SD Lawmakers Quietly Pull Medical Cannabis Arrest Bill From Agenda

Lawmakers Quietly Pull Medical Cannabis Arrest Bill From Agenda

By Jason Karimi | WeedPress: The Paper Trail

PIERRE, S.D. — A controversial bill that would have expanded police authority to arrest registered medical cannabis patients was quietly pulled from the South Dakota Legislature’s agenda this week — a move that signals mounting resistance to efforts to roll back patient protections.

Senate Bill 95, which was scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, was officially withdrawn at the request of the prime sponsor on January 28. The committee agenda now lists SB 95 as “Withdrawn from Agenda,” meaning no testimony was taken, no debate occurred, and no vote was held.

For patients, advocates, and civil liberties watchers, the move represents at least a temporary halt to a bill that raised serious constitutional and practical concerns.

What SB 95 Would Have Done

SB 95 proposed allowing law enforcement to arrest a registered medical cannabis patient solely for failing to immediately produce a medical cannabis card or card number, even if the patient was otherwise lawfully registered.

In practical terms, that would have meant:
• A fully legal patient could be arrested first
• Then forced to prove their legality later
• Reversing the current framework where registration status, not immediate physical possession of a card, governs legality

Critics warned the bill would have created a de facto strict liability arrest standard for patients — turning routine encounters into custodial arrests based on paperwork rather than actual illegal conduct.

Why It Was Pulled

While no formal explanation has been given, pulling a bill at the sponsor’s request typically signals one of three things inside the Capitol:

1. Votes weren’t there in committee
2. Pushback from stakeholders (patients, attorneys, or even law enforcement leadership)
3. Concerns about legal exposure, including due process and unlawful arrest risks

Legislators are well aware that arrest-first frameworks raise serious questions under both the Fourth Amendment and basic due process principles — particularly when a state already maintains a centralized patient registry that can be verified electronically.

A Pattern of Pressure on Patients

SB 95 fits into a broader pattern in South Dakota: repeated attempts to narrow, complicate, or chill lawful medical cannabis use through procedural traps rather than direct bans.

Instead of openly repealing patient protections, some bills attempt to:
• Expand arrest authority
• Increase technical compliance burdens
• Shift the burden onto patients to prove innocence in the field

That approach has drawn criticism from civil liberties advocates who argue that medical cannabis patients are being treated as presumptive criminals, rather than lawful participants in a state-authorized program.

What Happens Next

Because SB 95 was withdrawn — not defeated — it can still return in several forms:
• Reintroduced with amended language
• Added to a different bill as a “clean-up” amendment
• Brought back later in the session when attention is lower

For now, however, the withdrawal represents a meaningful pause — and a signal that lawmakers are encountering resistance when attempting to expand arrest powers over registered patients.

Why This Matters

This isn’t just a technical legislative move. It’s about whether South Dakota treats medical cannabis patients as:

• Lawful program participants
or
• Suspects first, patients second

Pulling SB 95 suggests that, at least for now, the Legislature is not ready to openly advance a policy that would normalize arresting patients over paperwork.

WeedPress will continue monitoring SB 95 and any successor bills to ensure that changes to the medical cannabis system are exposed — not slipped through quietly.