Backers of Marijuana, Casino License Amendments Ask to Intervene in Lawsuit Over Abortion Measure

Abortion, Marijuana, , , , , ,

On Tuesday the ballot question committees backing a marijuana amendment and an amendment to change Arkansas’ casino license laws asked the state supreme court for permission to intervene in a lawsuit over a proposed abortion amendment.

The joint motion to intervene filed by Arkansans for Patient Access and Local Voters In Charge claims that the court’s decision in the lawsuit could affect petition signatures the groups gathered for their respective ballot measures.

The motion says the groups would like to intervene in the lawsuit “for the limited purpose of
addressing whether a sponsor can appoint an agent to fulfill its statutory duties” under Arkansas law.

Last month, Arkansans for Limited Government submitted petition signatures to place the Arkansas Abortion Amendment on the ballot. Bringing the amendment up for a vote would require at least 90,704 valid signatures from registered voters.

However, Secretary of State John Thurston disqualified every petition filed to place the abortion measure on the ballot, because the sponsors failed to provide affidavits that state law requires concerning paid petition canvassers.

By law, ballot initiative sponsors must file a statement confirming that each paid canvassers was given a copy of the state’s initiative and referenda handbook as well as an explanation of relevant state laws before he or she solicited petition signatures. The sponsors backing the abortion measure failed to file this specific documentation when they submitted the petitions for the abortion amendment. That prompted the Secretary of State to reject all of the petitions.

Arkansans for Limited Government subsequently filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Thurston.

The Arkansas Abortion Amendment would change the constitution to prevent the State of Arkansas from restricting abortion during the first five months of pregnancy — which is more extreme than Roe v. Wade and would allow thousands of elective abortions on healthy women and unborn children every year.

The amendment does not contain any medical licensing or health and safety standards for abortion, and it does not require abortions to be performed by a physician or in a licensed medical facility.

It automatically nullifies all state laws that conflict with the amendment — jeopardizing basic abortion regulations like parental-consent and informed-consent requirements.

The measure also contains various exceptions that would permit abortion through all nine months of pregnancy in many cases.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.

READ MORE

“Medical” Marijuana Amendment Doesn’t Seem to be About Medicine

Marijuana,

An effort is underway to drastically expand “medical” marijuana in Arkansas.

Arkansans for Patient Access is promoting the Arkan­sas Med­ical Marijuana Amend­ment of 2024. The measure rewrites much of the “medical” marijuana amendment that Arkansas enacted in 2016.

Ironically, this new “medical” marijuana amendment would let people use “medical” marijuana without suffering from a specific medical condition listed in state law.

The amendment would repeal state laws and regulations that protect children from marijuana marketing.

The measure would give free marijuana cards to immigrants and people from out of state who travel to Arkansas to use marijuana.

The amendment also guarantees marijuana industry insiders a monopoly over Arkansas’ marijuana industry, and it fails to limit the amount of THC that marijuana products can contain.

We have seen time and again in other states how legalizing marijuana doesn’t weaken the black market, and it doesn’t alleviate the opioid crisis. If anything, it makes those problems worse.

Family Council Action Committee has materials available for volunteers and churches regarding the marijuana amendment:

You can learn more at FamilyCouncilActionCommittee.com.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.

READ MORE

Arkansas Supreme Court Continues Considering Arguments in Abortion Amendment Lawsuit

Abortion, , , ,

On Friday the Arkansas Attorney General’s office and the group Arkansans for Limited Government both submitted briefs with the Arkansas Supreme Court as part of the lawsuit surrounding a proposed abortion amendment.

The Arkansas Abortion Amendment would change the constitution to prevent the State of Arkansas from restricting abortion during the first five months of pregnancy — which is more extreme than Roe v. Wade and would allow thousands of elective abortions on healthy women and unborn children every year.

The amendment does not contain any medical licensing or health and safety standards for abortion, and it does not require abortions to be performed by a physician or in a licensed medical facility.

It automatically nullifies all state laws that conflict with the amendment — jeopardizing basic abortion regulations like parental-consent and informed-consent requirements.

The measure also contains various exceptions that would permit abortion through all nine months of pregnancy in many cases.

Last month, Arkansans for Limited Government submitted petition signatures to place the Arkansas Abortion Amendment on the ballot. Bringing the amendment up for a vote would require at least 90,704 valid signatures from registered voters.

However, Secretary of State John Thurston disqualified every petition filed to place the abortion measure on the ballot, because the sponsors failed to provide affidavits that state law requires concerning paid petition canvassers.

By law, ballot initiative sponsors must file a statement confirming that each paid canvassers was given a copy of the state’s initiative and referenda handbook as well as an explanation of relevant state laws before he or she solicited petition signatures. The sponsors backing the abortion measure failed to file this specific documentation when they submitted the petitions for the abortion amendment. That prompted the Secretary of State to reject all of the petitions.

Arkansans for Limited Government subsequently filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Thurston.

In its briefs filed Friday, Arkansans for Limited Government reiterated its belief that the group complied with state law and that the Secretary of State’s rejection was unlawful.

The Arkansas Attorney General’s office filed briefs explaining how the abortion group failed to comply with state law, and also provided supplemental evidence on Monday that the Secretary of State did not treat Arkansans for Limited Government differently from other ballot initiative sponsors.

A ruling in the case is expected sometime in the near future.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.

READ MORE