On Friday, we posted Argus Leader: SD Attorney General's office asks judge to dismiss anti-legal cannabis lawsuit, but we missed another shoe dropping in the motions against the lawsuit.
At the Rapid City Journal, Arielle Zionts reports in Judge grants voters' request to oppose sheriff, Highway Patrol superintendent in marijuana lawsuit:
Four South Dakota residents who campaigned and voted for recreational marijuana have been granted permission to intervene in the lawsuit seeking to overturn the amendment that legalized the drug.
"I think the will of the voters and the will of the people should be respected," defendant Randy Seiler said Friday of why he decided to intervene. "That's the literal definition of a democracy, where people vote and the wishes and the decision of the voters is respected."
Seiler, chair of the South Dakota Democratic Party and a former U.S. Attorney, is joined by three other defendants:
- Melissa Mentele, executive director of New Approach South Dakota and sponsor of the successful medical marijuana ballot initiative;
- Bill Stocker, a retired Sioux Falls police officer;
- Chuck Parkinson, former staffer for Sen. Jim Abdnor and former appointee of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
"Each defendant has an interest in the question presented in this election contest," campaigned for Amendment A, and was a qualified voter but "the existing parties will not adequately represent the interests of the defendants," the group's lawyers wrote in their Nov. 24 motion to intervene.
The defendants are represented by Brendan Johnson, a former U.S. Attorney for South Dakota and sponsor of Amendment A; Timothy Billion; and Eric Magnuson, former chief justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court. Johnson said their legal fees are being paid by South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws, a ballot question political committee.
The motion is embedded here at the Journal.
At Dakota Free Press, Cory Allen Heidelberger points out in Four South Dakotans Intervene to Pick Ravnsborg’s Slack in Defending Amendment A:
According to Sneve [reporter at the Argus Leader], Judge Klinger wants all arguments and motions from both parties by January 8. That one-month time frame is remarkable compared to the last time our one-party regime tried to overturn a popular initiative in court: back in 2016, Republican legislators filed suit before Thanksgiving to block freshly voter-approved Initiated Measure 22 from taking away their free dinners from lobbyists, obtained a preliminary injunction from Judge Mark Barnett by December 8, and won a complete suspension of IM 22 from the court by the Winter Solstice. Judge Klinger won’t even have all the arguments in hand from the state, the state, and Team Johnson/Seiler until after Epiphany.
We'll keep an eye out as January 8 rolls up.
Related posts:
- Big Stone County MN sheriff not fully aware of what SD cannabis law says, shares fears anyway
- Rapid City letter-to-editor writer objects to Governor Noem's anti-cannabis nanny state
- Argus Leader: SD Attorney General's office asks judge to dismiss anti-legal cannabis lawsuit
- Will Big Stone Lake become pot tourist haven after South Dakotans vote for legal weed?
- The peculiar knots of cannabis policy prompt GOP kinks in South Dakota and Minnesota
Photo: Cannabis plants in a greenhouse.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the paypal subscription button.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
Comments