Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign quietly shelled out nearly $19,000 in 2025 to a Massachusetts psychiatrist whose practice includes ketamine and esketamine therapies, according to newly filed federal reports. The spending was logged as leadership training and consulting, a description that is now fueling debate over whether the payments were a proper use of campaign funds.
According to the New York Post, Federal Election Commission filings list three payments in 2025 to Dr. Brian Boyle totaling roughly $18,725, recorded as $11,550, $4,375 and $2,800. The Post reports those disbursements were categorized with vague labels such as “leadership training” and “consulting,” language critics say makes it harder to tell what the campaign was actually paying for.
Dr. Brian Boyle is identified as the chief psychiatrist at Stella Mental Health, where both the clinic’s provider profile and a February 2026 company press release describe his role in interventional psychiatry, including ketamine infusions and Spravato (esketamine). Stella Mental Health highlights Boyle as the leader of its Boston-area clinical network and notes his focus on treatment-resistant depression.
Campaign-finance attorney Paul Kamenar told the New York Post that using campaign contributions for what appear to be personal expenses “appears to violate federal campaign finance laws.” Whether that line has actually been crossed will hinge on the Federal Election Commission’s “irrespective test,” which bars candidates from using campaign funds on costs that would exist even if they were not running for office or serving in government. The standard is laid out in FEC guidance, which notes that the Commission weighs these disputes on a case-by-case basis.
Ocasio-Cortez has previously pressed the federal government to take psychedelic-assisted therapies more seriously. She filed amendments aimed at directing the Department of Defense to study psilocybin and MDMA as potential PTSD treatments for service members, as reported by Marijuana Moment. Observers have also pointed to her earlier co-sponsorship of a broader research measure that ultimately found its way into defense legislation, a legislative history outlined in commentary on JDSupra.
What the law says
Federal law flatly prohibits converting campaign contributions to a candidate’s personal use. Under the FEC’s “irrespective test,” an expense is considered personal and therefore off-limits if it would have been incurred whether or not the individual was a candidate or officeholder.
The FEC has issued guidance and advisory opinions explaining that it sorts these questions on a case-by-case basis rather than relying on a rigid checklist. Recent rulemaking has clarified some specific areas, such as what qualifies as legitimate security-related spending, but many gray zones remain. For more detail, the Commission’s personal-use rules are spelled out in its published FEC guidance.
Boyle’s practice and perspective
Stella’s provider profile describes a team-based, interventional approach to mental health care and emphasizes Boyle’s work with treatment-resistant depression, ketamine infusions and esketamine protocols. The profile notes prior experience at McLean Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital. Stella Mental Health frames these treatments as part of an outcomes-focused program aimed at speeding symptom relief for patients who have not responded to more traditional therapies.
The campaign payments to Boyle drop into a broader, increasingly high-stakes national argument about psychedelics and mental health care. Supporters of ketamine and related therapies point to a growing stack of clinical research, while skeptics argue that, at a minimum, politicians using campaign cash in this space need to be crystal clear about what they are buying and why.
For now, the public record consists of the FEC filings and Boyle’s own professional profile, and those documents are what reporters, lawyers and watchdogs are poring over. What comes next, if anything, will likely depend on whether the FEC or outside groups conclude that those same materials justify a closer look.
