Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Sues Dallas Over Cannabis Decriminalization Measure

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against the city of Dallas, challenging the legality of a recently passed marijuana ballot measure. The lawsuit, announced on Thursday, underscores ongoing tensions between state and local governments over drug policy and law enforcement priorities.

Proposition R: A Controversial Charter Amendment

At the heart of the lawsuit is Proposition R, a charter amendment approved by Dallas voters aimed at reducing penalties for marijuana possession. The measure prohibits law enforcement from making arrests or issuing citations for marijuana possession and restricts the use of marijuana odor as probable cause for searches or seizures.

Supporters of Proposition R view the amendment as a step toward reforming outdated drug laws, reducing incarceration rates, and addressing racial disparities in policing. However, the Texas Attorney General’s office sees it as a direct challenge to state law.

Paxton’s Legal Argument

In the lawsuit, Attorney General Paxton contends that the amendment violates Texas law and undermines law enforcement’s ability to uphold state regulations. According to Paxton, the city of Dallas lacks the authority to enact measures that conflict with state drug laws.

The legal challenge argues that Proposition R effectively restricts police officers from enforcing laws against marijuana possession, thereby creating a legal gray area that could lead to broader noncompliance with state regulations.

Paxton’s office has labeled the measure a violation of the Texas Constitution, asserting that cities cannot selectively enforce state laws. This lawsuit is part of a broader effort by the Attorney General’s office to challenge local decriminalization measures across Texas.

Impact on Law Enforcement

Proposition R’s stipulations, particularly those prohibiting arrests and searches based on marijuana odor, represent a significant departure from standard law enforcement practices in Texas. Critics argue that such restrictions could hinder investigations and embolden illegal drug activity.

Supporters, however, argue that the policy change is necessary to prevent over-policing and reduce the burden of minor drug offenses on the judicial system. Proponents believe that decriminalization policies like Proposition R can free up law enforcement resources to focus on more serious crimes.

Ground Game Texas and Advocacy for Reform

Ground Game Texas, an advocacy group that campaigned for Proposition R, has highlighted the potential benefits of the amendment. The organization claims that the measure would save millions in public funds, decrease racially biased policing, and prevent individuals from facing incarceration for minor marijuana offenses.

The group has pushed similar initiatives in other cities, aiming to reform marijuana laws and reduce what they describe as the disproportionate harm caused by current enforcement policies.

State vs. Local Authority

The lawsuit reflects a broader conflict between state and local governments in Texas over policy-making authority. Cities like Dallas argue that local governments are better positioned to address community-specific issues, such as the enforcement of minor drug offenses.

The state, on the other hand, maintains that it has ultimate authority over drug laws and that local measures like Proposition R are illegal. This ongoing struggle is part of a larger national debate over states’ rights versus local governance in areas like drug policy, policing, and public health.

Previous Legal Actions by the Attorney General

The lawsuit against Dallas is not an isolated case. Since January 2024, Paxton’s office has filed five lawsuits against Texas cities for adopting marijuana decriminalization measures. The Attorney General has argued that these policies promote crime, drug abuse, and violence, making them incompatible with state law.

These lawsuits have targeted cities that seek to reduce penalties for marijuana possession, with Paxton asserting that such measures undermine the rule of law and public safety.

Potential Implications of the Lawsuit

The outcome of this legal battle could have significant implications for marijuana policy in Texas. If the court sides with the Attorney General, it may set a precedent limiting the ability of cities to enact local decriminalization measures. Such a ruling could deter other municipalities from pursuing similar reforms.

On the other hand, if Dallas successfully defends Proposition R, it could encourage other Texas cities to adopt comparable measures, potentially leading to broader changes in how marijuana laws are enforced statewide.

Public Reaction and Broader Debate

The lawsuit has sparked intense debate among Texans, with opinions divided along ideological and political lines. Supporters of Proposition R argue that the measure reflects the will of Dallas voters and addresses systemic issues in the criminal justice system.

Opponents, however, view the measure as a slippery slope that could lead to increased drug use and weakened law enforcement. They argue that marijuana decriminalization sends the wrong message about drug use and undermines efforts to maintain public order.

The Broader Context of Marijuana Policy

Texas remains one of the stricter states regarding marijuana laws, with possession of even small amounts of cannabis considered a criminal offense. However, public attitudes toward marijuana have shifted significantly in recent years, with growing support for decriminalization and legalization across the United States.

In contrast to Texas’ stance, 39 states have legalized medical marijuana, and 24 states, along with Washington, D.C., have legalized recreational use. This national trend has put pressure on states like Texas to reconsider their policies.

What’s Next for Proposition R?

The legal challenge against Dallas is expected to move through the courts in the coming months. Both sides are likely to present extensive arguments, with the city of Dallas defending its right to implement voter-approved measures and the state asserting its authority to enforce uniform drug laws.

The case will likely be closely watched by advocates and opponents of marijuana reform, as it could influence similar efforts in other Texas cities.

The lawsuit against Dallas over Proposition R highlights the growing tension between state and local governments in Texas over marijuana policy. As public opinion continues to shift in favor of reform, legal battles like this one may shape the future of drug enforcement not only in Texas but across the nation.

With the potential to affect law enforcement practices, criminal justice reform, and public safety, the outcome of this case will carry significant implications for both proponents and opponents of marijuana decriminalization.