After the Mississippi Supreme Court overturned IM 65, which legalized medical cannabis in the state, eyes turned to South Dakota. Their Supreme Court was also hearing a trial surrounding cannabis. This time, it involved the Amendment A ruling. This amendment legalized recreational cannabis in South Dakota for citizens 21 and over.
Amendment A
This amendment, along with IM 26 legalizing medical cannabis, passed at the same time, which was unheard of previously. Almost immediately after passing, a couple of law enforcement officers filed a lawsuit against Amendment A on behalf of Governor Noem. The lawsuit claimed that Amendment A broke the single clause rule. This means that a bill or an amendment can only tackle one subject.
In this case, Amendment A legalizes recreational cannabis for citizens 21 and over. There are sub headings under the amendment that explains how to implement the ruling, answers basic questions, and provides general details on how the amendment will work. Those opposed say that these aren’t sub headings to the amendment but are actually separate clauses. To them this means that Amendment A violates the single clause rule, making the amendment unconstitutional.
A circuit judge ruled back in February that Amendment A did in fact break the single clause rule and deemed the amendment unconstitutional. Activists appealed the measure and at the end of April, the Supreme Court heard the case.
Ruling
Since April, activists in South Dakota have been waiting for a ruling on Amendment A. Like IM 26, it is set to begin July 1, following the Constitutional timeline of six months after being approved by voters. However, State Court Administrator Greg Sattizahn confirmed Thursday, June 24 that a ruling wouldn’t come until after the original implementation deadline.
There is concern among activists following the Mississippi Supreme Court overturn that South Dakota Supreme Court could do the same. We won’t know until after the final ruling.
Make sure to check back for more cannabis and hemp related news.