Listen to this page
Read by an AI voice. The full article is read aloud, top to bottom, including the help lines and the status box. The three tables and the two images are on the page. Code section, ordinance and docket numbers are read out in full.
Help first. If someone is difficult to wake, is not breathing normally, is having a seizure, or is unresponsive, call 911.
Anywhere in the United States: Poison Control on 1-800-222-1222, around the clock, for a reaction that worries you after any kratom or kava drink, ours included. The 988 crisis lifeline, by call or text. The federal treatment locator is findtreatment.gov.
Kratom is not a treatment for opioid use disorder, or for opioid or kratom withdrawal, and neither is any drink that contains it, ours included. Buprenorphine, methadone and naltrexone are the medicines with the evidence base for opioid use disorder, prescribed by a clinician. Clinical questions belong with a clinician who can see you. Not with us.
The San Diego kratom ban ordinance has been in the city code since 2016, and it never uses the word kratom. Inside the city, it makes it unlawful to manufacture, sell, offer, distribute or possess for sale any "Novel Psychoactive Drug", and a separate section bans simple possession. Its list of examples names mitragynine and the minor alkaloid, both found in kratom products. In August 2026, the City Attorney's office took a smoke shop operator to civil court over alleged kratom sales at eleven stores.
We have a stake. GUD Tonics sells kava drinks that also contain kratom, and nothing in the code's words sets a drink containing mitragynine apart from any other product that contains it.
Checked November 9, 2026: the San Diego Municipal Code, the city and state documents cited here, the Federal Register, and our own store pages.
Who wrote it. GUD Tonics, which sells three ready-to-drink kava drinks that also contain kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a bundle of them, and a kava powder without kratom. Our shipping policy lists places we do not ship to. The exposure: San Diego's code and the state health department's position both reach products that contain kratom, and our drinks contain it.
City and county. Division 33 of the city code has been in force since June 14, 2016. The City Attorney's Unfair Competition Law suit (release dated August 10, 2026): filed, allegations only, with no ruling, injunction or settlement found as of November 9, 2026 (court docket not searched). No San Diego County kratom ordinance found as of that date.
State, per the Governor's October 31, 2026 release. ABC "Conducted 9,209 visits", "Removed 8,230 products from shelves" and reported "a 97.97% compliance rate among the locations it has visited" (ABC-licensed locations only). The state health department "has embargoed or destroyed approximately $10 million worth" of products containing kratom or the minor alkaloid. Separately, the state's May 1, 2026 complaint against a kratom manufacturer: outcome not checked.
Federal, as of November 9, 2026. No DEA order under its October 14, 2026 notice of intent (FR Doc 2026-20943) had been published. Any order would come "on or after November 13, 2026": a floor, not a start date. Kratom leaf and mitragynine are not federally controlled. MGPI, MGM-15 and MGM-16 have been temporarily in Schedule I, in any amount, since August 26, 2026 (FR Doc 2026-17429).
No affiliate links. Corrections: through our contact page. Next review February 9, 2027, or sooner if a court rules in a case named here, DEA publishes an order, the city or the county votes on a kratom rule, or California enacts a kratom statute.
Is kratom legal in San Diego? The short answer
Not in the City of San Diego, going by the city's own documents. Division 33 of the San Diego Municipal Code, in force since June 14, 2016, makes it unlawful to "manufacture, sell, offer to sell, offer for sale, distribute, or possess for sale" any Novel Psychoactive Drug (section 52.3303) and, separately, "to possess" one (section 52.3304). Mitragynine is item 71 on its list of examples; the minor alkaloid is item 62.
For kratom, San Diego's plainest statement is the city's one-page guide for merchants, which says the council approved an ordinance on June 14, 2016 that "prohibits the manufacturing, sale, distribution and possession of spice, bath salts, kratom, and other synthetic and psychoactive drugs."
The rule is the city's alone: it does not reach Oceanside, Solana Beach, Chula Vista, Santee or unincorporated county land. The state's position, covered below, applies across California. None of this is legal advice; for your own situation, ask a lawyer licensed in California.
What the San Diego kratom ban ordinance says, section by section
The ordinance is Division 33 of Chapter 5, Article 2, sections 52.3301 to 52.3308. The history notes in the division's text on the city's code site show emergency ordinance O-20660, effective June 14, 2016, the day the council acted, and O-20657, effective July 15, 2016. A councilmember's release that day said the council "voted unanimously" to ban "Spice and related drugs." Neither it nor the City Attorney's May 23, 2016 release mentions kratom; kratom comes in through the code's examples.
| Section | What it does |
|---|---|
| 52.3301 Purpose and Intent | The council's findings and purpose. |
| 52.3302 Definitions | Defines a Novel Psychoactive Drug and lists 91 examples, among them "Mitragynine" (item 71) and the minor alkaloid (item 62). |
| 52.3303 Manufacture, Distribution, and Sale Prohibited | "It is unlawful to manufacture, sell, offer to sell, offer for sale, distribute, or possess for sale" any covered drug. |
| 52.3304 Possession Prohibited | "It is unlawful to possess" any covered drug. |
| 52.3305 Evidentiary Factors | Eleven evidentiary factors, and the disclaimer rule quoted below. |
| 52.3306 Public Nuisance | Manufacturing, sale, offering to sell, distribution or possession for sale is a public nuisance; simple possession is not listed. |
| 52.3307 Property Owner and Responsible Person Liability | Unlawful for a property owner or other responsible person, after the City's written notice, to "fail to abate the public nuisance within 30 calendar days from the date of the notice." |
| 52.3308 Exclusions | Exclusions, including FDA-approved drugs dispensed or possessed lawfully and drugs on California's controlled substance schedules. |
The definition does the work. Section 52.3302 defines a Novel Psychoactive Drug as "any compound, mixture, preparation, or substance, or its analog" containing substances with an effect on the central nervous system or brain similar to a federal Schedule I or II drug. The City Attorney's August 2026 release says the city "has prohibited the manufacture, sale, distribution, and possession for sale" of mitragynine and the minor alkaloid "as novel psychoactive drugs since 2016".
The verbs reach past the counter. "Sell" means "to furnish, exchange, transfer, deliver, or supply for monetary gain." "Distribute" means "to furnish, give away, exchange, transfer, deliver or supply, whether or not for monetary gain." So a free sample counts as distribution, and both definitions include delivery. There is no separate advertising verb.
Possession is its own offense. The City Attorney's 2026 release, about a sales case, cites sections 52.3302 and 52.3303 and speaks of "possession for sale". Section 52.3304 goes further, making it unlawful "to possess" any covered drug, with no amount set. If you have read that San Diego bans only possession for sale, the code says otherwise.
A "not safe for human consumption" disclaimer does not get a product out. Section 52.3305 lists eleven factors that "may be considered to determine if a violation of this Division has occurred", among them an unusual warning label such as "not for human consumption." Then it sets a flat rule: "Disclaiming a Federal Schedule I Drug, a Novel Synthetic Drug, or a Novel Psychoactive Drug as 'not safe for human consumption' will not avoid the application of this Division."
A note on sources: the city's PDF of the division that we read was printed in March 2021, and the city's online code viewer still lists Division 33 under the same title.
Penalties come from the code's general rules
Division 33 has no penalty clause of its own. Penalties come from the code's general provisions on judicial remedies, which apply to a violation of any section. They are maximums for the whole code, not fines set for kratom.
| Route | What the general provisions say | Section |
|---|---|---|
| Misdemeanor | Up to $1,000, up to six months in the County Jail, or both. | 12.0201 |
| Infraction | At the City Attorney's discretion: up to $250 for a first conviction, up to $500 for a second or later one within a year. | 12.0201 |
| Each day | "a separate offense for each and every day" of a violation. | 12.0201 |
| Civil suit | An injunction, and "a maximum civil penalty of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) per violation of the Municipal Code for each day" of a violation. | 12.0202 |
So the San Diego kratom ban can be enforced as a misdemeanor, an infraction or a civil case. The $2,500 is a court's maximum in a civil action, not a ticket for possession. We found no record of a criminal kratom case under Division 33, though we did not search court records, and the merchant guide's line that violators "are subject to citation and/or arrest" is a warning, not a report of arrests.
The 2026 enforcement: a civil suit, not a criminal case
In a release dated August 10, 2026, the City Attorney's office announced a civil action under California's Unfair Competition Law against a smoke shop operator and eleven corporations the operator owns and runs, filed "on behalf of the People of the State of California." Times of San Diego reported the "newly filed" action on August 6. We do not name the defendants or their stores.
The complaint, the release says, alleges that between March and May 2026, City investigators acting undercover visited all eleven of the defendants' retail locations and "were offered and sold kratom products at every one." It calls the conduct unlawful and unfair "because profiting from banned products gives them an advantage over law-abiding competitors."
The suit seeks an injunction to stop sales of products containing mitragynine or the minor alkaloid, "civil penalties of up to $2,500 per violation", further penalties of up to $2,500 per violation against senior citizens or disabled persons, and investigative costs. Those are requests under state law, not a city fine and not an award.
City Attorney Heather Ferbert said her office would "get these products off shelves, and make sure businesses that follow the rules aren't undercut by competitors who ignore the law." The release says the office's Affirmative Civil Enforcement Unit is handling the case. It is civil, not a criminal prosecution, and the complaint's claims are allegations until a court rules. Its status on November 9, 2026 is in the status box.
Is there a San Diego County kratom ban ordinance?
Not one we could find: on November 9, 2026, we found no countywide kratom ordinance and none for unincorporated land. In February 2020, KPBS reported, supervisors "stopped short of declaring" kratom a public nuisance and voted 4-1 to have county agencies "return in 60 days with options, including a possible ban." We found no verified follow-up.
Cities in the county set their own rules. Solana Beach bars sales to anyone under 21 rather than banning kratom, and unlike San Diego's code, its definition names any "beverage intended for human consumption that contains any part of the leaf". We could not find Oceanside's ordinance at the city or a code publisher, so we cannot quote or date it. The state Senate Health Committee's February 2026 paper says: "The cities of Oceanside and Jurupa Valley prohibit the sale, distribution, and possession of all kratom products." For the exact terms of any Oceanside kratom ban, check the city's own code.
| Place | What the rule covers | What we read |
|---|---|---|
| City of San Diego | Manufacture, sale, offers, distribution, possession for sale and simple possession of listed drugs, mitragynine included. | Municipal Code, Division 33. |
| County of San Diego | No kratom ordinance found. A 4-1 vote in February 2020 asked for options. | KPBS report, February 2020. |
| Solana Beach | No sale, advertising, offer or distribution to anyone under 21. Beverages named. | Municipal code chapter 6.40 (Ordinance 537, 2024). |
| Oceanside | Sale, distribution and possession, per the committee's summary. | Senate Health Committee paper only. Ordinance not found. |
The state layer: a food-law position, not a kratom statute
California has no kratom statute. The Senate Health Committee's background paper for its February 18, 2026 hearing says "there is no specific California statute on kratom" and that "Twenty states, including California, do not have laws regulating kratom."
What the state has is a reading of its food law. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) cites Health and Safety Code 110555, under which food is adulterated if it contains an unsafe food additive, and treats food containing kratom or the minor alkaloid as adulterated. Its warning of October 24, 2025, revised on January 7, 2026 to add "for consumption", says such products are "illegal to sell or manufacture for consumption" and "cannot be sold online or in stores." That is a consumer warning and an enforcement position under food law, not a kratom statute or regulation.
ABC, the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, told its licensees in an advisory dated January 15, 2026 that they "must cease sales of these products and remove them from shelves immediately," or face "administrative disciplinary action which may result in the suspension or revocation of their ABC license." Its own caution: advisories "may not necessarily reflect the current state of the discussed statute or regulation."
The Governor's October 31, 2026 release said a dangerous or illegal product does not become safe or legal "just because it's dressed up as candy, a colorful beverage or a wellness supplement." Its enforcement figures are in the status box.
The state has also sued inside the county. On May 1, 2026, CDPH said it and the Attorney General had filed a complaint in San Diego County Superior Court against a kratom manufacturer there, alleging it made and distributed "adulterated and illegal" kratom food products and interfered with a CDPH embargo. CDPH says a May 2025 inspection found "kratom powders, capsules, liquids, and chewable tablets being manufactured and held for sale." The state seeks "Civil penalties of up to $1,000 per day for each violation," among other relief. These are allegations; we do not name the company.
Federal status does not change the city's text. Kratom leaf and mitragynine are not federally controlled, but San Diego's list names mitragynine on its own terms. DEA's October 14, 2026 notice of intent proposes temporary control of the minor alkaloid and MGPI above thresholds. A notice is not an order, and its status is in the box above.
What the code means for drinks that contain kratom
Nothing in Division 33 mentions beverages, and no city document we read singles out drinks; the City Attorney's suit concerns "kratom products" at smoke shops. But the code defines its target by content, not format: any "mixture" or "preparation" containing a covered substance, with mitragynine on the list. On those words, a drink or a shot containing mitragynine is a mixture containing a listed substance, just as a powder would be. That is our reading, not a city finding or legal advice.
In San Diego, a "not safe for human consumption" disclaimer does not change that: it "will not avoid the application of this Division." CDPH takes a similar line. "Regardless of the naming or labeling," its food branch says, kratom products are made and sold for human consumption, so they are "not legal to manufacture or sell for consumption."
The state is explicit about format where the city is not. CDPH's warning says products containing kratom or the minor alkaloid "are typically sold as beverages, shots, powders, tablets, capsules and gummies." At the federal level, FDA's position is that kratom "cannot be lawfully added to conventional foods."
What about kava? Neither San Diego's code nor CDPH's kratom warning mentions it, and we draw no conclusion about a drink with kava alone. Ours contain kratom, so the word kava on the bottle changes nothing here.
If you are not sure whether a drink contains kratom, start with our guide to spotting kratom in drinks. For the federal proposal and the states that treat these drinks differently, see our guide to kratom drinks and DEA's proposed liquid limit.
Where GUD Tonics stands
GUD Tonics sells three ready-to-drink kava drinks that also contain kratom (Baja Bliss, Pink Sunset and TropiColada), a bundle of the three, and a kava powder without kratom. Our FAQ says mitragynine is "in every ready-to-drink GUD Tonic, which is why our drinks are for adults 21 and over only." San Diego's list names mitragynine, and CDPH's position covers food that contains kratom, so on the words of both, our drinks sit where any other kratom product sits. That is our reading, not a legal opinion.
Our shipping policy lists places we do not ship to. A seller's list is not a legal check, ours included, and nothing in this article says that selling, delivering or possessing our drinks is lawful in San Diego or anywhere else in California.
Our own lists have a gap here. Our shipping policy says GUD Tonics ships "to all US states where Kratom is legal." Its no-ship lists, read November 9, 2026, do not name California as a state, though CDPH says kratom products "are illegal to sell for consumption and cannot be sold online or in stores." The only California entries are San Diego and Oceanside, filed under "counties", though San Diego's ban is the city's and we found no county ordinance.
The code's definitions of "sell" and "distribute" both include "deliver". Whether a seller outside the city that ships an order to a San Diego address sells, delivers or distributes there under the code is a question for a California lawyer, and it is a question about us as much as anyone.
What we plan to do: pause shipments of our kratom drinks to California addresses while counsel reviews our shipping policy, correct our no-ship lists, and update this page when that review is done.
For our lab certificates, see our lab results page. A certificate is a lab measurement, not a legal opinion, and nothing on one makes a product lawful in San Diego. Corrections to this article go through our contact page.
Questions people ask about the San Diego ordinance
Is kratom legal in San Diego?
Not in the City of San Diego, going by the city's own documents. Since 2016, its municipal code has made it unlawful to manufacture, sell, offer, distribute or possess for sale any Novel Psychoactive Drug, and separately to possess one, and its examples include mitragynine and the minor alkaloid. The city's merchant guide names kratom outright. Not legal advice.
Does San Diego's ordinance ban possession?
Yes. Section 52.3304 says "It is unlawful to possess any Federal Schedule I Drug, Novel Synthetic Drug, or Novel Psychoactive Drug," with no amount set. Section 52.3303 separately covers possession for sale, which is the part the City Attorney's 2026 release cites.
Does the ban cover drinks?
The code never mentions beverages, but its definition reaches any "compound, mixture, preparation, or substance" containing a listed substance, and mitragynine is listed. On those words, a drink containing mitragynine is covered like any other form; that is our reading, not a city statement. A "not safe for human consumption" disclaimer "will not avoid the application of this Division."
Is there a San Diego County kratom ban?
We found none, countywide or for unincorporated areas, as of November 9, 2026; in February 2020, KPBS reported, supervisors voted 4-1 to ask for options. The City of San Diego's ban covers the city only. Solana Beach bars sales to anyone under 21, and a state Senate committee paper says Oceanside prohibits "the sale, distribution, and possession of all kratom products."
Does California have a statewide kratom law?
There is no kratom statute, according to the state Senate Health Committee's February 2026 background paper. CDPH treats food containing kratom as adulterated under existing food law and says such products are "illegal to sell or manufacture for consumption." ABC told its licensees in January 2026 that they "must cease sales" or face license suspension or revocation.
Disclaimer: this article summarizes public documents and our own store pages as of November 9, 2026. It is general information, not legal or medical advice; for your own situation, ask a lawyer licensed in California. Statements about botanical products have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration, and no product is intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.
