Opinion ID: 4543517
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: conclusion

Text: ¶41 In considering federal law questions, the Supremacy Clause requires this Court adhere to decisions of the United States Supreme Court. We have previously declared unconstitutional various initiative petitions and state laws that infringed upon rights the United States Supreme Court has expressly determined are guaranteed by the United States Constitution. We have also followed United States Supreme Court precedent on federal questions in diverse areas such as Indian law and application of the Commerce Clause. However, the United States Supreme Court has never addressed preemption of state marijuana laws under federal statutes such as the CSA. ¶42 Petitioner argues that this uncertainty concerning federal preemption of state marijuana regulations compels this Court to declare SQ 807 unconstitutional. The opposite is true. The burden is on a protestant to demonstrate that a proposed initiative is clearly and manifestly unconstitutional on its face. In re: Initiative Petition No. 420 , 2020 OK 9 at ¶14. ¶43 This Court acknowledges the lack of controlling federal precedent has created uncertainty concerning the interplay between state regulatory schemes permitting marijuana use and existing federal law. The people of Oklahoma have spoken once on this interplay between state regulations and existing federal law in the approval and implementation of SQ 788, Oklahoma's legalization of medical marijuana. We have confronted that uncertainty, and considered the question in depth by examining the parameters of SQ 807, the language of federal statutes such as the CSA, and principles of preemption under the Supremacy Clause. Based on the above analysis, Petitioner has failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that SQ 807 is clearly or manifestly unconstitutional. We hold therefore that State Question No. 807, Initiative Petition No. 423, is legally sufficient for submission to the people of Oklahoma. STATE QUESTION NO. 807, INITIATIVE PETITION NO. 423 IS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT FOR SUBMISSION TO THE PEOPLE OF OKLAHOMA ¶44 Gurich, C.J., Kauger, Winchester, Edmondson and Combs, JJ., concur; ¶45 Darby, V.C.J., Kane (by separate writing) and Rowe (by separate writing) , JJ., dissent; ¶46 Colbert, J., not participating.