Minnesota Lawmakers Split on Kratom: Age-21 Restriction vs. Schedule II Prescription Bills Both Advance

Why it matters

Minnesota is wrestling with two competing approaches to kratom regulation — one that would simply raise the purchase age to 21, and another that would require a prescription, effectively classifying it as a Schedule II controlled substance. The outcome could set a significant precedent for states seeking a middle path between prohibition and open access.

The big picture

Kratom remains legal in Minnesota, where it is sold in pills and liquid form at smoke shops and convenience stores. Seven states now ban kratom outright, including Connecticut as of March 25, 2026. Minnesota's bipartisan bills would also apply to 7-OH products, and the debate mirrors the broader national conversation about how to regulate kratom without criminalizing users who rely on it.

Key findings

• One bill would raise the minimum age to purchase kratom from 18 to 21
• A second, more restrictive bill would classify kratom as a Schedule II controlled substance, requiring a prescription for legal purchase
• Both bills have bipartisan support and would also cover 7-OH products
• Democratic ER physician and state Sen. Alice Mann co-sponsors the age restriction bill, cautioning against writing laws based on anecdotal evidence
• Republican state Sen. Michael Holmstrom argued even an age-21 limit is insufficient and called for stronger restrictions
• FOX 9 reporters purchased kratom at a local Eden Prairie smoke shop: pills for $17.99 and liquid for $12.99, with minimal label warnings

What they say

Sen. Alice Mann said: "The ones that have the synthetic additives are the ones that are causing issues, the more significant side effects, and even some deaths now have been recorded. We have to be very careful when we take anecdotal evidence and write laws based on that. That is not the way we practice medicine. That is not the way we should write laws either."

Bottom line

Minnesota's approach — age restriction vs. prescription requirement — represents two very different regulatory philosophies that could influence how other undecided states craft kratom policy.