Last Friday, we saw an important development in the tortuous quest to issue integrated medical cannabis licenses in Alabama. Bottom line: The show will go on.
In our opinion, the decision from the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals delivers a resounding statement to everyone involved in the Alabama medical marijuana licensing process: Alabama courts will let the full process play out before they get involved.
This one feels a little less Ratt and a little more Queen. Less OK Go, more Revivalists. Rather than burn the licensing process to the ground, the court followed its earlier trilogy of rulings in Jemmstone I–III, as well as Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission v. Alabama Always, LLC, Southeast Cannabis Co. v. Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission, and Ex parte TheraTrue Alabama, LLC. The court did not outright vindicate the AMCC’s licensing, rulemaking, and investigative hearing process, but it certainly sent a message to all applicants.
The opinion deals with a few consolidated appeals, all of which are related to one main case filed against the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission and its commissioners. Avid Budding Trends readers likely already know this, but in that underlying case, hopeful applicants sued to prevent the AMCC’s licensing and investigative hearing process from moving forward. The applicants sought declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent any action to enforce the AMCC’s December 2023 licensing decisions. They also challenged the AMCC’s adoption of emergency and permanent rules governing stayed applications along with the AMCC’s scoring and investigative-hearing processes. After the circuit court declared the emergency rule void and enjoined the issuance of licenses, the AMCC, commissioners, and another applicant appealed.
Relying on its prior decisions, the court held that the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the AMCC’s licensing decisions were not final, i.e., no licenses have been issued and investigative hearings are still pending. The court also found no jurisdiction for the applicants’ rule challenges because the emergency and permanent rules do not interfere with the applicants’ rights. The court directed the trial court to fully dismiss the underlying case, effectively telling the lower courts and all applicants to hold their horses until after the investigative hearings have concluded and licenses have issued.
Those investigative hearings are scheduled to begin at the end of March, and we expect a decision from the administrative law judge by this summer. In the meantime, we’ll stay on top of this so you don’t have to.
Thanks for stopping by.
