Legal News

Montana Supreme Court Deliberating on the Medical Marijuana Debate
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...

On Wednesday, the Montana Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments on separate appeals filed by the state of Montana and the Montana Cannabis Industry Association and others on the use of medical marijuana. The appeals are in context of separate portions of a 2011 temporary injunction by a district court that blocked parts of a strict 2011 law from being implemented.

The Supreme Court has limited oral arguments to only two issues arising from the judgment of the district court:

First, whether the district court erred in preventing the ban on medical marijuana cardholders compensating providers for marijuana products, and for preventing the law from limiting a provider from selling pot to a maximum of three cardholders. These blocks created by the district court is being challenged by the state.

  
What
Where


The next issue to be heard is whether the district court erred in denying a preliminary injunction blocking the entire 2011 Medical Marijuana Act, instead of blocking only five sections. This has been challenged by the Montana Cannabis Industry Association.

The law at issue, SB423 is severely criticized by medical marijuana advocates. Attorneys James Goetz and Devlan Geddes for the pro-medical marijuana group wrote that “SB 423, in its entirety, is an unconstitutional broadside on the rights of Montanans … The central problem with the act … is that it is calculated to deny all reasonable access to medical marijuana.”

According to the cannabis industry lawyers, the real problem with the law is that it tries “to choke off access to medical marijuana for those in need by eliminating caregiver producers.”

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!




The state attorney general’s office, however, contended that the district court had erred by applying “a fundamental rights analysis to the production, sale and use of marijuana for medical purposes.”





 

RELEVANT JOBS

Senior Law Clerk

USA-DC-Washington

C2 ALASKA, LLC Washington, DC   The Law Clerk III shall provide legal resear...

Apply now

Junior to Mid-Level Litigation Associate - Cherry Hill, NJ (hybrid office / remote)

USA-NJ-Cherry Hill

Job Title:  Junior to Mid-Level Litigation Associate Role: Associate in Medical Malpractice/...

Apply now

Litigation Paralegal

USA-CA-Los Angeles

We are looking for a Paralegal/Legal Assistant for our downtown Los Angeles Office.  Respons...

Apply now

**EXPERIENCED LITIGATOR**

USA-CA-Industry

San Gabriel Valley Public Entity Law Firm seeks **Experienced Litigator* Must possess a Mi...

Apply now

BCG FEATURED JOB

Locations:

Keyword:



Search Now

Commercial Litigation Associate Attorney

USA-MA-Boston

Boston office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks a commercial litigation associate a...

Apply Now

Foreclosure Attorney

USA-GA-Atlanta

Atlanta office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks foreclosure attorney with experien...

Apply Now

Foreclosure Attorney

USA-TN-Memphis

Memphis office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks foreclosure attorney with experien...

Apply Now

SEARCH IN ARCHIVE

To Top