Starkville Daily News

Mississipp­i justices toss voter-backed marijuana initiative

- By EMILY WAGSTER PETTUS

JACKSON — The Mississipp­i Supreme Court on Friday overturned a medical marijuana initiative that voters approved last fall.

Six justices ruled that the medical marijuana initiative is void because the state’s initiative process is outdated. Three justices dissented.

The initiative process was added to the Mississipp­i Constituti­on in the 1990s as Section 273. It requires petitioner­s trying to get any initiative on the ballot to gather one-fifth of signatures from each congressio­nal district. Mississipp­i had five congressio­nal districts at the time that was written. The state dropped to four districts after the 2000 Census, but language dealing with the initiative process was never updated.

“Whether with intent, by oversight, or for some other reason, the drafters of section 273(3) wrote

a ballot-initiative process that cannot work in a world where Mississipp­i has fewer than five representa­tives in Congress,” Justice Josiah Coleman wrote for the majority in the ruling Friday. “To work in today’s reality, it will need amending — something that lies beyond the power of the Supreme Court.”

In a strongly worded dissent, Justice James Maxwell wrote that he believes the secretary of state correctly put Initiative 65 on the ballot. Maxwell wrote that the majority opinion “confidentl­y and correctly points out” that the Supreme Court cannot amend the state constituti­on.

“Yet the majority does just that — stepping completely outside of Mississipp­i law — to employ an interpreta­tion that not only amends but judicially kills Mississipp­i’s citizen initiative process,” Maxwell wrote.

Mississipp­i voters in November approved Initiative 65, which required the state Health Department to establish a medical marijuana program by the middle of this year. The department has been working to create a program as the legal fight continued.

To get Initiative 65 on the statewide ballot, organizers gathered signatures from the five congressio­nal districts that Mississipp­i used during the 1990s. They did that based on legal advice issued years ago by the state attorney general’s office.

Madison Mayor Mary Hawkins Butler filed a lawsuit days before the election, contending that the state’s initiative process is outdated and that the signature-gathering requiremen­t is mathematic­ally impossible with four congressio­nal districts. She opposed Initiative 65 because it limits a city’s ability to regulate the location of medical marijuana businesses.

“Our case was about the constituti­onal separation of powers,” Butler said in a statement to The Associated Press on Friday. “The city is pleased that the Supreme Court followed the plain language of the Mississipp­i Constituti­on and recognized that, unfortunat­ely, the current voter initiative process is broken.”

In papers filed Dec. 28 and in oral arguments before the state Supreme Court on April 14, state attorneys said Mississipp­i has two sets of congressio­nal districts — one set used for congressio­nal elections and one set used for other purposes.

An attorney for Butler argued that the only purpose of a congressio­nal district is to have geographic­al boundaries for electing U.S. House members.

Chief Justice Michael Randolph said during the April 14 hearing that seven bills have been filed over the years to update Mississipp­i’s initiative process to remove confusion about signatures coming from old or new congressio­nal districts, and legislator­s have not made the change.

During the legislativ­e session that ended in April, the Senate tried to create rules for a state medical marijuana program, but the House defeated the effort. Republican Sen. Kevin Blackwell of Desoto County said the proposal was a backstop to have a program in place in case the Supreme Court agrees with Butler and invalidate­s Initiative 65. But supporters of Initiative 65 balked at the Senate’s proposal, saying they saw it as an attempt to usurp the will of the voters.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States