Page 34 - SFHNAugust2020finalUF.qxp_SFHN 0608 Friday 5.0
P. 34

The Legality of MMTCs – To Be Determined


          A court case challenging the present   formula designed by the legislature.   MMTCs could simply pro-                  “statutory   give-away”
        Florida medical marijuana program has   The trial judge agreed with Florigrown.   vide parts of the cannabis             which created distinct
        not only made its way to the Florida   The Department of Health was ordered to   supply chain. Secondly, the             treatment, which usurps
        Supreme Court, the Court invited the par-  immediately issue to the company a   convoluted formula for                   any real opportunity to any
        ties back for even more briefs and oral   license to operate as an MMTC because   determining the number of              company not already pos-
        arguments before issuing a ruling. I don’t   the whole vertical integration program   MMTCs is completely arbi-          sessing a license from
        recall that happening, previously. It seems   was unconstitutional and against the   trary. The best arguments,          obtaining one. Clearly a
        that at least one justice saw an argument   intent of the voters, which was to make   though, were that low-THC          “special”, not ”general” law.
        that neither side argued in their initial pre-  safe medical cannabis accessible to quali-  license holders and rejected   I’m no mind-reader, but I
        sentations. The case is called Florigrown.   fied patients. The court of appeals agreed,   applicants were automati-     thought that Florigrown
        It has had a fascinating journey, and it may   as well. It unanimously ruled that the ver-  cally issued licenses prior   was already going to win
        well erase our present “vertical” program.   tical system which the Florida legislature   to any applications being   BY MICHAEL J. LISS,   based on the monopoly
          When the low-THC law was enacted,   enacted was unconstitutional. The   considered by the depart-       ESQ.           argument. I was fascinated
        certain criteria were determined by the   Department of Health petitioned the   ment. With the mathemati-                when the court asked for
        state to qualify a few growers/vendors in a   Supreme Court to determine the constitu-  cal formula for licenses to be issued, the   the additional briefing. The “special law”
        limited program. Some applications were   tionality of the vertically-integrated med-  only way to get a license was to buy one of   issue seems like a “layup” for Florigrown.
        submitted by qualified applicants but were   ical marijuana program.     the unused licenses (“golden tickets”),   How can this law not be a “special” law
        denied because of the limited number of   The Department of Health’s best argu-  which the trial court learned had sold for   which gives special privilege to lucky tick-
        licenses issued. Some were denied because   ments to the Florida Supreme Court were   as much as $53 million dollars, by a com-  et holders? The state’s argument seems
        the applicants did not meet the criteria.   that the cap on the number of MMTCs   pany which had never planted a seed or   weak to me, because while “classes” are
          After the 2016 constitutional referen-  was constitutional and that vertical inte-  conducted any other cannabis business   formed all the time (such as plumbers,
        dum passed, but before the Department of   gration was a rational way to make effec-  with that license. Florigrown pointed out   lawyers or any other licenses trade), there
        Health had promulgated rules for the   tive the intent of the voters - to make med-  that the department, itself, had calculated   are not lawyers who get special treatment
        industry, a new company called      ical cannabis readily available to patients   the state’s need for MMTCs to approxi-  beyond other lawyers. Here, however,
        Florigrown “registered” itself with the   in need. In response, Florigrown argued   mate 2,000 dispensaries. The argument   many of the license holders only hold
        department so that when applications   that (1) the law which was enacted alters   was that by vertically integrating the sys-  licenses and aren’t even in the cannabis
        were accepted, its place in line would   and contradicts the will of the voters, (2)   tem, the program was set up to fail by the   business. Investors flipping paper for $53
        already be saved. The department refused   the caps on the number of MMTC licenses   legislature, by selecting a few lucky play-  million dollars are not situated similarly to
        to recognize the “registration” of   was arbitrary, (3) that vertical integration   ers to reap unnatural rewards, gave   MMTCs which have spent endless mil-
        Florigrown.  Florigrown  sued  the  created illegal monopolies and (4) that the   patients fewer choices, less accessibility   lions of dollars to run licensed businesses,
        Department of Health.               law created a special class (those who were   and higher prices.         and they are not situated similarly to com-
          The lawsuit sought a temporary injunc-  granted licenses or had applied under the   The Supreme Court wanted more. The   panies which want to operate but do not
        tion from the trial court causing the   former law).                     Court ordered the parties to brief an issue   have the opportunity to have an applica-
        issuance of a license to Florigrown so that   It was at this point, having read the   which had not been raised by either party.   tion reviewed until some formulaic peak is
        it could operate as a “Medical Marijuana   briefs, that I was convinced that the jus-  The issue is whether the whole program   reached, which may never happen.
        Treatment Center” (MMTC), claiming   tices would rule that a system which   was created by a “special law granting a   Last month, I wrote that 2022 is likely
        that Florida’s program is unconstitutional   grants a few winning tickets and excludes   privilege to a private corporation.” In   to see an adult-use referendum pass. I
        because it is impossible for a company   everyone else from an industry would be   other words, does the vertical integration   opine that Florigrown will have an MMTC
        which was not grandfathered into the law   found unconstitutional for the reasons   statute grant rights to particular compa-  license prior to that ballot initiative reach-
        to obtain a license. The state argued that   argued by Florigrown. Firstly, a lawyerly   nies which are not afforded to companies,   ing the voters, that the system in place will
        the program was a rational system of reg-  language argument over “or” or “and”   generally. The department argued that the   be found unconstitutional and that adult-
        ulating a limited program, and that it   (there is a large difference in interpreting a   law allows for “classes” or businesses to   use will be legal after the 2022 vote.
        would eventually provide licenses to those   law depending on which word applies)   get particular treatment, just not specific   Because, after all, we are a country which
        who were not grandfathered, if and when   which determines whether MMTCs must   businesses. The law is not a “special” law,   represents freedom and opportunity for
        there were enough patients to meet the   be vertically integrated, or whether   but a “general” law, uniformly applied,   all. Awarding monopolies and preventing
                                                                                 was the argument.                   competition to the selected few provides
                                                                                    Florigrown responded that this is clear-  no freedom or opportunity for those wish-
                                                                                 ly a “special” law in that it creates classes.   ing to enter the industry. Special law likely,
                                                                                 Those who automatically got licenses   but one way or another, I believe the
                                                                                 without any review by the department,   Supreme Court is about to rule that the
                                                                                 and all other companies, which in reality   system we are just starting to get used to is
                                                                                 will never have applications reviewed, due   unconstitutional.
                                                                                 to the cap on the number of MMTCs.
                                                                                 While the department argued that the only   Michael Liss, Esq. can be reached at
                                                                                 restriction was a “grandfather clause” for     ml@integritycounselpa.com or
                Florida’s Resource for                                           the former licensees and applicant,     (561) 981-2507, located in Boca Raton.
                 Medical & Business              CONTRIBUTING WRITERS            Florigrown argued that this was simply a
                                                      Daniel Casciato
               Cannabis Developments                   Barbara Fallon

                   PO Box 812708                        Vanessa Orr
               Boca Raton, FL 33481-2708               Lois Thomson

                Phone: (561) 368-6950                SUBSCRIPTIONS
              www.cannabisnewsflorida.com              One Year - $45
                                                      Two Years - $70
                  CHARLES FELIX                       Three Years - $85
                   CAROL FELIX
                     Publishers
                                               To subscribe, call (561) 368-6950
                                                        Or email:
                  NANCY LAMMIE                 carol@cannabisnewsflorida.com
                   JMC Graphics
                   Art/Production                All rights reserved. Reproduction
                lammienancy@aol.com              In whole or part without written
                                                    permission is prohibited.
                   JUDY GRAMM                         Copyright ©2020
                  Editorial Manager

         34                       August 2020                                                               cannabisnewsflorida.com                                                                                     Cannabis News Florida
   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39