Background: We theorize the political function of drug criminalization as contributing to stigma systems exerting social control over people who use illicit drugs (PWUID). Consequently, drug decriminalization may be a potential destigmatizing solution. Since decriminalization is often positioned as an anti-stigma intervention targeting the public, it is important to understand how laypeople conceptualize decriminalization. Objectives: We aimed to explore: (1) how laypeople conceptualized drug (de)criminalization and its relation to the (de)stigmatization of PWUID; and (2) the potential implications of the various conceptualizations of (de)criminalization for the autonomy of PWUID. Methods: We acquired, via a Freedom of Information request, 221 deputations sent to the City of Vancouver regarding Motion B.4, which would advance decriminalization. These deputations were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Supporters of Motion B.4 commonly assumed decriminalization would destigmatize PWUID, and often argued that the drug toxicity crisis is a public health problem, not a criminal one. Meanwhile, those opposed commonly positioned criminalization as a necessary stopgap to avoid community harm. This view was echoed by some proponents, notably those who argued for public health models of decriminalization. Finally, some proponents asserted that PWUID should be included in policymaking, though few deputations came from self-identified PWUID. All PWUID argued that decriminalization must exclude police. Implications: Our analysis of lay perspectives on decriminalization highlights the importance of models that adequately address all levels of stigma for PWUID. Models that fail to preserve the autonomy of PWUID are likely to reproduce their stigmatization.