Subscribe Register Login

Friday, April 28, 2017, 9:01 p.m.

ADVERTISEMENT

Top Picks - Arkansas Daily Deal

Arkansas court disqualifies one medical marijuana proposal

By Emma Pettit

This article was originally published October 27, 2016 at 9:15 a.m. Updated October 27, 2016 at 5:58 p.m.

marijuana-plants-grow-in-a-greenhouse-at-los-suenos-farms-in-avondale-colo-earlier-this-year-scotts-miracle-gros-stock-is-getting-a-boost-from-marijuana-proposals-in-several-states-with-one-analyst-saying-scotts-is-seen-as-a-marijuana-growth-story

Marijuana plants grow in a greenhouse at Los Suenos Farms in Avondale, Colo., earlier this year. Scotts Miracle-Gro’s stock is getting a boost from marijuana proposals in several states, with one analyst saying Scotts is seen as a “marijuana growth story.”

The Arkansas Supreme Court has disqualified a medical marijuana proposal from the November ballot, but voters will still be able to consider a competing plan.

The court found that sponsors of Issue 7, known as the Arkansas Medical Cannabis Act, failed to obtain the necessary amount of signatures for the proposal to qualify.

Opponents challenged the ballot initiative, which would have allowed medical marijuana use as well as permit users to grow their own if it's unavailable otherwise, on the grounds that many of the signatures sponsors collected from Arkansas citizens were invalid.

In the ruling, Justice Karen R. Baker wrote the “total number of signatures which should have been counted by respondent falls below the statutory minimum.”

Baker explained that to have an initiative appear on the ballot, sponsors need to submit valid signatures from 8 percent of the voters in the last gubernatorial general election, or roughly 67,887.

Arkansans for Compassionate Care, the main supporter of Issue 7, originally submitted 117,547 signatures, and Secretary of State Mark Martin ultimately validated 77,516 of them, Baker wrote.

After reviewing the case, the court ultimately said roughly 12,104 were invalid, leaving approximately 65,412 valid signatures, which is 2,465 less than the necessary amount to “satisfy our constitutional requirements,” Baker wrote.

[DOCUMENT: Read the full opinion]

“This position treats this matter solely as a factual one, evades the applicable law, and is not supported by decades of precedent regarding statutory interpretation,” Baker wrote.

She added that the court has "simply interpreted the laws enacted by our General Assembly.”

In a dissent, Chief Justice Howard W. Brill said he believes the act "should remain on the ballot."

"While the sponsor's canvassers did make some errors in the signature-gathering process, I agree with the master's findings that these errors are not a complete failure with regard to the sufficiency of the signatures on the petition," Brill wrote.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Courtney Hudson Goodson agreed with the legal basis for disqualifying the ballot measure but noted that "the General Assembly has made it unduly difficult for measures to be placed on the ballot."

"The petition here failed to satisfy the onerous demands of the Act, even though there is no allegation that the signatures were invalid in any other way," she wrote. "The result is that the wishes of the citizens who signed the petition in good faith are being discarded, and the right of the people to pass judgment on the proposal in the voting booth has been lost."

Arkansas Surgeon General Greg Bledsoe, who serves as a spokesman for Arkansans Against Legalized Marijuana, said he respects the court’s decision, but would have preferred for the issue to remain on the ballot for voters to have their say. The lawsuit against Issue 7 was not brought by his group, Bledsoe said.

The surgeon general said he empathizes with the initiative proponents’ “passion and frustration” even if he disagrees with them on the medicinal benefits of marijuana in its current form. Disqualifying the ballot initiative 12 days before the vote could be “disillusioning” to people who wanted their voices to be heard, he said.

“It furthers this narrative that the government isn’t working for us and it undermines, in their minds, the process,” Bledsoe said.

Earlier this month, the court upheld a second medical-marijuana initiative, the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Amendment, so voters will still decide on that issue come election day.

Arkansans for Compassionate Care said in a news release the group would continue to fight the decision, but urged citizens to vote “yes” on the still-standing medical-marijuana amendment and also mark their vote on Issue 7, saying the priority is that “patients have safe access to medical cannabis.”

“We will keep fighting [to] ensure that no patient faces arrest for using a safe and effective medicine, whether that protection comes from Issue 6 or Issue 7,” said Deputy Director Ryan Denham in the release.

Arkansas voters narrowly rejected legalizing medical marijuana four years ago. Advocates had cast the proposals as a way to prove there's support for medical marijuana, even in conservative states.

Check back for updates and read Friday's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette for full details.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

ADVERTISEMENT

Comments on: Arkansas court disqualifies one medical marijuana proposal

To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.

Subscribe Register Login

You must login to make comments.

Displaying 1 - 10 of 26 total comments

Jump to last page >>

AncientUnicorn says... October 27, 2016 at 12:12 p.m.

This is voter disenfranchisement, plain and simple, and it is disgusting. Our state is throwing up any roadblock they can (no matter how incredulous or unfounded) meanwhile there are people suffering without medication.

( | suggest removal )

Happy1234 says... October 27, 2016 at 4:36 p.m.

What a load of BS.
How about the 100's of folks who voted early.
I am voting tomorrow I will be surprised if I am informed by the people at the poles if this is no longer valid.
All votes in favor of that have already been cast should go toward #6

( | suggest removal )

Pearl1975 says... October 27, 2016 at 4:37 p.m.

This is ridiculous to disqualify this amendment after early voting starts! When are politicians going to do what the tax payers want??? Just another way to block medical marijuana!

( | suggest removal )

JMort69 says... October 27, 2016 at 4:37 p.m.

So, the governor's and his puppet's bag of dirty tricks won with Issue 7. Are our politicians just to dense to see the beginnings of a rebellion this election cycle? Do they not understand how disgusted we are with their performances? Apparently not. Our country was founded by rebellion and rebellion has wrought many great changes. As a Baby Boomer, I know the power of the people. All of these politicians will run for office again and we will wreak our revenge at the polls. Justice Goodson is correct, our lawmakers are trying to prevent the peoples' voices from begin heard. "Taxation without Representation" was the hue and cry of our founding fathers. These political hacks had better realize that we the people will be heard, one way or the other. Vote for Issue 6 and show these dirty politicians that, try as they may, the DO NOT control our votes!

( | suggest removal )

LR1955 says... October 27, 2016 at 4:51 p.m.

I voted early for BOTH, but I preferred the ACT (Health Dept run) over the amendment(Liquor Store Backers/for profit).

( | suggest removal )

LR1955 says... October 27, 2016 at 4:59 p.m.

Has anybody else had comment posting failures over the last 24 hours ?

( | suggest removal )

GrimReaper says... October 27, 2016 at 5:09 p.m.

Hmmmm..........I guess pot is the only "medication" needed by those who believe in unicorns.

( | suggest removal )

BeeJ says... October 27, 2016 at 5:15 p.m.

Leave it alone and let the PEOPLE decide!

( | suggest removal )

dunk7474 says... October 27, 2016 at 5:39 p.m.

Everyone who is in office should be voted out, Especially our Senators.. The justices and the governor should leave if one wants to show how DIRTY this move was. Besides Karen Baker, the article doesn't state who else was for this ILLEGAL manuevor

( | suggest removal )

dearlo says... October 27, 2016 at 5:41 p.m.

Yes LR1955 had two post not to go threw. I already voted for 7 so I'm mad as heck. Either let us vote again or put our votes on the one that they intend to win. This at this stage of voting is just another way they show our voices don't count. We will stay at the bottom if we keep voting for the same old greedy thugs that are suppose to work for us.

( | suggest removal )

Click here to make a comment

To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.

ADVERTISEMENT

SHOPPING

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

Top Picks - Arkansas Daily Deal
Arkansas Online