COLUMBUS – The group backing a marijuana legalization issue on the November ballot is taking Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted’s office to the state Supreme Court over the language voters will read at polling places on Election Day.
If approved, the amendment to the Ohio Constitution would make it legal to use marijuana for medicinal purposes and for residents over 21 to use the drug for recreational purposes and to grow small amounts.
In a statement announcing the filing of the complaints, ResponsibleOhio legal counsel Andy Douglas calls the ballot language and the title assigned to Issue 3 by Husted and the Ballot Board – the bipartisan panel which approves language for ballot issues — “demonstrably false.”
“The Ballot Board and Secretary Husted crafted the language and title with intent to mislead, deceive and defraud the voters,” said the former Ohio Supreme Court Justice.
The title of Issue 3, as approved, says the measure “grants a monopoly for the commercial production and sale of marijuana for recreational and medicinal purposes.”
ResponsibleOhio’s issue would establish a network of growers with “exclusive rights” to send their product to either not-for-profit medical marijuana dispensaries, retail outlets or to be infused into various consumer products.
Husted says the use of the term “monopoly” is appropriate because “there is no better way to describe State Issue 3.”
Husted, who has opposed the issue, says approval of Issue 3 would grant “a small group of wealthy investors” rights “not afforded to other Ohioans.”
“The backers of State Issue 3 could have easily prevented Ohioans from calling their plan a marijuana monopoly by choosing to not write their plan as a marijuana monopoly,” he said.
Another ballot issue, aimed at trumping Issue 3, would make it illegal to amend the state constitution to create monopolies.
“Today’s lawsuit is the latest attempt in ResponsibleOhio’s deceptive campaign to distance itself from its proposed monopoly,” said Jen Detwiler, spokesperson for Ohioans Against Marijuana Monopolies.
ResponsibleOhio spokesperson Faith Oltman says the amendment’s language does not call for the creation of monopolies in production, distribution or sale of marijuana.
In its filings, ResponsibleOhio asks the court to declare the ballot language invalid and require the Ballot Board to adopt new language prescribed by the court, adopt the summary of the proposed amendment, which includes the phrase “exclusive rights,” but not the word “monopoly;” or adopt the wording originally proposed by the group.
The group is also asking the justices for an order declaring the ballot title invalid and requiring Husted to adopt a title that “properly identifies the proposed amendment,” or one composed by the court.
Oltman says the court could take up to two weeks to review evidence and briefs from both sides.