Status quo bias drives public support for drug policy in the USA

Substance regulation in the USA is in a crisis. Here we explore whether seemingly misaligned policies contradict public preferences or reflect biased citizen opinions. Using survey data (N = 5,053), we show that policy outcomes align with public opinion. We further demonstrate that regulatory preferences are driven by status quo bias: support for the legality of legal substances exceeds that for hypothetical drugs with corresponding properties (Δ_{median drug} = 39.33, 95% confidence interval 35.34 to 43.20), while the opposite holds for illegal drugs (Δ_{median drug} = -12.59, 95% confidence interval -15.44 to -9.87). Randomly assigning individuals to information about harm attenuates the status quo bias in the case of legal substances (Δ_{median drug} = -17.70, 95% confidence interval -22.35 to -13.05) but not for illegal ones. We discuss implications for public control over drug policies.