Joe Sneve at the Argus Leader has some of the same information I’d gotten wind of earlier:
Circuit Court Judge Christina Klinger in a decision issued Monday ruled that Constitutional Amendment A violates the state Constitution on two grounds: It violates single subject rule, meaning it encompassed more than one topic; and it conflicts with language in the Constitution that provides for its modification.
I was adamant that the people should put forward a simple functional architecture to guide the actions of the legislature. Simplicity being the key effective concept. So, now will we have to come back around the bend and do things more inclusively, or was this always the known outcome of full legalization as the powers that be paved the way for a more controllable entrance into the cannabis market?
https://plainstribune.com/cc4l
Fascinating time! I was hopeful that the tough slog kind of work in South Dakota cannabis was finished, but alas we may require another round of investment in time and money.
:\
On the bright side, if this doesn’t pass Supreme muster, we have a chance to put forward something better.