Citing a 10th Circuit Court decision, Chandler v. Arvada in Colorado as precedence, the Liberty Lobby, a Bellevue-based marijuana legalization advocacy group, has filed a lawsuit in 9th Circuit Court in Boise claiming that a Hailey city ordinance governing the initiative process is unconstitutional.
The complaint filed by Liberty Lobby Chairman Ryan Davidson last week contends that the Hailey ordinance violates due process, which protects the public's right to propose new laws. The initiative, planned for the November ballot also in Sun Valley and Ketchum has become part of a 5th District Court lawsuit between the Liberty Lobby and the city of Sun Valley.
"A city does not have the right to regulate marijuana laws in the state of Idaho," Sun Valley City Attorney Rand Peebles said after the suit was filed.
Legalities of the initiative aside, Davidson argues that the initiative should be heard regardless. His complaint seeks an injunction to prevent the city clerk from enforcing a city provision which requires petitioners to be residents of the city of Hailey.
Davidson argues that Hailey City Clerk Heather Dawson, under the direction of Hailey City Attorney Ned Williamson, infringed on the public's right to circulate initiative petitions in the city by not certifying the petition.
Lost in the debate over whether the Liberty Lobby has received due process has been the point of the initiative, Davidson said in an interview Wednesday.
If passed, it would allow the city of Hailey to tax and regulate the sale of marijuana if lobbyists ever succeed in getting the state Legislature to legalize the drug. The initiative is geared toward incrementally decriminalizing the marijuana, Davidson said. In Alaska for example, it is legal to possess three ounces of marijuana for personal use, although on a federal level it is illegal. Currently, Idaho 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.
Davidson also seeks damages in his Hailey complaint because a grant he was awarded by the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project was cancelled failing to get the measure on the ballot.
"We tried so hard to meet with all the cities in the spirit of cooperation," Davidson said, voicing his discontent that the initiative did not see serious legal review by any of the cities. "They were unwilling to work with us."
Dawson said as clerk she can put an initiative on the ballot if it is certified properly.
"It's always been a question of form from my perspective. I would accept a (legal) petition. The constitutional issues and the legality of the proposed measure would have been dealt with by Ned or city council," Dawson said, explaining that she had sent Davidson a letter to that effect. "It could be tested whether the right decision was made."
Williamson said in his opinion the residency issue has already been tested in the 9th Circuit Court in the case of Idaho Coalition United for Bears v. Cenarrusa.
"They are relying on the 10th Circuit case, I'm relying on the 9th," he said.
