Members of the Arkansas Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision, have ordered that votes for and against a proposal to expand medical marijuana should not count.
Justices on Monday sided with Protect Arkansas Kids, a group which intervened in the legal challenge against Issue 3, while rejecting the original complaint from Secretary of State John Thurston. While Issue 3 will appear on the ballot this election cycle, votes for and against it will not count.
Issue 3 would have made several changes to the state’s medical marijuana program, which was first approved by voters in 2016. Among other things, the proposal would have loosened licensing requirements, expanded qualifying conditions and healthcare providers able to prescribe the drug, and allowed for medical marijuana patients to grow their own cannabis.
In Monday’s opinion, the Supreme Court rejected the original legal challenge against the amendment, brought by Attorney General Tim Griffin on behalf of Secretary of State John Thurston. That argument centered on training requirements for paid canvassers; Thurston argued the group behind the amendment, Arkansans for Patient Access, failed to meet the threshold of 90,704 signatures to place it on the ballot because it did not follow state law regarding canvasser training.
Writing for the majority, Supreme Court Associate Justice Shawn Womack agreed with a second legal challenge against the amendment, which argued the proposal’s popular name and ballot title are insufficient.
“The ballot title misleads voters because it omits language stating that the proposed amendment would repeal the General Assembly’s authority to amend Amendment 98 (i.e., omits material information). The proposed amendment alters or amends Amendment 98 in at least twenty different ways,” the opinion reads.
Amendment 98 refers to the original medical marijuana amendment passed by voters in 2016. Issue 3 would have repealed the legislature’s authority to repeal or make any changes to that amendment, which state law allows lawmakers to do through a two-thirds vote of both legislative chambers.
Womack also took issue with a provision of Issue 3 which would allow possession of up to an ounce of marijuana if the drug is legalized on a federal level. The opinion argues, since this would also apply to Arkansans who do not have a prescription for medical marijuana, the amendment’s popular name (which only mentions medical marijuana) is misleading.
Womack was joined by Justice Barbara Womack Webb and special justices Bilenda Harris-Ritter and Don Curdie in the majority. Harris-Ritter and Curdie were appointed by Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders after Chief Justice John Dan Kemp and Justice Courtney Hudson recused themselves from the case.
Justices Rhonda Wood, Karen Baker and Cody Hiland dissented. Hiland disagreed with the majority, saying the proposal’s popular name and ballot title were not misleading or insufficient.
“When read together, APA’s popular name delineates that this is an amendment regarding medical marijuana while its ballot title expounds to allow for recreational, or “adult,” marijuana use in the State of Arkansas if such decriminalization occurs on a federal level. These two provisions do not pose a conflict of interpretation as articulated in the majority,” the dissent reads.
Hiland said the Supreme Court’s “decades-long legal precedent” for determining sufficiency for popular names and ballot titles was disregarded in Monday’s opinion, and that Arkansas voters should have gotten the chance to weigh in on the proposal.
“However, when all legal hurdles have been cleared, and we are tasked with making the final decision on sufficiency that tiptoes closely into the realm of judicial subjectivity, we must be faithful to evaluate on the basis of past precedent and through a lens of ‘liberal construction and interpretation’; ensuring that the benefit of the doubt rests with the people who have inherited the guarantee of liberty and the freedom to govern of themselves––the people of Arkansas,” the dissent reads.
A statement from Arkansans for Patient Access, the group behind the amendment, decried the Supreme Court’s actions Monday.
“This is a setback for the growth and improvement of our existing program, but it will not be the last attempt to ease the barriers Arkansas’s medical patients encounter. We will continue our fight to eliminate hurdles to access and lower costs. Patients across Arkansas have made it clear they want to build on the existing foundation; unfortunately, the anti-marijuana politicians have ignored their call. The people rule, our state motto, does not ring true today,” the statement reads.
A spokesperson for Protect Arkansas Kids, the intervenor in the case, celebrated the high court’s opinion.
“This ballot initiative was built on misinformation and half-truths, which epitomizes how Big Marijuana has relentlessly pushed commercial marijuana and THC drugs for ‘medicinal’ use. The reality is this ballot initiative wasn’t about those suffering from debilitating pain, PTSD, cancer or other serious medical conditions. It was about legalizing addictive, highly potent drugs under the guise of medicine.”
