Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against five cities that have voted to decriminalize the possession and distribution of marijuana. The lawsuit claims that the cities are violating state law and the Texas constitution by instructing police not to enforce drug laws. However, the lawsuit has been met with criticism from local officials, activists, and legal experts who argue that Paxton is overstepping his authority and undermining the will of the voters.
The Cities That Passed Decriminalization Policies
The cities that are targeted by Paxton’s lawsuit are Austin, San Marcos, Killeen, Elgin, and Denton. These cities passed ordinances in 2022 that would end arrests and citations for possession of less than four ounces of marijuana. The ordinances were initiated by Ground Game Texas, a progressive group that worked with local organizations to collect signatures and put the measures on the ballot. The ordinances received overwhelming support from the voters, ranging from 70% to 85% in favor.
The cities are home-rule cities, which means they have the authority to establish their own laws and ordinances unless they are expressly forbidden by state or federal law. The cities argue that their decriminalization policies are consistent with the Texas Local Government Code, which allows them to set their own law enforcement priorities and allocate their resources accordingly. They also point out that the policies do not legalize marijuana, but rather reduce the penalties for low-level offenses.
Paxton’s Arguments and Motives
Paxton’s lawsuit alleges that the cities are violating the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure and the Texas Controlled Substances Act, which prohibit the possession and distribution of marijuana. The lawsuit also claims that the cities are infringing on the exclusive jurisdiction of the state to regulate drug laws. Paxton is seeking an injunction to force the cities to repeal their ordinances and enforce state law.
Paxton said in a press release that he will not stand idly by as cities run by “pro-crime extremists” deliberately violate Texas law and promote the use of illicit drugs that harm the communities. He also accused the cities of endangering public safety and health by allowing marijuana to proliferate. Paxton is known for his conservative stance on marijuana and other social issues, and has been involved in several lawsuits against the federal government and Democratic-led cities.
The Reactions and Responses
The cities that are sued by Paxton have expressed their disappointment and defiance in response to the lawsuit. They have vowed to defend their ordinances and the rights of their citizens in court. They have also criticized Paxton for wasting taxpayer money and time on a frivolous lawsuit that ignores the will of the voters and the realities of the criminal justice system.
The lawsuit has also drawn backlash from activists, lawyers, and lawmakers who support marijuana reform. They have denounced Paxton’s lawsuit as an anti-democratic assault on the constitutional authority of home-rule cities and the local control of law enforcement. They have also highlighted the benefits of decriminalization, such as reducing arrests, saving costs, and addressing racial disparities in drug enforcement.
Texas is one of the few states that has not legalized medical or recreational marijuana, and has a very limited compassionate use program for low-THC cannabis. However, public opinion polls show that a majority of Texans support marijuana legalization, and several bills have been filed in the state legislature to reform the state’s marijuana laws. Paxton’s lawsuit may face an uphill battle in the courts and in the court of public opinion.
