Legal battle heats up over Massachusetts marijuana policy change

Four cannabis entrepreneurs in Massachusetts have taken legal action to stop a potential statewide vote that would reverse recreational marijuana sales while keeping medical cannabis legal. The group, all active participants in state programs designed to right past wrongs in drug enforcement, filed their challenge in the state’s highest court this week. They argue the proposed ballot question unfairly targets their businesses and the support systems they rely on. The lawsuit names two top state officials who have roles in approving ballot measures. It claims the Attorney General missed important errors when checking the petition’s wording, while the Secretary of State could breach his duties by allowing the question to move forward. Both offices declined to respond, leaving questions unanswered about how the state plans to handle this dispute. Behind the scenes, a campaign pushing for the repeal received all its funding from an out-of-state group opposed to legalization. Their spokesperson expressed frustration at the legal challenge, arguing that voters should get to decide the issue directly. At stake are millions in grants that have helped minority-owned cannabis businesses grow since recreational legalization. Last month alone, $28. 8 million went to qualifying applicants, with over $50 million distributed since 2024. The lawsuit warns that throwing out these programs could cripple businesses that have barely recovered from past prohibition-era policies. One plaintiff pointed out the cruel timing of eliminating 800 tax-paying companies during an economic squeeze, suggesting the move would push customers back to unregulated dealers who don’t follow safety rules.Legal experts say the ballot question is unusually complex because it bundles multiple unrelated changes into one vote. Critics call it a poorly disguised attempt to roll back legal cannabis while keeping some medical privileges. The opponents behind the repeal effort have faced allegations before—last year a state commission dismissed claims that their signature collectors used misleading tactics to gain support. Their campaign insists everything was done properly, but legal opponents argue the initiative’s wording is deliberately vague. Behind the scenes, the cannabis businesses involved in the lawsuit range from a delivery service to a dispensary and a provisioning center. Each has received significant financial help from state equity programs, which were created to repair damage done by decades of unequal drug enforcement. Their lawyers emphasize that voters can’t easily split their preferences here—choosing to repeal adult-use sales doesn’t let them protect social equity funding or medical access without splitting the vote. It’s a mess of contradictions that could leave everyone confused at the ballot box.