PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · May 25, 2023
Halt All Lethal Trafficking of Fentanyl Act or the HALT Fentanyl Act
This bill permanently places fentanyl-related substances as a class into schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. A schedule I controlled substance is a drug, substance, or chemical that has a high potential for abuse; has no currently accepted medical value; and is subject to regulatory controls and administrative, civil, and criminal penalties under the Controlled Substances Act.
(The temporary scheduling order issued by the Drug Enforcement Administration to place fentanyl-related substances into schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act expires on December 31, 2024.)
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Under the bill, offenses involving fentanyl-related substances are triggered by the same quantity thresholds and subject to the same penalties as offenses involving fentanyl analogues (e.g., offenses involving 100 grams or more trigger a 10-year mandatory minimum prison term).
Additionally, the bill establishes a new, alternative registration process for schedule I research that is funded by the Department of Health and Human Services or the Department of Veterans Affairs or that is conducted under an investigative new drug exemption from the Food and Drug Administration.
The bill also makes several other changes to registration requirements for conducting research with controlled substances, including
permitting a single registration for related research sites in certain circumstances,
waiving the requirement for a new inspection in certain situations, and
allowing a registered researcher to perform certain manufacturing activities with small quantities of a substance without obtaining a manufacturing registration.
Finally, the bill expresses the sense that Congress agrees with the interpretation of Controlled Substances Act in United States v. McCray, a 2018 case decided by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. In that case, the court held that butyryl fentanyl, a controlled substance, can be considered an analogue of fentanyl even though, under the Controlled Substances Act, the term controlled substance analogue specifically excludes a controlled substance.
People & committees
Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 289 - 133 (Roll no. 237).
House roll call 237 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 289 - 133 (Roll no. 237).
House roll call 237 · Individual votesThe House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 467.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2605-2607)
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 467 as unfinished business.
On motion that the committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
Mr. Bucshon moved that the committee rise.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Pettersen amendment No. 3, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Pallone demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 429, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Pettersen amendment No. 3.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 429, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Mills amendment No. 2.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 429, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Miller (OH) amendment No. 1.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2602-2605)
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 467 as unfinished business.
On motion that the committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
Mr. Guthrie moved that the committee rise.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 467.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Marjorie Taylor Greene to act as Chairwoman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 429 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 467, S.J. Res. 11 and H.J. Res. 45. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 467 under a structured rule with one of hour of general debate. S.J. Res. 11 and H.J. Res. 45 are considered under closed rules with one hour of general debate. Motion to recommit provided on H.R. 467 and H.J. Res. 45, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 11.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 429. (consideration: CR H2579-2587)
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 429 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 467, S.J. Res. 11 and H.J. Res. 45. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 467 under a structured rule with one of hour of general debate. S.J. Res. 11 and H.J. Res. 45 are considered under closed rules with one hour of general debate. Motion to recommit provided on H.R. 467 and H.J. Res. 45, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 11.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 47.
Committee on the Judiciary discharged.
Committee on the Judiciary discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-67, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-67, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 27 - 19.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 17 - 10 .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.467 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.467 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.467 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.467 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.