Pubdate: Wed, 10 Sep 2014
Source: Tampa Tribune (FL)
Copyright: 2014 The Tribune Co.
Contact: http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-letters/submit/
Website: http://tbo.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/446
Author: James L Rosica, Tribune/Scripps Capital Bureau
Page: Metro, page 1

7 EX-JUSTICES OPPOSE POT PROPOSAL

They See It As A Legislative Matter, Not A Constitutional Issue

TALLAHASSEE - Seven former Florida Supreme Court justices came out 
Tuesday in opposition of a proposed state constitutional amendment 
for medical marijuana.

That's not to say all the former justices necessarily are against 
using marijuana as medicine, but rather that they think the issue 
isn't proper for a ballot initiative.

Their opposition was announced in a news release, billed as a "paid 
political advertisement," from the Vote No on 2 Campaign. The 
marijuana proposal will be Amendment 2 on the November ballot.

Parker Lee McDonald, who retired from the court in 1994, compared the 
marijuana initiative to an amendment approved by Florida voters in 
2002. It gave constitutional protection to pregnant pigs against pens 
that are too small.

"That's the kind of stuff we don't need" in the constitution, said 
McDonald, who lives in Tallahassee. "Go through the Legislature, 
that's what they're there for."

Earlier this year, lawmakers passed and Gov. Rick Scott approved a 
separate state law that legalizes a non-euphoric strain of marijuana 
known as Charlotte's Web. Its passage was backed by families with 
children who suffer from intense seizures, best relieved by medical 
pot ingested as an infused oil.

When asked his views on medical marijuana, the 90-year-old retired 
jurist said he "hasn't taken a position. My opposition is more legal 
than social," McDonald said. "I don't know whether I'd be opposed. 
It's a fair subject for public debate."

Opposition to the amendment has centered on criticism that the 
wording is too broad and will lead to widespread recreational use of pot.

Kenneth Bell, who sat on the court from 2003-08, also expressed 
concerns over changing the constitution.

"Once an amendment is in the Constitution, it is extremely difficult 
to change," he said in the news release. "A subject such as this 
should be addressed by general law," meaning legislative action.

Citing the Charlotte's Web bill, Bell added that "any expansion of 
marijuana use should reflect further development in medical knowledge 
and have a care-fully limited scope, which Amendment 2 does not do."

The head of the drive to legalize medical pot in Florida said he 
respected the justices but countered that "their legal opinions are 
irrelevant."

"What is relevant is the majority opinion of the current Supreme 
Court of Florida, that which placed Amendment 2 on the ballot this 
fall," said Ben Pollara, campaign manager of United for Care.

In January, a divided court approved the amendment for the ballot on 
a 4-3 vote.

Attorney General Pam Bondi and lawmakers opposed the measure, saying 
the language was unclear and misleading.

The court's majority found that the proposed amendment "embraces a 
single subject" and the ballot title and summary "are not clearly and 
conclusively defective."

Dissenters said that "foisting this seriously deceptive ballot 
summary on the voters does a severe disservice to the people and to 
their constitution."

"That a 4-3 decision is somehow less relevant than any other majority 
vote of the court demonstrates a lack of understanding of how the 
court works, (is) an affront to the intelligence of the voters, or 
both," Pollara said.

Bell said the ruling wasn't an endorsement.

"Though the sitting justices cannot address the merits or wisdom of 
the amendment, my colleagues and I who are no longer on the Court may 
do so, and we concluded that it is lacking in merit and is unwise," he said.

The proposed amendment needs 60 percent approval. A Public Policy 
Polling survey released Tuesday showed 61 percent favor the 
amendment, with 33 percent opposed.

Support has fallen from the last poll in June, however, when the 
spread was 66 percent in approval and 25 percent opposed.

[Sidebar]

Former Supreme Court justices opposing marijuana amendment

Parker Lee McDonald: justice, 1979-1994; chief justice, 1986-1988

Leander J. Shaw Jr.: justice, 1983-2003; chief justice, 1990-1992

Stephen H. Grimes: justice, 1987-1997; chief justice, 1994-1996

Major B. Harding: justice, 1991-2002; chief justice, 1998-2000

Charles T. Wells: justice, 1994-2009; chief justice, 2000-2002

Raoul G. Cantero: justice, 2002-2008

Kenneth B. Bell: justice, 2003-2008

Source: Vote No On 2 Campaign)
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom