The group behind an amendment to expand Arkansas’ medical marijuana program is suing to put it back on the November ballot after it was disqualified by Secretary of State John Thurston on Monday.
Attorneys for Arkansans for Patient Access filed the lawsuit in state Supreme Court Tuesday, alleging Thurston violated Amendment 7 of the Arkansas Constitution by restricting the right to the ballot initiative process.
Despite collecting over 150,000 signatures total, the secretary of state only accepted about 77,000 initially. The group collected more signatures during a 30-day cure period, but Thurston only accepted 10,521, meaning the group failed to reach the threshold of 90,074 signatures to make it on the ballot.
The case revolves around interpretation of state laws surrounding the petition process. The secretary of state rejected signatures collected by paid canvassers, because certain pieces of paperwork weren’t signed by the amendment’s sponsor, but a representative of the company that hired the canvassers.
Plaintiffs say the secretary of state’s application of the law was selective. They argue, throughout the process of getting the amendment approved, they received no pushback when representatives from the campaign handled numerous official actions, instead of the amendment’s “sponsor” as is required by state law. It wasn’t until the signature verification process that, they say, the secretary of state decided to interpret the law that way.
“Events to this point had proceeded normally and as previous initiative and referendum efforts had been conducted by sponsors, the Secretary of State, and the Attorney General for years,” the lawsuit reads. “Unfortunately, things were to become anything but normal.”
Describing the situation as “nonsensical,” the suit also points out that, while some of the 77,000 signatures deemed valid by the secretary of state could have violated the state law in question, those signatures still remained valid. But, the secretary of state said all signatures submitted during the cure period would be subject to the state law.
Plaintiffs also argue the secretary of state and Attorney General Tim Griffin violated state law by delegating tasks to employees during the amendment’s approval process. The lawsuit alleges a double standard, since state law says the “secretary of state” or the “attorney general” themselves must complete the tasks.
Attorneys for Arkansans for Patient Access are seeking an expedited review of the case, as well as for a special master to be appointed to weigh in on interpretations of state law. They’re also seeking a preliminary injunction to validate and count all signatures collected during the cure period so the amendment can be restored to the ballot.
Despite Monday’s rejection by the secretary of state, Issue 3 will still appear on the ballot in Arkansas—the fight now is over whether votes in favor of it will count. A similar fate befell a proposed amendment to legalize abortion in Arkansas, which ultimately fell short because signatures collected by paid canvassers were rejected for the same reason.
If ultimately passed, the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment would expand providers able to prescribe the drug, allow for patients to grow their own plants, and expand the number of conditions which qualify people to be prescribed medical marijuana, among other things.
The Arkansas Supreme Court has ordered Thurston’s office to respond by noon Wednesday.
