Pubdate: Wed, 16 Feb 2005
Source: Idaho Mountain Express (ID)
Copyright: 2005 Express Publishing, Inc
Contact:  http://www.mtexpress.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2296
Author: Gregory Foley
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n1798/a02.html?12207
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization)

COURT SET TO RULE ON POT LAWSUITS

Bellevue-Based Liberty Lobby Seeking To Legalize Cannabis In Sun Valley

A longstanding legal dispute between the city of Sun Valley and a
Bellevue-based group trying to legalize marijuana could come to a
climax at the end of this month.

After a series of legal maneuvers in the last two months, the Liberty
Lobby of Idaho and a city attorney have asked that the 5th District
Court rule on whether the city must process an initiative petition
that seeks a special vote on the pot-legalization issue. The court has
scheduled a hearing on the matter for Monday, Feb. 28.

Although the Feb. 28 hearing is designed to bring the dispute to a
close, it is anticipated the case will end up in the Idaho Supreme
Court.

At issue are two competing lawsuits that surfaced last
September.

First, the Liberty Lobby filed suit against Sun Valley City Clerk
Janis Wright because she had declined to process the organization's
petition to have citizens vote on whether it should be legal to grow,
possess, use and distribute marijuana in the city, under certain
restrictions.

The Liberty Lobby filed an initiative petition Aug. 25, the same day
it filed similar petitions in the cities of Ketchum and Hailey.

In its suit, the Liberty Lobby alleged that the city did not follow
established procedures for processing citizen-led ballot
initiatives.

Soon after, Sun Valley City Attorney Rand Peebles filed a countersuit
against the Liberty Lobby. The city complaint contended that the
organization's proposal to legalize and regulate the sale of marijuana
is "unconstitutional" and to hold an election on the issue "would be
in excess of the city's jurisdiction."

State law declares that possession of three ounces or more of
marijuana is a felony that can bring five years in prison and a
$10,000 fine.

Eventually, the 5th District Court decided to consolidate the two
competing lawsuits.

Ryan Davidson, chairman of the Liberty Lobby, in November asked the
court to reconsider the decision to consolidate the c�ses. He
argued that the court must determine whether the city followed
mandated procedures for handling initiatives before it sought to
determine whether it is unconstitutional for a city to put the
pot-legalization question to voters.

At the same time, Davidson argued that the city's lawsuit should be
dismissed, primarily because the state Supreme Court, not the city or
the district court, has the authority to handle matters of
constitutionality.

Both motions were denied and the two parties have since asked the
court to render a "summary judgment" on the dispute. In essence, the
parties have agreed there is no disagreement over the facts of the
case and the court should issue a definitive ruling.

In theory, if the city can establish that the initiative is
unconstitutional, the Liberty Lobby's argument that the city failed to
follow initiative procedures could be rendered moot.

This week, Adam King, acting attorney for Sun Valley, said the city's
position remains that it would be "clearly and patently
unconstitutional" to advance the Liberty Lobby's proposed initiative.

"The city can't make laws that are in conflict with the general laws
of the state," King said.

Davidson holds otherwise. In a memorandum submitted to the court
earlier this month, he again argued that the city did not have the
authority to deny processing of his initiative.

"Can a city violate its own ordinances with impunity?" he asked in the
memo.

King said that no matter what decision the 5th District Court renders,
the case will almost certainly not end there.

"Each party has made it clear that if they lose they will appeal to
the Supreme Court."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Derek