For centuries, humans have used plants and other substances to alter one’s  consciousness for spiritual or pleasurable purposes. Today, humans derive  most illicit drugs from plants. But who decides when a plant transforms to  a drug? The entity with the authority to determine when a substance or plant  becomes an illicit drug has varied historically. Drug criminalization, with  roots in the early 1900s, is a relatively new phenomenon in the eyes of history. The United States granted the Drug Enforcement Administration  (DEA) the authority to decide which drugs are criminal. Throughout its  existence, the DEA’s strategies for curbing drug use and trafficking have  fallen short; instead, these strategies have led to skyrocketing overdose death  rates, spillover violence, more power for drug cartels, and the agency’s abuse  of its power.

This Essay calls for a reimagining of how the United States approaches  drug policy, starting with the abolition of the DEA. In making the case for  abolition, this Essay will proceed in three parts. First, Part I will provide a  brief history of the DEA and its mandate as prescribed by the U.S.  government. Part II will provide a snapshot of the DEA’s approach to drug  use and drug economies. Part III will explain why the DEA’s approach has  historically been counterproductive and will highlight challenges the agency  has faced in the twentieth century in addressing new and emerging issues in  communities. This Essay concludes by urging readers to reimagine what  American society could be if community care and access to resources took  precedence over criminalization and enforcement as embodied by the DEA.