids – an approach that reportedly even convinced some Georgia lawmakers to refer to 7-OH products as “gas station heroin” in debate. The American Kratom Association initially supported parts of Georgia’s effort to rein in dangerous products, but ultimately urged a veto once felony provisions were added, warning the law “will limit kratom availability for consumers in Georgia” and criminalize honest vendors (source). Georgia’s governor signed it regardless, marking a victory for the anti 7-OH camp. For the GKC and allies, Georgia became proof-of-concept that highlighting 7-OH’s risks could spur tough restrictions. But it also served as a cautionary tale for the AKA – the harsh outcome (including prison terms up to 15 years) rang alarm bells among kratom advocates, foreshadowing that an overzealous focus on 7-OH could endanger the kratom industry’s future in other states.
On the opposite coast, California emerged as another key battleground. In early 2024, GKC backed a sweeping kratom regulation bill, AB 2365, introduced by Assembly member Matt Haney. The bill would have strictly regulated kratom sales in the nation’s largest market – setting maximal alkaloid limits (effectively targeting high 7-OH extracts), mandating extensive lab testing and fees, and prohibiting sales to under-21 adults (source). GKC’s fingerprints were all over AB 2365: the coalition not only openly supported it, but even donated $11,000 to Haney’s campaign shortly after the bill dropped (source). AKA, by contrast, grew concerned that AB 2365’s requirements were so onerous they would “put manufacturers out of business,” as AKA’s public policy fellow Mac Haddow argued (source). A behind-the-scenes snafu in August 2024 hinted at confusion over strategy – an AKA lobbyist mistakenly sent Haney a letter misstating AKA’s position on 7-OH, prompting a public clarification that AKA was not in favor of banning the alkaloid outright (source). Ultimately, industry pushback and fiscal scrutiny stopped the California effort. In August 2024, as the bill sat in the Senate Appropriations Committee’s suspense file, the Los Angeles Times reported AB 2365 had been “quietly shelved,” with lawmakers opting not to advance it (source). For now, 7-OH remains un-restricted in California, aside from local bans in a few cities. Legislators have pivoted to a more modest approach – in 2025, a new bill (AB 1088) was introduced focusing only on barring kratom/7-OH sales to minors (source). Any renewed attempt to outlaw 7-OH statewide appears paused until at least 2026. The California episode underscored the divisions between kratom interest groups: GKC hailed the strict regulation push, but other kratom advocates mobilized to stall it, fearing a de facto ban in disguise.
Florida became a dramatic theater of war in 2025, and one that ultimately flipped the script of the 7-OH fight. The GKC targeted Florida with a high-profile media campaign early in the year, just as lawmakers considered bills on kratom. Glossy ads and lobbying materials echoed Georgia’s warnings, painting 7-OH as an imminent public health menace. “Initial research suggests 7-OH is safe. So why the opposition?” one Florida politics column mused, noting the disconnect between GKC’s alarmism and studies showing no significant abuse potential for kratom or 7-OH, a finding that even led U.S. Health and Human Services to reject a federal ban, citing risks of harming consumers if kratom were scheduled (source). GKC’s efforts found some sympathetic ears in Tallahassee: a House proposal, HB 1489, was introduced to prohibit “synthetic kratom” products and high 7-OH derivatives, framing them as “opioid-like” adulterants that “have shown to cause harm” (source). But as committee hearings unfolded, this narrow ban effort morphed into a broader threat. Some Florida legislators, spooked by talk of “gas station heroin,” moved to consider banning all forms of kratom statewide, not just 7-OH concentrates. Suddenly, the very existence of Florida’s newly enacted Kratom Consumer Protection Act (which legalized kratom in 2023) was in jeopardy.
This was a wake-up call for the AKA. Having initially supported quality controls, the AKA reversed course and teamed up with the Holistic Alternative Recovery Trust (HART) to defend kratom’s legality. In a striking turn, long-time rivals in the kratom world closed ranks. “The two leading organizations in the space, [AKA and HART], have signed a joint agreement… to ensure that 7-OH products are properly regulated by states and kept out of the hands of minors,” reported Florida Politics in February 2025 (source). Their immediate goal: stop an outright ban. The alliance proved effective. Florida’s legislative session ended with no 7-OH ban. HB 1489, after being amended to incorporate stricter testing and labeling rules, stalled and died in committee in June 2025 (source). Broader prohibition bills never gained traction. As a result, kratom (and 7-OH products) remain legal in Florida under the existing regulations, and GKC’s “restrict 7-OH” campaign failed in the state. One unintended consequence of GKC’s approach was clearly demonstrated: pushing the ‘7-OH is dangerous’ narrative too hard risked inviting a total kratom ban, a scenario that forced AKA and others to actively oppose GKC to protect the entire kratom consumer base. Florida’s outcome is viewed as a win for the pro-kratom/7-OH camp, and any renewed push to ban 7-OH there is unlikely until 2026.
While kratom advocates averted disaster in Florida, Oklahoma’s 2024–2025 saga ended in a more restrictive outcome. Initially, Oklahoma seemed poised to follow the moderate path: a Kratom Consumer Protection Act (KCPA) was introduced to set age limits (21+), require labeling, and ban adulterants. But as in other states, the question of 7-OH content took center stage. Influenced by reports of gas station 7-OH shots and GKC lobbying, Oklahoma legislators amended their KCPA to include hard limits on 7-OH. The final law, House Bill 3574, which took effect in November 2024, flatly prohibits any kratom product with over 1%–2% of 7-hydroxymitragynine and outlaws any “synthesized” kratom alkaloid altogether (source). Effectively, this bans the high-potency 7-OH extracts (which far exceed those percentages) while keeping natural kratom legal. It also imposes criminal penalties: selling non-compliant products or falsifying lab reports is a misdemeanor or worse (source). The bill sailed through with near-unanimous votes (82–1 in the House; 40–3 in the Senate) (source), reflecting little organized opposition.
Kratom advocates did scramble late in the process – even the AKA, wary of Oklahoma’s direction, reportedly tried to negotiate less draconian measures. For example, there were discussions about a compromise 2% cap (aligned with many states’ standards) instead of Oklahoma’s initially proposed 0.1% trace limit. In 2025, the legislature entertained a follow-up bill, SB 891, to refine the definitions and testing rules in the new law, giving industry some input on implementation (source). But the core policy – 7-OH above trace levels is banned – remained. Oklahoma thus became, in practice, one of the toughest states on 7-OH. The AKA and Seven Hope Alliance’s joint resistance came too late to alter this outcome. Unlike Florida, where policymakers pulled back from a full ban, Oklahoma’s leaders showed zero tolerance for what one narcotics bureau spokesman there called “kratom in a syringe”. For 7-OH proponents, Oklahoma is a setback: a lucrative market (no age restrictions prior to 2024) just vanished for 7-OH products, at least until attitudes soften.
Everything is bigger in Texas, and in 2025 that included an ambitious legislative push to crack down on 7-OH. Senate Bill 1868 began as a comprehensive kratom regulation package but evolved into something of a partial ban. The bill, authored by Sen. Bob Hall with apparent encouragement from GKC, combined a standard KCPA framework (testing, labeling, 21+ age limit) with extraordinarily strict provisions on 7-OH. It would have made it a felony to possess or sell “synthetic kratom alkaloids”, explicitly adding 7-hydroxymitragynine (in isolated form) to Texas’s Schedule I controlled substances list (source 1, source 2). Even naturally occurring 7-OH in products would be limited to 0.1% of total alkaloids – effectively phasing out all strong extracts (source). “Texas’s kratom regulation seeks to eliminate unsafe products while ensuring compliance through rigorous oversight,” one analysis noted, highlighting the bill’s focus on gas station sales and untested products (source). In April 2025, SB 1868 passed the Texas Senate by a vote of 26–5, signaling broad support for a clampdown (source).
However, as the session clock wound down, the bill faced challenges in the House. Kratom advocates (now unified in opposition to the ban aspects) lobbied House members that scheduling kratom compounds as Penalty Group 1 narcotics would unjustly criminalize consumers and deter any regulated market. Whether due to these advocacy efforts or larger legislative traffic jams, SB 1868 did not get a House vote before adjournment. The bill died, surprising some observers who thought Texas might be the next Louisiana (which, as discussed below, outright banned kratom this year). Because the Texas Legislature convenes only in odd-numbered years, this delay means no new kratom laws will be passed in Texas until 2027 at the earliest – essentially putting the 7-OH battle on hold in the Lone Star State. For now, Texas continues under its 2021 KCPA rules, which allow kratom but cap 7-OH content at 2% and prohibit adulterants (source). The close call in Texas is viewed as a strategic stalemate: GKC proved it could rally significant support for a ban in a conservative legislature, but the kratom industry mustered enough resistance to stave it off this round. Both sides will likely regroup for another showdown in the next session.
Beyond the headline states, 2025 saw a flurry of kratom-related bills – many of them directly addressing 7-OH – reflecting how national this issue has become:
Louisiana delivered the anti-kratom lobby’s biggest prize to date. Bucking the KCPA regulatory trend, Louisiana’s legislature passed SB 154, classifying mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine as Schedule I controlled substances (alongside heroin and LSD) effective August 1, 2025 (source). This law bans all kratom possession and sales statewide. Louisiana policymakers cited rising addiction concerns and even banned the kratom tree itself under state law, imposing up to 5 years prison for distribution (source). The move stunned kratom proponents, as Louisiana had been considering a KCPA earlier; instead it chose outright prohibition – a clear victory for those calling 7-OH “heroin-like.”
South Carolina took a different path, enacting a KCPA (again, that’s Kratom Consumer Protection Act) in May 2025 to regulate rather than ban. The new law prohibits selling any product containing synthetic kratom alkaloids or more than trace 7-OH, alongside standard safety provisions and an age 21 limit (source). The AKA hailed South Carolina as the 14th state to adopt a consumer protection model rather than scheduling, showcasing that the pro-kratom lobby still wins many state debates (source).
New Jersey and Hawaii each saw KCPA bills introduced (NJ A1188, HI H.B. 717/S.B. 463) that explicitly limit 7-OH to 2% in products and ban synthetic derivatives (source). While neither passed in 2025’s sessions, they indicate a common regulatory standard being promoted: keep kratom legal but block purified 7-OH above natural levels. Similarly, Mississippi considered a KCPA (and even an excise tax on kratom), and North Dakota approved a bill to study kratom’s effects and policy options by 2026 (source), reflecting legislative caution amid the mixed messages on 7-OH’s safety.
Arizona, Utah, Tennessee, and others: Notably, several states had already restricted 7-OH prior to 2025. Arizona and Utah’s kratom laws, for example, cap 7-hydroxymitragynine content at 2% of alkaloids (source), essentially banning the ultra-concentrated products. Tennessee, which once mulled a ban, now allows kratom but not any “synthetically derived” alkaloids (a clause interpreted to prohibit added 7-OH). GKC frequently points to these states as proof that 7-OH products are “already illegal under existing laws” in many places (source) – a contention used to justify new crackdowns elsewhere. However, enforcement of such limits is spotty, and many consumers remain unaware of the distinctions.
The late Charlie Munger said “Show me the incentives and I'll show you the outcome”. In this battle, the incentives are pretty clear. For J.W. Ross and the GKC, 7-OH has likely taken a big chunk of revenue out of Feel Free. In our opinion, the GKC has the weakest position in the lobbying wars. Popularizing the term “Gas station heroine" and talking about how unsafe 7-OH is loses its punch when we consider that Feel Free in March settled a class-action lawsuit for $8.75 million for not disclosing to its customers that it was putting kratom in its drink shots.
Similarly for the AKA, the majority of AKA members paying dues and making donations are traditional mitragynine brands who have also seen an alarming hit to sales since 7-OH first came on the market. If we look at the arguments being made by these two groups, it does appear that the AKA has a much more credible leg to stand on. The AKA has been fighting for over a decade now to keep kratom safe and legal. The strongest argument that the AKA is making is that we really don’t know the extent to which 7-OH is safe, as the current literature has some major holes in it. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like the AKA has funded any of their own scientific research to further the argument, so for now they are stuck with the argument that “nobody really knows…”.
On the other side of the fight are a variety of 7-OH brands who are very incentivized to keep their product legal and keep cashing checks. While it is understandable to want to make money, the 7-OH industry as a whole has known about the AKA’s safety concerns since the industry was born, and have been behind the curve in funding scientific research to answer the outstanding questions around safety, withdrawal, tolerance build up, and the effects of repeated dosing. Instead, we have seen the 7-OH world trend towards higher dose products, which feeds right into their opposition’s arguments around a lack of responsibility.
As 2025 unfolds, the tug-of-war over 7-hydroxymitragynine has left kratom consumers and lawmakers navigating a maze of state-by-state rules. In some states, 7-OH is now outright banned or effectively impossible to sell; in others it remains available, if under regulatory watch. The year’s lobbying wars have also reshaped alliances. The AKA, initially aligned with GKC’s safety concerns, split away once it saw total bans looming, instead partnering with groups like 7-HOPE to advocate for regulation over prohibition (source). This realignment suggests a more united front among pro-kratom organizations going forward, focused on keeping kratom legal while addressing the genuine risks of unregulated high-potency extracts. On the opposing side, GKC and its supporters show no signs of relenting in their state-level blitz; their strategy of emphasizing 7-OH’s opioid-like qualities has succeeded in places like Georgia, Oklahoma, and Louisiana, and they will likely press those advantages in new states next year.
For lawmakers seeking to educate themselves on the issue, the key takeaway is the delicate balance any policy must strike. Kratom’s advocates concede the need for some oversight – for example, ensuring minors can’t buy it and barring truly adulterated or toxic products – and even the harshest critics acknowledge that kratom in raw leaf form is not the same as pure fentanyl. But between those extremes lies 7-hydroxymitragynine, the flashpoint compound that will continue to test how nuanced (or not) legislatures can be. “It’s akin to equating cocaine with coca leaves,” one critic noted of conflating isolated 7-OH with kratom itself (source). As the science evolves and more data on 7-OH’s effects emerges, state policies may adjust accordingly. Until then, the 7-OH lobbying wars are likely to continue, with high stakes for both the $1.3 billion kratom industry and the millions of consumers who depend on kratom – in whatever form – for their wellbeing
Thanks for reading! We’re digging deeper into the kratom world and just getting started. If you’ve seen something we should know, send tips to tips@testmykratom.org.
© 2026 TestMyKratom | Terms | Grading System