On November 8, 2016, Florida’s electorate approved Amendment 2, a citizens’ initiative that amended the Florida Constitution to create article X, section 29, titled “Medical marijuana production, possession and use.” The Amendment provides limited immunity under state law by providing “[t]he medical use of marijuana by a qualifying patient or caregiver in compliance with th[e Amendment] is not subject to criminal or civil liability or sanctions under Florida law.” Art. X, § 29(a)(1).
Florigrow challenged the constitutionality of the provision successfully securing a temporary injunction in the lower court. In a 2-1 decision, the First District upheld the injunction after concluding that Florigrown has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its claims that the provisions of section 381.986(8) requiring MMTCs to be vertically integrated and placing caps on the number of MMTC licenses violate the Amendment. Fla. Dep’t of Health v. Florigrown See, https://www.1dca.org/content/download/619684/7035512/file/184471_1284_07102019_12032204_i.pdf
Florida Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered a second round of arguments in a battle about whether the state has properly carried out a 2016 constitutional amendment that broadly legalized medical marijuana.See, https://www.floridatrend.com/article/29547/justices-order-more-arguments-on-medical-marijuana-law
New briefs to be filed and argued whether the law law is an impermissible “special law.”