MARIJUANA BALLOT CHANGES ORDERED

PIERRE -- A circuit judge told South Dakota officials Friday to make
substantial changes in the language that will appear on the November
ballot to explain a proposal that would legalize the use of marijuana
for medical purposes.

Voters in November will decide whether to legalize marijuana for
people who have certain medical conditions such as cancer, AIDS or
chronic pain. The ballot explanation by Attorney General Larry Long
will guide voters.

In a ruling issued Friday, Circuit Judge Max Gors of Pierre gave Long
the option of either using a new explanation written by the judge or
making substantial changes to the explanation Long had written.

Sponsors of the medical marijuana measure argued in an Aug. 17 hearing
that Long's explanation went too far because it said even if South
Dakota legalizes marijuana for medical purposes, it would still be
illegal under federal law. The attorney general had said that could
lead to federal prosecution for possession or use of marijuana for
medical use, and doctors could be prosecuted or lose their federal
licenses to dispense prescription drugs if they recommend that
patients get marijuana.

Gors said the explanation should tell voters that marijuana use would
still be illegal under federal law even if the South Dakota measure
passes, but the statement should be made only once. The judge said the
attorney general's explanation went too far because it repeated that
message several times.

Those statements and other features of Long's explanation appeared to
be biased, the judge said.

"The whole impression leads one to believe that the attorney general
wants voters to reject the initiative. The attorney general should
confine his politicking to the stump and leave his bias out of the
ballot statement that is supposed to be objective," Gors wrote.

Long said he was still studying the judge's ruling late Friday
afternoon and did not know whether he would rewrite his original
explanation or use the one written by the judge.

However, the attorney general said state officials will not appeal to
the South Dakota Supreme Court because ballots need to be printed by
Sept. 1 so soldiers and other people living overseas can return their
ballots by the November election.

"The one thing we can't be doing is file an appeal because we don't
have time," Long said.

Ron Volesky of Huron, a lawyer representing sponsors of the measure,
said his clients also will not appeal.

"I'm very pleased with the decision, and we don't plan on appealing.
There's no need to appeal," said Volesky, the Democratic candidate for
attorney general.

Gors said the ballot explanation should say marijuana would be
available to "persons," not adults and children. He said the attorney
general's use of the word "children" could be an improper attempt to
persuade voters to reject the measure.

Also, the ballot explanation must explain that minors could get
marijuana for medical use only if their parents consent, Gors said.

The ballot explanation also must include language explaining that
people could get state certification to use medical marijuana by
submitting their medical records or by getting a doctor's
recommendations, the judge said.

And the explanation should tell voters that only people with
debilitating medical conditions could use marijuana for medical
purposes, Gors said.