In a significant development, the Arkansas Supreme Court has ordered the verification of disputed signatures for a proposed medical marijuana amendment, Issue 3. This decision comes after the advocacy group Arkansans for Patient Access (APA) filed a lawsuit challenging the rejection of its signatures by the Secretary of State. The court’s ruling mandates an expedited hearing to determine if the measure will appear on the November 5th ballot. This amendment seeks to expand access to medical marijuana in Arkansas, potentially impacting thousands of patients.
Background and Legal Battle
The legal battle over Issue 3 began when Secretary of State John Thurston announced that APA had failed to meet the required signature threshold of 90,704. Thurston cited incorrect filings as the reason for the rejection. In response, APA filed a lawsuit, arguing that the signatures should be counted. The Arkansas Supreme Court’s decision to verify the disputed signatures and expedite the hearing is a crucial step in resolving this contentious issue.
The court’s ruling includes several key actions: granting a preliminary injunction, ordering the verification of disputed signatures, and expediting the hearing process. This decision underscores the importance of ensuring that all valid signatures are counted, reflecting the will of the voters. The outcome of this legal battle will determine whether the proposed amendment will be on the ballot, allowing voters to decide on the future of medical marijuana in Arkansas.
The proposed amendment, Issue 3, aims to make significant changes to the existing medical marijuana laws. These changes include expanding access based on any medical need, allowing patients and caregivers to grow marijuana plants, and enabling telemedicine consultations for certification. The amendment also proposes removing application fees and extending the validity of identification cards.
Implications for Medical Marijuana Access
If approved, Issue 3 would significantly expand access to medical marijuana in Arkansas. The amendment seeks to broaden the criteria for medical marijuana use, allowing patients with any medical need to qualify. This change would make it easier for patients to obtain medical marijuana, potentially improving their quality of life. Additionally, the amendment would allow patients and designated caregivers to grow up to 14 marijuana plants, providing a more affordable and accessible option for those in need.
The proposed changes also include provisions for telemedicine consultations, enabling patients to obtain certification without in-person visits. This is particularly beneficial for patients with mobility issues or those living in remote areas. By removing barriers to access, the amendment aims to make medical marijuana more readily available to those who need it.
Another significant aspect of the amendment is the removal of application fees for identification cards. This change would reduce the financial burden on patients, making it more affordable to obtain medical marijuana. The extension of the validity period for identification cards from one year to three years is also a welcome change, providing greater convenience for patients.
Public and Political Reactions
The proposed amendment has garnered mixed reactions from the public and political figures. A recent poll conducted by Talk Business & Politics-Hendrix College showed that 54% of respondents support the measure, while 35.5% oppose it. Supporters argue that the amendment will provide much-needed relief to patients and improve access to medical marijuana. They believe that the proposed changes will enhance the existing medical marijuana program and address the needs of patients more effectively.
Opponents, however, have raised concerns about the potential for increased marijuana use and the impact on public health and safety. Protect Arkansas Kids, a state ballot question committee, has been vocal in its opposition to the measure. They argue that the language of the ballot question is misleading and that the proposed changes could lead to unintended consequences. The group’s request to intervene in the case was granted by the Supreme Court, allowing them to present their arguments against the measure.
The expedited hearing ordered by the Supreme Court will provide an opportunity for both supporters and opponents to present their cases. The outcome of this hearing will determine whether the measure will appear on the November ballot, giving voters the final say on the future of medical marijuana in Arkansas.

Maria Garcia is an award-winning author who excels in creating engaging cannabis-centric articles that captivate audiences. Her versatile writing style allows her to cover a wide range of topics within the cannabis space, from advocacy and social justice to product reviews and lifestyle features. Maria’s dedication to promoting education and awareness about cannabis shines through in her thoughtfully curated content that resonates with both seasoned enthusiasts and newcomers alike.