Tuesday, October 27, 2020

The Queen Strikes. Checkmate for 65?

Update (11:20 AM): Supreme Court ordered SOS to respond by 5:00 PM tomorrow. 

It is always the simple things that are overlooked yet often come into play.  Such may be the case in the medical marijuana fight.  Mayor Hawkins-Butler and the City of Madison filed an emergency petition against Secretary of State Michael Watson yesterday in the Mississippi Supreme Court that seeks to declare the initiative invalid.  The 34-page petition revolves around one central point: the Secretary of State improperly certified the petition for Initiative 65 in 2019 by ignoring the Mississippi Constitution's requirement that each congressional district can only contribute 20% of the required signatures for an initiative.  It is a case of simple math.  Does 1/4 = 1/5?

 Ashley Ann Duval filed the proposed initiative*  along with 105,686 certified signatures in November 2019.  The Secretary of State certified the initiative and placed it on the ballot.   The Legislature passed an alternate initiative, 65A, and placed it on the ballot as well. Earlier post on both initiatives. The medical weed war has raged white-hot in the last few weeks as advocates such as State Representative Joel Bomgar take on the Mississippi political establishment and law enforcement.  

The Mississippi Constitution has specific procedures for intiatives.  Article XV, Section 273 (3) of the Mississippi Constitution states: 

 (3)  The people reserve unto themselves the power to propose and enact constitutional amendments by initiative. An initiative to amend the Constitution may be  proposed by a petition signed over a twelve-month period by qualified electors equal in number to  at least twelve percent (12%) of the votes for all candidates for Governor in the last gubernatorial election. The signatures of the qualified electors from any congressional district  shall not exceed one-fifth (1/5) of the total number of signatures required to qualify an  initiative petition for placement upon the ballot. If an initiative petition contains signatures from a single congressional district which exceed  one-fifth (1/5) of the total number of required signatures, the excess number of signatures from  that congressional district shall not be considered by the Secretary of State i   determining  whether the petition qualifies for placement on the ballot.

The initiative sections were added to the Constitution in 1992 when Mississippi had five congressional districts.  However, Mississippi lost a congressional district after the 2000 census.  Section 273 was not amended to reflect the change in congressional representation.

The thrust of the Plaintiff's argument is 100 / 4 = 25 and 25% > 20%.   The petition states "it is a mathematical certainty that the number of signatures submitted in support of Initiative Measure 65 from at least one of the four congressional districts exceeds 1/5 of the total number required.  

The numerical dilemma is not unknown to the Legislature.  No less than seven resolutions have been introduced since 2003 to change Section 273's requirement to reflect the change in congressional districts.  However, each resolution failed, including one filed this year by Representative Lee Yancy (R-Gold Coast).  Text of bill. 

The petition accuses the Secretary of State of amending Section 273 (3) without the approval of the voters: 

the Secretary  of  State  nonetheless  has  followed  an  "amended"  Section  273(3)  and  has inserted "the last five-district congressional district plan which was is effect prior to the  adoption  of  the   current  four-district  plan"  into  the  text  of  the   Constitution.1 Ignoring the plain language of Section 273(3) and  violating Miss. Code Ann.§ 23-17- 23(b), the  Secretary of State determined the petitions in support of Initiative Measure No. 65 were sufficient.
The Secretary of State's website states in the I65 Section: 

The official ballot title and ballot summary for an initiative measure are prepared by the Mississippi Attorney General’s Office. Initiative measures are valid for one year beginning from the date the ballot title and ballot summary are finally established. During this one-year period, a petition may be circulated to place the measure on the next statewide general election ballot to allow the voters of Mississippi to determine whether the measure should become a part of the Mississippi Constitution. According to Mississippi law, for an initiative measure to be placed on the ballot, a minimum of 86,183 certified signatures must be gathered, with at least 17,237 certified signatures from each of the five congressional districts as they existed in the year 2000. This required number of signatures represents twelve percent (12%) of the total number of votes cast for Governor in the last gubernatorial general election. Signatures must be certified by county circuit clerks as belonging to registered voters in Mississippi. A completed petition should be filed with Secretary of State, together with a filing fee of $500.00. For more information on the initiative process in Mississippi, consult the Mississippi Constitution of 1890, Section 273, and Mississippi Code Annotated §§ 23-17-1 through 23-17-61 (1972).

The petition further argues that Section 23-17-23(b) of the Mississippi Code bars the Secretary of State from filing any petition lacking sufficient signatures.  Mississippi Code text. 

The Attorney General took it upon himself to change the language of Section 273 without the approval of the Legislature or the voters.  The Court should follow the text of the language in the Mississippi Constitution instead of the language created by the Secretary of State. 

Mayor Hawkins-Butler and Madison argued the Supreme Court was the proper place for the petition to be heard as it has "original and exclusive jurisdiction" to determine whether such petitions are valid.  The petition asks the Court to "prevent the official declaration of the vote" on I65.  

 The Queen claims she has the right to challenge the petition as a qualified elector under Power v. Robertson.  

Madison claims it has standing to sue as it has an interest in protecting its zoning rights.  The lawsuit claims I65 bans zoning medical marijuana treatment centers than "comparably sized businesses."  Such treatment centers can grow and produce marijuana.  Madison allows some horticultural uses in areas zoned residential. I65 "would likely allow" a licensed treatment center to "grow marijuana within a residential area."  Madison has a legitimate interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens as well as property values. 

The petition asks the Court to prohibit the Secretary of State from officially declaring the vote for any initiatives placed on the November 3 ballot.  

Attorneys Katie Pickett, Adam Stone, and Andrew Harris of Jones Walker represent the plaintiffs.

Kingfish note: The City of Madison issued a press release this morning: 

The City of Madison and Mayor Mary Hawkins Butler have filed an Emergency Petition before the Mississippi Supreme Court seeking a declaration that Initiative 65 was unconstitutionally brought to the voters.

"The constitutional process for  amending our constitution has not been followed and the public has been misled about the content of the initiative.  Initiative 65 gives marijuana providers greater rights than any other lawful business.  Such a significant change must be lawfully adopted." Mayor  Mary Hawkins Butler said.

The City ' s Emergency Petition is not about the wisdom of legalizing medical marijuana. The City  is not opposed to a well-regulated pure medical marijuana program for the truly suffering, but both  the City and Mayor Hawkins Butler have grave concerns about how this constitutional amendment was  brought to the voters.

The Attorney General will have to defend the Secretary of State.  That in and of itself will be real interesting given how law enforcement adamantly opposes 65.  

 

* Initiative Process

1.  Proposed initiative is filed with the Secretary of State.

2. The Attorney General reviews it and returns to SOS. 

3. The initiative is refiled with a certificate of review. 

4.  The proposed initiative is published and filed. 

5. Signatures are gathered.  Circuit Clerks certify signatures. 

6. The petition and signatures are filed with the Secretary of State. 

7. SOS determines sufficiency of petition.  He filed petition with Clerk of House and Secretary of Senate.  

8.  Initiative is placed on ballot if requirements are met. 


80 comments:

Anonymous said...

So this argument would mean that no petition can ever get on the ballot, right? At least until they amend the constitution or Mississippi gets a fifth congressional seat (ha).

Anonymous said...

Check it OUT! Mayor...QUEEN Mary doing the work of the legislature, governor, and SOS... DAYUUUUUMMMMM!! Talk about an October surprise!

Anonymous said...

Good for her. Madison is fortunate to have a leader staying involved and informed at this level and then being willing to put herself out there.

Anonymous said...

So, all of those previous initiatives are dead and invalid? Like the one that says hunting is a right?

Anonymous said...

Sooo, McDaniel can quit circulating that stupid initiative about the flag?

Kingfish said...

That question crossed my mind.

If she is right and they didn't follow the constitution, oh well.

Anonymous said...

Kingfish stop calling the mayor Queen. Do you call Lubumba King or Dictator or Czar.

Anonymous said...

The Queen will win re-election in another romp next year.

Anonymous said...

@9:34, I'd imagine she probably prefers to be called Queen

Court Jester Bomgar said...

Hail to the Queen!

Anonymous said...

This is an asinine filing. The plaintiff's logic would invalidate all initiatives passed since MS lost its fifth congressional district. A petition must have over 20% of total signatures coming from at least one of the current four districts, and one doesn't need a PhD in Mathematics to understand that.

Another question: if, somehow, the petition is invalidated, does the legislatively mandated 65A remain? That is the real question. It seems to me - in that scenario - 65 would be the de facto law of the state.

I feel sorry for Michael Watson. Delbert was SoS when this alleged act occurred. I wonder who the FBI agents will choose to investigate (and whether Queen Mary will run for SoS in 2023). City of Madison taxpayers: keep a tally on how much this litigation costs the brick city.

Kingfish said...

Actually I do. I call him Little Lord Lumumba from time to time. Want to lie again?

Anonymous said...

It's ok let her have her temper tantrum. She might even win. It's still going to happen, another amendment will be placed on the ballot for the next statewide election.
Not to mention you can expect it to be legalized on the federal level next year.

Anonymous said...

SHAME ON THE ELECTED OFFICIALS!! The people of Mississippi that need medical marijuana- Cancer patients, Parkinson's and other diseases that need the relief that marijuana has been shown to provide, are left to suffer.

Anonymous said...

The fact that she filed this petition this late in the process tells me that 65 has a TON of support and will pass. That's what the polls say. Desperation move by the anti-65'ers

Anonymous said...

Good God Gertie (Kingfish)- Could you not boil that opening post down to about three or four paragraphs instead of making it what could be a four page document for presentation before the court?

And you could have told us which district was improperly represented with what numbers and percentage.

And we all know Mary did not come up with this challenge. She only gets credit for it, like so much of what goes on in Madison.

Anonymous said...

Not unexpected. This is the challenge that faces progress in Mississippi.

Anonymous said...

If this suit was a sure thing, they would have filed it months ago. Its a desperation move and a hail Mary because 65 is polling at about 75%

Bill Dees said...

I don't see any allegation that eliminating the signatures exceeding 20% of the required total (20% = about 21000) from any congressional district would take the total signatures (just over 105,000) below the threshold of about 83,000 required to satisfy the constitutional requirement. I think the emergency petition fails to state a claim on its face.

Anonymous said...

Now what do I do with a year's supply of Zig Zags for my glaucoma?

Anonymous said...

9:09 - I don't know what world you live in, but there has not been an initiative filed and voted on about hunting and it being a right.

In fact, there has not been an initiative proposed, much less filed, about hunting.

But - if there had been, and if it had passed, and it had been after 2000, then the answer would probably be yes. But since this evidently exists only in your wet dreams, then its a moot issue.

Come back and try again with something more relevant

Anonymous said...

Bill Dees, maybe you need to read the constitutional I&R language again. It says all signatures above the 20% from a congressional district cannot be counted. Thus, by their argument, it would be impossible to get enough signatures -- 80% is not equal to 100%.

Its an interesting argument in that the current language of the constitution cannot be met and that the legislature should have fixed the language at some point after 2000. It was, after all, the legislature that wrote the language that created I&R, and when they did it they tried to make it hard for anything to ever make it. Evidently, they did a better job than even they imagined at the time.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone heard there is a "group" ,per se, that helped our lawmakers write this bill as confusing as it that also helped Arkansas write there's to try and derail it's passing? I've heard that several times.

Anonymous said...

Oh dear! And the Queen didn't shout " Off with their Heads" before it was on the ballot? Has she gotten slow in her old age? LOL

Anonymous said...

The potheads had Laremy Tunsil's gas mask on and couldn't see clearly the numbers on Lame Train's calculator for all the smoke.

"Did you say Math, or Meth? Is 25K a lot of pennies, or what?"

Anonymous said...

This proves its not about who has the most money, its not even about who has the best lawyer, its about who has a lawyer that is willing to do a little reading without assuming they know the law.

Calm Down said...

good news.

Anonymous said...

If they weren't confident 65 will pass, they would have saved this BS for an ace up the sleeve in case it did. This is desperate, and I bet several more prominent political folks passed on being the face of this lawsuit before Mayor Mary gleefully agreed to get ready for her closeup.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like the fix is in. Once again, the slimy right will thwart the will of the people. Mary is making a lot of enemies with this one.

Anonymous said...

The clear intent in the constitution is to allow for ballot initiatives to be petitioned for by the voters, so to interpret this rule literally means that no ballot initiative could be approved ever, or at least until we get another district. No way this passes. It is not within the intent or spirit of exactly what is written into the state constitution.

P.S....the SOS could/should have brought this up a long time ago in order for the petitioners to go find more signatures. If this somebody does get over turned, expect the state to incur millions in legal fees.

Queen Virtue Signaller said...

Weaponized pearl clutching, you're welcome.

Anonymous said...

If you know you can't win, attach the process. This "Hail Mary" will come up short. A few lawyers will get a quick check for a perfunctory effort though. They should refocus ban liquor stores, not weed stores! Weed smokers don't become violent like drinkers.

Bill Dees said...

@11:30, yes I understand that. But to so interpret the constitution would result in an absurdity, a result courts avoid if at all possible. I certainly could see an opinion (I think the issue isn't ripe for adjudication until the initiative passes)that upholds the SOS's reasoning, solely to avoid an absurd result - that no initiative could ever be placed on the ballot.

Anonymous said...

Bill Dees, that would be what a liberal court would do. Interpret the language like they 'think it should mean' and not what it says. Also, that seems to be not looking at the precedent.

The other approach is for the court to recognize that the legislature was aware of this failing of the statute and refused to address it - and therefore it (like many other outdated statutes) fail on their face.

As to being ripe, any adjudication would come about after November 3rd in all likelihood, so that issue seems to me to be moot.

And it is not that no initiative could ever be put on the ballot - the court could easily say basically to the legislature that they need to fix their mistake; that is, if the legislature wants to have future initiative led changes to the constitution.

Whether we should have those initiatives is not up to the court, but rather to the legislature --- and a good court would acknowledge this, not try to 'fix' it as they think it 'should' be.

The difference in an activist court and a literal court.

Anonymous said...

I can't wait to open up my Pot shop in the middle of Madison next door to the CVS. :)

Anonymous said...

65 is a bad bill. Mississippi taxes alcohol and cigarettes profusely, marijuana a should be taxed as a Vice too. Proponents know that it will legalize possession. It’s why they favor it over 65A.

Screw the potheads. I’ll vote 65A

Anonymous said...

That's what we need, another way for the scatterbrained to legally slow their cognitive process. That's what we really.

Anonymous said...

Republicans in Mississippi just seem to hate personal freedom. What a buck of arses.

Anonymous said...

You have to remember the constitution of 1890 prohibits women from owning land also.

Anonymous said...



"...Mary is making a lot of enemies with this one."
October 27, 2020 at 1:51 PM

Not in OUR town. In Madison, Mary IS reflecting the will of The People. And if you don't like Madison, stay-the-pluck-OUT. We don't need you. We don't want you. And we probably moved here, TO GET AWAY FROM people like you.

Anonymous said...

Queen Mary about to body slam Watson!!! Coast boy is about to learn what it is all about. Josh Gregory wont save his ass...

Anonymous said...

4:19 I’m gonna open up a shop right in front of your house.

Unknown said...

The flag vote is not the result of an initiative...

Macy Hanson said...

These are three truly excellent attorneys, unfortunately (I support Initiative 65). Very, very excellent. Andrew Harris was valedictorian of my class at Ole Miss Law School and Adam Stone and KAYTIE (correct spelling) Pickett are damn good.

I hope that the City of Madison is not picking up the tab of the Jones Walker invoices, however.

I do wonder why this petition was filed so close to the election.

I agree with a comment that sometimes the lawyers who read the law beat far superior lawyers. I am not sure how this issue was not raised until now, though. Kudos to Adam, Kaytie, and Andrew for reading the law. But I hoope that they lose.

Anonymous said...

The same thing that's happened in North Carolina and is happening in Texas and Georgia is going to happen to Madison.

Anonymous said...

33 states have approved medical marijuana. When has Mississippi EVER been in the top 35 to adopt something sensible or new? I know. Never. Never have, never will. Mayor Mary would have been leading the anti crowd in 1860, 1910, and 1960 and she and her kind would gladly return to any of those days. Same for Congressperson Granny Clampett.

Desperate.

Anonymous said...

@4:19 PM - spot on! Mayor Mary is doing her job and doing it well. In a previous life I was a supervisor in the nation's largest marijuana eradication program. You don't want cultivation anywhere near residences and within any city limits. The smell is obnoxious and spreads quite a distance.

Cultivation also brings thefts, armed robberies, and in general crime, regardless of what the money people/politicians are telling the sheeple.

It also creates a black market with the accompanying crime.

I am not against medical marijuana, but it has to be done the right way.

Anonymous said...

2:26. They may not be violent, but they forget how to think and eventually just quit thinking because they start to believe thinking is just too damn difficult. Seems like you had one too many before you commented.

Anonymous said...

I personally know of 2 people in Madison who have said today they will not vote for Mary again after this. One is a cancer patient and the other severe epilepsy - both are successful professionals who are longtime residents and struggling with their health. She is on the wrong side of this big time and it’s going to make it tough for her politically anywhere in the state after this stunt.

Anonymous said...

Mayor Mary is turning into an inspiration for a comic book villain. Rename her Mayor Karen Butler and dress her up like Cruella de Vil. She could sue the sick and poor for fun all at the pleasure of an evil cabal of real estate developers.

Anonymous said...

For the Pro 65ers, are you for legalization of marijuana for any reason or are you only for true medical use? I ask this as I see a place, albeit pretty limited, for medical marijuana but a place for certain patients. However, this bill allows much more than that. If it was truly a "medical marijuana bill", it would require a prescription by a physician and be filled in a pharmacy. This bill does not do that. For that reason, I am a "no" vote on 65. Also, you guys do realize this is a change to the state constitution, not merely just an initiative that can easily be changed if you find out you were hoodwinked. This is not something that can just be undone the next election. Think long and hard about this.

Now we can have a debate whether recreational use of weed should be allowed but let's make it an honest debate rather than hiding or cloaking your true intent by using "medical marijuana" and taking advantage of some folks who have suffered tragedy in their lives. It is unfair to use them when they think they are supporting a pure medical bill.

Anonymous said...

@4:19 - speak for yourself. I would venture to say I’ve lived in Madison much longer than you. All my life in fact. From the days when Madison was a wide spot in the road to Canton. And I completely support 65. This will hurt Mary more than she realizes.

Anonymous said...

There's some backwards assed people spreading mess on the internet about how we are going to have pot shops on every corner and everybody is going to be high all the time.

65 is for PRESCRIPTION ONLY medical use of marijuana.

These are the same bunch of hypocrites that fought craft beer for over a decade and wanted to mandate that you drink Budweiser. Why? Because the Bud distributors were huge donors.

Anonymous said...

So Lynn has to defend Michael against Mary; priceless! And Bomgar and his minions that are behind 65 may see their millions invested so far go up in smoke.

Anonymous said...

She will fit right in to whatever that place is called where you go after death if you are Ros Barnett or Theodore Bilbo.

Anonymous said...

5:29, this one ain't, but McDaniel is circulating a petition for another vote in the future to include the confederate symbolism.

Anonymous said...

Good point 6:25. We were the last state to kill prohibition. Why would we shoot to be in the top 40 on something to help terminally ill people?

And of course, the elite always had access to alcohol during prohibition.

Anonymous said...

7:16 - I live in Madison, enjoy a little reefer myself, and will gladly vote to keep Mary as Mayor. I will also vote for 65A. A good idea written as a bad (actually, f*cking terrible) law is not something to support. None of the tax revenue for schools, infrastructure and communities. No local control. No way for the legislature to amend it (well, that one might be ok). And what’s the fun in smoking something legal, anyway?

Anonymous said...

Its all about who gets their palm greased. Contribute enough and you can get state money for a beef plant. Contribute enough money and you can squash scientifically proven pain relief that is less addictive than the prescription crap that is crushing America.



Anonymous said...

You Madison ignoramuses have no idea what your sweet, innocent kids are doing at this VERY SECOND. How many MC kids have gone to the ER in the last year for vaping who knows what kind of poisonous Mexican heroin-laced junk? But a cancer patient can't get a PRESCRIPTION for effective relief? Oh, hell no. Can't have that. Time to protest.

Anonymous said...

@7:16 This is laughable..2 people...Mayor Mary is shaking in her boots. Go look at the returns from the past several elections. Mayor Mary will be mayor of Madison as long as she chooses to do it. You may not like her or her position but the one thing about her is she always stands up for what she thinks is right no matter the pressure it may bring. She didn't build Madison by backing down from a tough issue. Mayor Mary gets things done which is why she ruffles feathers of those who are on the opposing side of an issue with her.

Anonymous said...

First, the legislative intent is clear from the face of the Constitution: that for such an initiative, 12% of the number of voters who voted in the last gubernatorial election, relatively evenly spread across and about the state, are required to sign. It is also obvious that the "1/5" is derived from having 5 districts (5 / 100 percent). Now, if arguendo, there had been a district added rather than subtracted, 1/6 per district would have been the "proper" number but the "1/5" wording would not "shock the conscience" of either a court or a reasonable person insofar as it being within the clear intent as well as mathematically-possible situation. Therefore, I would suggest that attempting to torture the wording into something it was not intended to convey simply because it became 4 rather than 6 districts, and therefore now subject to semantic torture and mathematical happenstance rather than truly objective legal wanting, is unreasonable.

The MS Constitution doesn't say that if there are more than 1/5 of the signatures from one or more districts, the initiative cannot be certified, it says "The signatures of the qualified electors from any congressional district shall not exceed one-fifth (1/5) of the total number of signatures required to qualify an initiative petition for placement upon the ballot. If an initiative petition contains signatures ***from a single congressional district*** which exceed one-fifth (1/5) of the total number of required signatures, the excess number of signatures from ***that congressional district*** shall not be considered by the Secretary of State in determining whether the petition qualifies for placement on the ballot." It DOES NOT SAY "...if the signatures from any district exceeds 1/5, all of the signatures from ALL OF THOSE districts shall not be considered..."

The intent is clear but number of districts is not. The clear intent is that whether 4, 5, or 10 districts, the real requirement is that the supporting signatures from each are at least proportional in number per district. However, if one wants to argue semantics as well as parse, given the "a single district" wording, if ***MORE THAN ONE*** district, i.e., not ***A SINGLE district***, exceeded 1/5 of the number required per district, that in and of itself would not trigger the caveat. But that conflicts with the preceding sentence and it isn't a reasonable presumption that legislative bodies have the intent to do such things. So the proper wording and that reflecting the reasonable intent would have been "a percentage equal to 100% divided by the number of districts apportioned at the time the initiative is certified" or some such rather than a fixed percentage.

That said, if the number of signatures per district isn't roughly equivalent, then the petition's argument is reasonable. However, if the numbers are pretty close to 25% per district, the argument is "tortured." The real problem appears to be that legal pot is *apparently* supported a significant majority of voters so trying to defeat that *apparent* large majority supporting this, especially with, er, "technicalities," isn't smart politics on a state-wide basis. They ought to be prepared to win small and lose big.

EAB said...

I'm sure Mayor Mary will be filing a retroactive lawsuit against the Voter ID measure any minute now too, right?

I don't agree with the "mathematical certainty" bit though, because the former 5th district overlapped the others, primarily the 4th. You need 17K signatures from each of the 5 districts, or 21.5K signatures from each of the 4. A signature doesn't get completely thrown away if you've got enough signatures in that district, it just doesn't get run up into the overall signature count or offset shortfalls in other districts.

So if I formerly lived in 5 and was redistricted into 4, my signature counts either toward that 17K if we're playing by the old rules, or toward the 21.5K for the new district. If I and 17K of my neighbors in former-5 sign, and if 17K voters in former-4 also sign, it's covered both ways. You've got 34K voters from new-4, 17k voters from old-4, and 17k voters from old-5; as long as you get 21.5K from 1, 2, and 3 for a total of 98.5K, you are good to go.

The folks who submit the initiatives do know this, because it came up in reference to Initiative 26 in 2011 (and I think for voter ID that year as well?). Unless Bomgar and crew *completely* failed to do their homework, I'd assume they have canvassed appropriately and kept tallies of the folks in old-5 to make sure they're covered under both scenarios.

Anonymous said...

Anyone who thinks this will cost MHB even a lick politically in Madison simply doesn't know what the hell they are talking about.

Anonymous said...

7:16

Because I’m sure that lotto money is going to infrastructure!

Anonymous said...

9:12PM wrote, "Anyone who thinks this will cost MHB even a lick politically in Madison simply doesn't know what the hell they are talking about."

On its face, will it cost her Madison? Maybe, maybe not. But imagine a strong negative viral reaction. It could easily cost her. It's a strange new world and even in the "old" world, things could and often did change dramatically in a heartbeat. Nowadays, it doesn't take much to go from royalty to outcast. Or from outcast to royalty. Think even 5 years ago - no to the flag and yes to pot wouldn't have even been up for marginally-serious consideration. And now, with a truly open vote, there is good chance the flag would now look like a Cheech and Chong album cover.

Anonymous said...

Forget marijuana
Forget politics
Forget taking sides

This is an easy constitutional question. The people made the constitution. Not the legislature. So forget the legislature too.

If the logic in the petition is followed then the people have made a constitution that they themselves cannot now possibly change. That in and of itself would be unconstitutional and antithetical to our form of government which derives all of its power from the people. If the people wanted to change it to what they intended to begin with based on proportion of total districts in the state, how prey tell would they do that? It’s not legally possible according to the Petition. The only thing the court can do is construe constitutional provision based on “original intent” as Scalia would have said. If the petitioners are right, it would be akin to filing a petition against God if God decided to change his mind about anything he ever said. The people cannot make a constitutional provision that says they are precluded from changing their own constitution later. For that reason, the petition must fail regardless of ones confirmation bias for either side of the outcome of the measure itself.

Anonymous said...

"Mary is making a lot of enemies with this one."

She's worked mighty hard over the years to perfect that talent.

Those who work at her will and pleasure are posting, above, in interesting numbers.

Anonymous said...

Yep voter ID is illegal too, if she succeeds with this lawsuit. I am a plaintiff every election held that required an ID must be thrown out.

Anonymous said...

On its face, will it cost her Madison? Maybe, maybe not.

Nope. In Madison it won't cost her a lick. You don't know nothing.

Anonymous said...

65 will pass. This challenge will be tossed. Legislators and elected officials waking up late realizing people want this.

That being said the Queen is doing what is best for her city. If I were opening a dispensary I would do it at Renaissance or the Madison exit. Mary doesn’t want pot shops in her city. But they’re coming and the best, cleanest most law abiding dispensary will make a fortune in Madison

Anonymous said...

Good point on the voter id law getting wiped out by this also. I guess that means none of our recent elections were constitutional and we don’t have any elected officials. I guess Mayor Mary is just plain old Mary the bitch now. Who wants to go lock her out of city hall?

I got mind control over Deboo.... said...

@ October 27, 2020 at 6:26 PM

@4:19 PM - spot on! Mayor Mary is doing her job and doing it well. In a previous life I was a supervisor in the nation's largest marijuana eradication program. You don't want cultivation anywhere near residences and within any city limits. The smell is obnoxious and spreads quite a distance.

Cultivation also brings thefts, armed robberies, and in general crime, regardless of what the money people/politicians are telling the sheeple.

It also creates a black market with the accompanying crime.

I am not against medical marijuana, but it has to be done the right way.


You contradicted yourself so many times in that little soliloquy.

Listening to Too much Gallo and rewatching "Reefer Madness" too many times.

It's 2020 not 1951

Anonymous said...

We don't have a representative government in Mississippi? What intellectual midget, or is it an extremist, that says the constitution can't be amended? We, the people, are forbidden to lobby our representatives to meet our wishes? My biggest question is why does this issue require an amendment to the constitution? Wouldn't simple legislation do?

Anonymous said...

Maybe people should read this.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-true-cost-of-marijuana-a-colorado-town-that-went-all-in_3546091.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2020-10-27-4

Anonymous said...

We don't have a representative government in Mississippi? What intellectual midget, or is it an extremist, that says the constitution can't be amended? We, the people, are forbidden to lobby our representatives to meet our wishes? My biggest question is why does this issue require an amendment to the constitution? Wouldn't simple legislation do?

Mississippi politicians on the federal, state, and local levels have paternalistic attitudes in regards to what's best for the citizens of this state.

From the lottery to marijuana, to alcohol (sales and distribution), to casinos, anything the citizens push for the state to partake in, they'll tell us we don't know any better. Too many of our elected officials lack conventional wisdom and it is a hindrance to helping this state get out of the dark ages.

Anonymous said...

Stop with the comparisons to Colorado. They have recreational use. This vote is just for medical use with a doctor's prescription.

Anonymous said...

@9:17, do you realize the source you just posted is blatant fiction? It’s a propaganda arm of q anon. Posting crap like that doesn’t help move a conversation forward.

Anonymous said...

Who cares? Weed is SO easy to get. And I know because I buy it every week from a person that I have known for years. We both are educated professionals with careers, families and morals. The war on drugs is a joke. A black hole for tax dollars.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, 9:17AM! I was wondering if Epoch Times was any good. It's not bad, although the article was more optimistic than I expected. Still, it confirmed most of my fears about marijuana and legalization.



Recent Comments

Search Jackson Jambalaya

Subscribe to JJ's Youtube channel

Archives

Trollfest '09

Trollfest '07 was such a success that Jackson Jambalaya will once again host Trollfest '09. Catch this great event which will leave NE Jackson & Fondren in flames. Othor Cain and his band, The Black Power Structure headline the night while Sonjay Poontang returns for an encore performance. Former Frank Melton bodyguard Marcus Wright makes his premier appearance at Trollfest singing "I'm a Sweet Transvestite" from "The Rocky Horror Picture Show." Kamikaze will sing his new hit, “How I sold out to da Man.” Robbie Bell again performs: “Mamas, don't let your babies grow up to be Bells” and “Any friend of Ed Peters is a friend of mine”. After the show, Ms. Bell will autograph copies of her mug shot photos. In a salute to “Dancing with the Stars”, Ms. Bell and Hinds County District Attorney Robert Smith will dance the Wango Tango.

Wrestling returns, except this time it will be a Battle Royal with Othor Cain, Ben Allen, Kim Wade, Haley Fisackerly, Alan Lange, and “Big Cat” Donna Ladd all in the ring at the same time. The Battle Royal will be in a steel cage, no time limit, no referee, and the losers must leave town. Marshand Crisler will be the honorary referee (as it gives him a title without actually having to do anything).


Meet KIM Waaaaaade at the Entergy Tent. For five pesos, Kim will sell you a chance to win a deed to a crack house on Ridgeway Street stuffed in the Howard Industries pinata. Don't worry if the pinata is beaten to shreds, as Mr. Wade has Jose, Emmanuel, and Carlos, all illegal immigrants, available as replacements for the it. Upon leaving the Entergy tent, fig leaves will be available in case Entergy literally takes everything you have as part of its Trollfest ticket price adjustment charge.

Donna Ladd of The Jackson Free Press will give several classes on learning how to write. Smearing, writing without factchecking, and reporting only one side of a story will be covered. A donation to pay their taxes will be accepted and she will be signing copies of their former federal tax liens. Ms. Ladd will give a dramatic reading of her two award-winning essays (They received The Jackson Free Press "Best Of" awards.) "Why everything is always about me" and "Why I cover murders better than anyone else in Jackson".

In the spirit of helping those who are less fortunate, Trollfest '09 adopts a cause for which a portion of the proceeds and donations will be donated: Keeping Frank Melton in his home. The “Keep Frank Melton From Being Homeless” booth will sell chances for five dollars to pin the tail on the jackass. John Reeves has graciously volunteered to be the jackass for this honorable excursion into saving Frank's ass. What's an ass between two friends after all? If Mr. Reeves is unable to um, perform, Speaker Billy McCoy has also volunteered as when the word “jackass” was mentioned he immediately ran as fast as he could to sign up.


In order to help clean up the legal profession, Adam Kilgore of the Mississippi Bar will be giving away free, round-trip plane tickets to the North Pole where they keep their bar complaint forms (which are NOT available online). If you don't want to go to the North Pole, you can enjoy Brant Brantley's (of the Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance) free guided tours of the quicksand field over by High Street where all complaints against judges disappear. If for some reason you are unable to control yourself, never fear; Judge Houston Patton will operate his jail where no lawyers are needed or allowed as you just sit there for minutes... hours.... months...years until he decides he is tired of you sitting in his jail. Do not think Judge Patton is a bad judge however as he plans to serve free Mad Dog 20/20 to all inmates.

Trollfest '09 is a pet-friendly event as well. Feel free to bring your dog with you and do not worry if your pet gets hungry, as employees of the Jackson Zoo will be on hand to provide some of their animals as food when it gets to be feeding time for your little loved one.

Relax at the Fox News Tent. Since there are only three blonde reporters in Jackson (being blonde is a requirement for working at Fox News), Megan and Kathryn from WAPT and Wendy from WLBT will be on loan to Fox. To gain admittance to the VIP section, bring either your Republican Party ID card or a Rebel Flag. Bringing both and a torn-up Obama yard sign will entitle you to free drinks served by Megan, Wendy, and Kathryn. Get your tickets now. Since this is an event for trolls, no ID is required. Just bring the hate. Bring the family, Trollfest '09 is for EVERYONE!!!

This is definitely a Beaver production.


Note: Security provided by INS.

Trollfest '07

Jackson Jambalaya is the home of Trollfest '07. Catch this great event which promises to leave NE Jackson & Fondren in flames. Sonjay Poontang and his band headline the night with a special steel cage, no time limit "loser must leave town" bout between Alan Lange and "Big Cat"Donna Ladd following afterwards. Kamikaze will perform his new song F*** Bush, he's still a _____. Did I mention there was no referee? Dr. Heddy Matthias and Lori Gregory will face off in the undercard dueling with dangling participles and other um, devices. Robbie Bell will perform Her two latest songs: My Best Friends are in the Media and Mama's, Don't Let Your Babies Grow up to be George Bell. Sid Salter of The Clarion-Ledger will host "Pin the Tail on the Trial Lawyer", sponsored by State Farm.

There will be a hugging booth where in exchange for your young son, Frank Melton will give you a loooong hug. Trollfest will have a dunking booth where Muhammed the terrorist will curse you to Allah as you try to hit a target that will drop him into a vat of pig grease. However, in the true spirit of Separate But Equal, Don Imus and someone from NE Jackson will also sit in the dunking booth for an equal amount of time. Tom Head will give a reading for two hours on why he can't figure out who the hell he is. Cliff Cargill will give lessons with his .80 caliber desert eagle, using Frank Melton photos as targets. Tackleberry will be on hand for an autograph session. KIM Waaaaaade will be passing out free titles and deeds to crackhouses formerly owned by The Wood Street Players.

If you get tired come relax at the Fox News Tent. To gain admittance to the VIP section, bring either your Republican Party ID card or a Rebel Flag. Bringing both will entitle you to free drinks.Get your tickets now. Since this is an event for trolls, no ID is required, just bring the hate. Bring the family, Trollfest '07 is for EVERYONE!!!

This is definitely a Beaver production.

Note: Security provided by INS
.