LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — The Arkansas Supreme Court has intervened to prevent votes from being counted for a significant ballot initiative aimed at expanding medical marijuana in the state, citing misleading language in the proposal.
In a close 4-3 decision, justices determined that the initiative failed to adequately inform voters about its implications on a previous constitutional amendment that legalized medical marijuana in 2016. The proposed amendment sought to widen the definition of medical professionals eligible to certify patients for medical cannabis, expand qualifying conditions, and extend the validity of medical cannabis cards to three years.
While the measure will still be present on the ballot due to the certification deadline, election officials have stated that any votes cast for it will not be counted. Early voting commenced in Arkansas on Monday.
In their ruling, the justices also dismissed claims from election officials regarding insufficient signatures submitted by organizers to qualify the initiative for the ballot. They emphasized that the ballot measure failed to communicate to voters that it would have removed the Legislature’s authority to amend the 2016 medical marijuana law.
Justice Shawn Womack noted in the majority opinion, “This decision doomed the proposed ballot title, and it is plainly misleading.” Additionally, the court pointed out that the measure did not clarify that, should it pass, it would permit possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for any purpose if marijuana is legalized under federal law.
The organization behind the measure, focused on patient access, expressed disappointment in the court’s ruling, asserting that their collected signatures reflect broad support for expanding the medical marijuana program. “We are deeply disappointed in the Court’s decision. It seems politics has triumphed over legal precedent,” the group stated.
Following Secretary of State John Thurston’s announcement that the initiative’s supporters did not meet the required number of signatures, the organization took legal action. Concerns over the wording of the initiative were raised by a group opposing the measure.
Thurston’s office had invalidated some submitted signatures, claiming that procedural rules regarding paid signature gatherers were not observed. Earlier this year, similar issues led to the rejection of petitions for an anti-abortion ballot measure.
In July, the state indicated that the initiative’s supporters fell short of the necessary signatures, but granted them an additional 30 days to gather more. However, any signatures collected by paid gatherers would be disregarded if not properly documented, according to the state’s interpretation of the law.
The court ruled against this interpretation, affirming that state law allows for various individuals to be recognized as sponsors of the measure. In dissent, Justice Cody Hiland argued that the court’s ruling overlooked established standards concerning the clarity and sufficiency of ballot titles.
With a growing number of states legalizing recreational marijuana, the upcoming November elections could further shift the landscape, as voters in Florida, North Dakota, and South Dakota will consider proposals for legalizing recreational cannabis, alongside two medical marijuana measures on Nebraska’s ballot.
