| Opinion: | In Re: State Question No. 820 Initiative Petition No. 434, 2022 OK 30 |
| Subject matter: | Initiative Petition |
| Date Decided: | March 28, 2022 |
| Trial Court: | N/A |
| Route to this Court: | Original Jurisdiction |
| Facts: | State Question 820 would legalize, regulate, and tax the personal use of marijuana by adults. It would allow the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana Authority to regulate this marijuana use. A 15% excise tax would be imposed, with the proceeds funding the Authority and the surplus going to schools, courts, localities, the General Fund, and drug treatment programs. SQ 820 would establish limits, standards, and restrictions on marijuana. Petitioner Jed Green filed two challenges. Mr. Green first argued that SQ 820 violated Article V, Section 57 of the Oklahoma Constitution because it embraces multiple subjects. Second, Mr. Green challenged the gist of SQ 820 for being misleading. |
| Standard of Review: | Heavy burden to establish constitutional insufficiency and any doubt “is resolved in favor of the initiative” petition. |
| Analysis: | Concerning the first challenge, the Court ruled there was only one subject: adult-use marijuana. The “retroactive application of the legalization of certain uses of marijuana” is related to adult-use marijuana, so there is only subject covered. Secondly, the gist of SQ 820 is not misleading. It explains the purpose, impacts, restrictions, and limits of SQ 820. It puts signers on notice that 820 allows for personal use of marijuana, that the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana Authority will regulate it, that local governments have some regulatory powers, and of the retroactive provision. Mr. Green failed to point to anything not outlined by SQ 820. The Court determined that Mr. Green failed to meet his burden in establishing that State Question No. 820 is clearly or manifestly unconstitutional and that the gist of State Question No. 820 is misleading. |
