Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General Re Use of Marijuana for Certain Medical Conditions. Advis — Canady, J…

Summary

Justice Canady, dissenting, would deny placement of the proposed medical-marijuana amendment on the ballot because its title and summary materially mislead voters. He reasoned that the summary falsely suggests the amendment does not authorize conduct violating federal law, understates the breadth of the physician-authorized medical-use standard, omits significant physician immunity, and improperly describes qualifying conditions as debilitating diseases. Justice Polston and Justice Labarga, dissenting, likewise would deny ballot placement, emphasizing the summary’s misleading treatment of qualifying conditions, the breadth of the physician-benefit judgment, and the amendment’s immunity provisions.