Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Major League Baseball open thread
Next Post: Help Illinois Electric Co-Ops, Municipalities, And Illinois Workers Prevent The Premature Closure Of Prairie State
Posted in:
* John Pletz at Crain’s…
Just a day after a new weed law took effect, paving the way for the state to issue 185 new retail licenses through lotteries, a lawsuit was filed to stop the already-delayed process.
A Michigan company run by a former Chicago-based entrepreneur wants a federal judge to stop the lotteries from issuing the licenses, claiming the state’s original rules and new ones are unfair.
Sozo Illinois, which applied for dispensary licenses, sued in federal court here, claiming a provision in the application that gives Illinois residents five bonus points unfairly discriminates against the company and violates state and federal laws guaranteeing due process and equal protection. The company also said it’s being unfairly excluded from one of three lotteries that will be used to distribute licenses, taking aim at a legislative fix to one of the most controversial provisions of the licensing process. […]
The process to issue the first 75 licenses for new marijuana shops has been under fire since it resulted in a tie between 21 applicants who achieved perfect scores, some of which appeared to have tenuous connections to communities the law was designed to help. The Legislature decided that applicants who didn’t win the first 75 licenses would be eligible for two lotteries for 110 more licenses to be distributed this year. Applicants such as Sozo, which achieved social-equity status through employment, were excluded from the second of the two lotteries.
Achieving social equity status through hiring was sharply criticized for being ripe for potential abuse. Those folks could be fired on day one, critics said.
The lawsuit is here.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 10:39 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Major League Baseball open thread
Next Post: Help Illinois Electric Co-Ops, Municipalities, And Illinois Workers Prevent The Premature Closure Of Prairie State
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Just curious. Wouldn’t a Michigan company be on the hook for interstate commerce regarding a federally banned substance? I suppose it would test the will of the federal government.
Comment by H-W Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 10:57 am
a disaster from day 1…no lottery, no scoring needed.. let ANYONE that can find the space, build out the security have a go..
Comment by NotRich Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 11:06 am
===let ANYONE that can find===
60-30-1
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 11:11 am
==60-30-1==
Heard. My elevator pitch would be that the original law and now the new law have both been challenged and have resulted in zero recreational licenses having been issued so far, other than to businesses previously licensed for medical. Artificial caps on number of licenses means there is always somebody on the outside looking in with no recourse other than to sue and gum up the whole works. Please learn from the mistake of issuing limited number of riverboat gambling licenses.
Comment by SAP Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 11:44 am
Both a due process and equal-protection claim will generally require the plaintiff to prove the violation of a fundamental right. I have a hard time seeing the federal court holding that selling pot is a fundamental right.
Comment by duck duck goose Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 12:50 pm
Yes 60-30-1, but let’s take a look at “Toke-lahoma.” Low license fees, no cap on licenses, and tons of new, small businesses including a lot of mom and pops. Your corner dealer is not left because it’s easy for them to go legit! Could solve a lot of equity problems too.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/27/toke-lahoma-cannabis-market-oklahoma-red-state-weed-legalization-437782
Comment by Shield Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 1:10 pm
Isn’t selling medicine a fundamental right?
Comment by Dotnonymous Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 1:12 pm
===Isn’t selling medicine a fundamental right? ===
If it was, Walgreen’s would be selling a heckuvalot more stuff.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 1:16 pm
=== Yes 60-30-1, but===
Until it’s ripe and is going to be signed, what are we really talking about?
To the post,
The idea and the want for equity is one big thing, but being able to legislatively make equity possible while having regulatory constraints intact, and the availability too.
If it were easy…
Lottery, no lottery, systematically figuring out real access and equity… indeed, another day, another lawsuit.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 1:19 pm
Federal courts haven’t been too concerned with applying the US Constitution in other states… https://my.vanderbilt.edu/marijuanalaw/2021/06/three-federal-courts-so-far-have-held-that-state-residency-requirements-for-cannabis-licenses-probably-violate-the-dormant-commerce-clause/
Comment by Paying Attention Tuesday, Jul 20, 21 @ 3:00 pm