South Dakota Supreme Court strikes down voter-passed recreational marijuana initiativePosted by On


(KCAU) — After more than seven months of deliberating, South Dakota’s Supreme Court upheld an earlier ruling that found Amendment A to be unconstitutional saying the initiative violated the state’s “single subject” requirement.

Voters passed Amendment A by a count of 54% to 46% more than a year ago, making South Dakota the 15th state to legalize recreational marijuana and the fourth state to do so that same night in the 2020 election.

Since then, the law has been under constant scrutiny from those that oppose it. On November 23, 2020, the state announced a lawsuit brought forward by Highway Patrol Superintendent Col. Rick Miller on Governor Kristi Noem’s behalf, who publicly opposed the initiative before it was even voted on.

The initial argument in the suit was that the constitutional amendment included more than one issue which violates South Dakota’s “single subject” rule when amending their state constitution.

Wednesday, the state’s Supreme Court upheld that logic with Chief Justice Steven Jensen writing in the majority opinion:

“It is clear that Amendment A contains provisions embracing at least three separate subjects, each with distinct objects or purposes.”

But Matthew Schweich, campaign director of South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws, said that just isn’t true.

“Almost the entirety of Amendment A was about recreational cannabis…

Original Author Link click here to read complete story..

(KCAU) — After more than seven months of deliberating, South Dakota’s Supreme Court upheld an earlier ruling that found Amendment A to be unconstitutional saying the initiative violated the state’s “single subject” requirement.

Voters passed Amendment A by a count of 54% to 46% more than a year ago, making South Dakota the 15th state to legalize recreational marijuana and the fourth state to do so that same night in the 2020 election.

Since then, the law has been under constant scrutiny from those that oppose it. On November 23, 2020, the state announced a lawsuit brought forward by Highway Patrol Superintendent Col. Rick Miller on Governor Kristi Noem’s behalf, who publicly opposed the initiative before it was even voted on.

The initial argument in the suit was that the constitutional amendment included more than one issue which violates South Dakota’s “single subject” rule when amending their state constitution.

Wednesday, the state’s Supreme Court upheld that logic with Chief Justice Steven Jensen writing in the majority opinion:

“It is clear that Amendment A contains provisions embracing at least three separate subjects, each with distinct objects or purposes.”

But Matthew Schweich, campaign director of South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws, said that just isn’t true.

“Almost the entirety of Amendment A was about recreational cannabis…



Source link

News

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.