South Dakota Initiated Measure 27, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2022)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
South Dakota Initiated Measure 27
Flag of South Dakota.png
Election date
November 8, 2022
Topic
Marijuana
Status
Defeatedd Defeated
Type
State statute		Origin
Citizens

South Dakota Marijuana Initiated Measure 27, the Marijuana Legalization Initiative, was on the ballot in South Dakota as an initiated state statute on November 8, 2022. The measure was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported this ballot initiative to legalize the possession, distribution, and use of marijuana for persons who are at least 21 years old.

A "no" vote opposed this ballot initiative to legalize the possession, distribution, and use of marijuana for persons who are at least 21 years old.

Election results

South Dakota Initiated Measure 27

Result Votes Percentage
Yes 163,584 47.08%

Defeated No

183,879 52.92%
Results are officially certified.
Source

Overview

How would this initiative have changed marijuana laws in South Dakota?

See also: Text of measure

This initiative would have legalized the use and possession of recreational marijuana, as well as marijuana accessories and paraphernalia, in South Dakota for people who are at least 21 years old. Individuals would have been allowed to possess or distribute up to one ounce of marijuana.[1]

This measure was designed so that an individual could own up to three marijuana plants (with no more than six plants per private property) as long as the individual lived in a jurisdiction where there was not a licensed marijuana retail store. The initiative would have required that marijuana plants be kept in a locked space and out of public view.[1]

Under this measure, civil penalties would have applied to individuals who violated provisions of this initiative.[1]

Was marijuana legalization previously on the ballot in South Dakota?

See also: Amendment A of 2020

In 2020, Amendment A, a measure that would have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, was on the ballot in South Dakota. Voters approved the measure 54%-46% in the general election on November 3, 2020, but the Supreme Court overturned the measure on February 8, 2022.

Circuit Judge Christina Klinger ruled that Amendment A was unconstitutional because it violated South Dakota’s single-subject rule and was a revision of the constitution rather than an amendment to the constitution.

There were some differences between Initiated Measure 27 and Amendment A. While Amendment A covered licensing, taxation, local government regulations of marijuana, and regulations regarding hemp, Initiated Measure 27 did not address any of these areas.

What was the status of recreational marijuana in the United States?

See also: Background

Going into the election, 19 states and Washington, D.C., had legalized the possession and personal use of marijuana for recreational purposes.[2][3][4]

  • In 11 states and D.C., the ballot initiative process was used to legalize marijuana.
  • In one state, the legislature referred a measure to the ballot for voter approval.
  • In seven states, bills to legalize marijuana were enacted into law.

Marijuana legalization measures were on the 2022 ballot in Arkansas, Maryland, Missouri, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The measures were approved in Maryland and Missouri and were defeated in Arkansas, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

Measure design

Click on the arrows (▼) below for summaries of the different provisions of South Dakota Initiated Measure 27.

Marijuana Legalization: use and possession of marijuana

Measure 27 would have legalized the use and possession of marijuana for people who are at least 21 years old. This included any part of the marijuana plant, the resin, seeds, or concentrate from the plant.

Marijuana Regulations: limitations on how much marijuana could be possessed

An individual could possess one ounce or less of marijuana. For marijuana in a concentrated form, a person could not possess more than eight grams.

If there were no licensed marijuana retail store within the jurisdiction of a person’s residence, that person could own up to three marijuana plants, as well as the marijuana produced by those plants. Any plants over an ounce would need to be kept at one private residence, kept in a locked space, and kept out of sight to the public. No more than six plants could be kept at a single residence at one time.

Marijuana Distribution: limitations on the distribution of marijuana

A person could distribute one ounce or less of marijuana without payment.

Marijuana accessories and paraphernalia: regulations regarding accessories

This measure would have allowed the possession and sale of marijuana paraphernalia and accessories to people who are at least 21 years old. Paraphernalia and accessories include bongs, pipes, grinders, rolling papers, and other equipment or products specifically designed to ingest, grow, or prepare marijuana for consumption.

Penalties: fines and penalties for violating the initiative's provisions

The civil penalties for violating specific provisions are described below:

  • A $250 penalty for keeping marijuana plants visible near a public place
  • A $250 penalty for keeping marijuana plants in an unlocked space
  • A $100 penalty for smoking marijuana in a public place not licensed for that activity
  • A $100 penalty for possession, distribution, or use of marijuana or marijuana accessories by a person under 21 years old. In lieu of this penalty, the option of attending up to four hours of drug education or counseling would be provided.

What the measure did not affect: laws the measure did not regulate or affect

This measure did not affect laws that regulate or prohibit:

  • Delivery or distribution of marijuana, or marijuana paraphernalia, to a person under 21 years old.
  • The use or possession of marijuana by a person under 21 years old.
  • Operating a motor vehicle under the influence of marijuana, or smoking marijuana while in a vehicle while it is being operated.
  • Possession or use of marijuana while on the grounds of a school, school bus, or correctional facility.
  • Consuming marijuana in a public place where it was not permitted by statute.
  • Consuming marijuana as part of a criminal penalty or diversion program.
  • Undertaking a task under the influence of marijuana that would constitute negligence or professional malpractice
  • Performing solvent-based extractions on marijuana using solvents other than water, glycerin, propylene glycol, vegetable oil, or food-grade ethanol, unless permitted by statute.

The measure also did not:

  • Affect an employer’s ability to restrict marijuana use by employees
  • Limit an owner of private property to regulate or prohibit marijuana use on their property.
  • Limit the state or local government in prohibiting or regulating marijuana use on property owned by the state or local government


Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:[1]

“ An initiated measure legalizing the possession, use, and distribution of marijuana.[5] ”

Attorney General explanation

The attorney general's explanation for the measure was as follows:[1]

“

Initiated Measure 27 legalizes the possession, use, and distribution of marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia by people age 21 and older. Individuals may possess one ounce or less of marijuana. They may also distribute one ounce or less of marijuana without payment or other consideration.

Marijuana plants, and the marijuana produced from those plants, may be possessed under specific conditions. Marijuana plants may only be grown, and the marijuana from those plants may only be possessed, in counties or cities where no licensed retail marijuana store is available or where allowed by county or city ordinances.

Certain violations of the restrictions the measure places on the possession, use, and distribution of marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia are subject to various civil penalties. Individuals under age 21 can attend drug education or counseling instead of paying a civil penalty.

Initiated Measure 27 legalizes substances considered felony controlled substances under State law. Marijuana remains illegal under Federal law.

Judicial or legislative clarification of the measure may be necessary.[5]

”

Fiscal impact statement

The official fiscal impact statement was as follows:[6]

“ The State and counties could see a minimal decrease in expenses due to decreased incarceration for marijuana-related offenses, and the State could see marginal additional revenue in the form of new civil penalty fines.[5] ”

Full text

The full text of the ballot measure is below:[1]

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2022

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The attorney general wrote the ballot language for this measure.

The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 18, and the FRE is -12. The word count for the ballot title is 11.

The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 16, and the FRE is 11. The word count for the ballot summary is 160.


Support

South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws led the campaign in support of the ballot initiative.[7]

Supporters

Officials

Candidates


Arguments

  • South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws: “This petition is about more than just cannabis legalization. It’s a defense of the constitutional ballot initiative rights of South Dakota voters.”
  • Matthew Schweich, campaign leader for the Yes on 27 campaign: “I would describe Measure 27 as cannabis legalization for the individual. It does not include licensing regulations, taxation; it’s really about personal freedom and ensuring that small amounts of cannabis do not make you a criminal.”


Official arguments

The following was the argument in support of Initiated Measure 27 found in the South Dakota 2022 Ballot Questions Guide:[8]

  • 2022 South Dakota Ballot Questions: We encourage South Dakota voters to approve Initiated Measure 27 so that we can legalize cannabis for adults 21 and older and restore the will of the people. Criminalizing cannabis is a waste of time and resources for law enforcement. Legalization allows police, investigators, and courts to focus on serious crime. Furthermore, cannabis arrests lead to criminal records that deprive South Dakotans of jobs, education, housing, military service, and other opportunities. South Dakota’s medical cannabis law, approved by voters in 2020, is still in the process of being implemented. In the meantime, it remains very difficult for patients to access the program. Many patients cannot easily find a doctor who will issue a medical cannabis recommendation. For some, the combined cost of the recommendation and the state ID card is an additional barrier. For many seriously ill people (including veterans with PTSD, epilepsy patients, MS patients, and cancer patients) cannabis is the only medicine that relieves their pain and suffering without debilitating side effects. Measure 27 will guarantee that all medical cannabis patients 21 and older in South Dakota are free from arrest. Measure 27 only legalizes cannabis for adults who are 21 and older. Public health reports analyzing tens of thousands of high school students in Colorado and Washington show that teen cannabis use did not increase after those states legalized cannabis for adults in 2012. National studies and research in other states have found similar results. Legalization policies in other states have created over 400,000 new jobs and generated over $10 billion in tax revenue, which is being allocated to public schools, drug treatment, healthcare services, and other programs. South Dakota voters already approved cannabis legalization in 2020 but that law was repealed in court. Measure 27 is shorter, simpler, and written to withstand a future lawsuit. --- Brendan Johnson, former South Dakota U.S. Attorney, partner with Robins Kaplan LLP; Melissa Mentele, Executive Director for New Approach South Dakota; Matthew Schweich, Yes on 27 campaign manager for South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws; Bill Stocker, retired Marine, disabled veteran, retired Sioux Falls police officer

Opposition

Protecting South Dakota Kids led the campaign in opposition of the ballot initiative.[9]

Opponents

Officials


Arguments

  • Protecting South Dakota Kids: "More minority kids are being arrested in Colorado for pot since legalization, and car crashes related to marijuana, young adult use, and workplace positives are skyrocketing in legal states. We do not need to legalize in order to reform the criminal justice system. We can remove criminal penalties, expunge records, and offer justice without commercializing today’s highly pure THC pot products."
  • Pat West, Meade County Sheriff-elect: "That expands the opportunity for black market because if you saturate the community with marijuana, it needs to go somewhere because there people aren’t going to throw it away. They’re going to start selling that to anybody that they can to include our children and our community."


Official arguments

The following was the argument opposing Initiated Measure 27 found in the South Dakota 2022 Ballot Questions Guide:[10]

  • 2022 South Dakota Ballot Questions: IM 27 would swing the door wide open for higher crime rates, increased suicide rates, traffic fatalities, workplace injuries, and mental health problems. This measure would harm our South Dakota children, families and communities. The measure:
    • Harms children. Although it’s advertised as “adult use,” when states legalize marijuana the rates of adolescent use increase substantially.
    • Increases mental health problems. There are over 20,000 peer-reviewed articles linking marijuana use to severe mental health issues. Common outcomes include psychosis, depression, and suicide.
    • Fuels the “black market.” Marijuana commercialization often leads to a dramatic increase in the black market, and this measure would hinder law enforcement from stopping it. If the door is opened to the marijuana industry to push drug activity, we will see:
    • Increased crime rates: The crime rate in Colorado has increased 11 times faster than the rest of the nation since legalization. South Dakota would be no different.
    • Increased costs to communities: Many states that have legalized marijuana have seen an increased number of emergency room visits. For every $1 in tax revenue generated, Colorado spends $4.50 on counteracting the damaging impact of legalization.
    • Increased addiction rates: Marijuana is highly addictive and states that legalize the drug see increases in addiction rates, as well as increased abuse of opioids, alcohol, and other illicit drugs.
    South Dakota already has laws that allow people to use marijuana products for health reasons. We can’t sacrifice the health and safety of our children and communities so the industry can come in and make a profit, leaving South Dakotans to pay the price. Don’t let South Dakota go “Up In Smoke”. Vote no on IM 27. --- Jim Kinyon, Chairman, Protecting South Dakota Kids

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for South Dakota ballot measures
The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 31, 2022.


South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws was registered to support Initiated Measure 27. The campaign received $181,249 in contributions.[11]

Protecting South Dakota Kids was registered to oppose Initiated Measure 27. The campaign received $512,855 in contributions.[11] 

   .sbtotaltable {
   width: 50%;
   }
   .sbtotaltable th {
    font-size:1.2em;
   }
   .sbtotaltable td {
       text-align:center;
      }
   .sbtotalheader {
       background-color: black !important;
       color:white !important;
       font-size:1.0em;
       font-weight:bold;
   }
   .sbtotaltotal {
       font-weight:bold;
   }
Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Support $55,123.32 $126,126.00 $181,249.32 $50,002.04 $176,128.04
Oppose $501,370.66 $11,484.36 $512,855.02 $512,855.02 $524,339.38
Total $556,493.98 $137,610.36 $694,104.34 $562,857.06 $700,467.42

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the measure.[11] 

   .sbtotaltable {
   width: 50%;
   }
   .sbtotaltable th {
    font-size:1.2em;
   }
   .sbtotaltable td {
       text-align:center;
      }
   .sbtotalheader {
       background-color: black !important;
       color:white !important;
       font-size:1.0em;
       font-weight:bold;
   }
   .sbtotaltotal {
       font-weight:bold;
   }
Committees in support of Initiated Measure 27
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws $55,123.32 $126,126.00 $181,249.32 $50,002.04 $176,128.04
Total $55,123.32 $126,126.00 $181,249.32 $50,002.04 $176,128.04

Donors

The following were the top donors who contributed to the support committees.[11]

Donor Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions
New Approach Advocacy Fund $0.00 $68,435.54 $68,435.54
Marijuana Policy Project $0.00 $39,367.88 $39,367.88
Johnson Properties $0.00 $18,322.58 $18,322.58
Besame SD, Inc $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Cannabis Industry Association of South Dakota $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Fsst Pharms LLC $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Genesis Farms $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
SCI Holdings LLC $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in opposition to the measure.[11] 

   .sbtotaltable {
   width: 50%;
   }
   .sbtotaltable th {
    font-size:1.2em;
   }
   .sbtotaltable td {
       text-align:center;
      }
   .sbtotalheader {
       background-color: black !important;
       color:white !important;
       font-size:1.0em;
       font-weight:bold;
   }
   .sbtotaltotal {
       font-weight:bold;
   }
Committees in support of Initiated Measure 27
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Protecting South Dakota Kids $501,370.66 $11,484.36 $512,855.02 $512,855.02 $524,339.38
Total $501,370.66 $11,484.36 $512,855.02 $512,855.02 $524,339.38

Donors

The following were the top donors who contributed to the opposition committees.[11]

Donor Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions
Daugaard For South Dakota $25,000.00 $0.00 $25,000.00
Contractors PAC of South Dakota $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Next Generation Leadership PAC $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
SD Police Chief's Association $10,000.00 $0.00 $10,000.00
Wheeler Manufacturing Co. Inc. $5,000.00 $0.00 $5,000.00

Polls

See also: 2022 ballot measure polls
Are you aware of a poll on this ballot measure that should be included below? You can share ballot measure polls, along with source links, with us at [email protected].
South Dakota Initiated Measure 27, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2022)
Poll
Dates
Sample size
Margin of error
Support
Oppose
Undecided
Emerson College Polling 10/19/22-10/21/22 1500 ± 2.4% 39.7% 50.5% 9.8%
Question: "How do you plan to vote on Measure 27, which would legalize the possession, use, and distribution of marijuana for recreational purposes in South Dakota?"

Note: LV is likely voters, RV is registered voters, and EV is eligible voters.

Background

Amendment A of 2020

See also: South Dakota Constitutional Amendment A, Marijuana Legalization Initiative (2020)

In 2020, Amendment A was on the ballot in South Dakota for the November 3, 2020, general election. The measure would have legalized the recreational use of marijuana.

South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws led the campaign in support of Amendment A. Brendan Johnson, former U.S. attorney for the District of South Dakota, sponsored the initiative, and it qualified for the ballot on January 6, 2020. New Approach South Dakota and South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws, two committees supporting the initiative, raised $2.35 million and spent $1.6 million. The opposing campaign, No Way on Amendment A, reported $259,035 in contributions and $249,035 in expenditures.[12]

On Election Day, November 3, 2020, the measure was approved by voters by 54% (225,260) to 46% (190,477).[13]

On November 20, 2020, Pennington County Sheriff Kevin Thom and South Dakota Highway Patrol Superintendent Rick Miller filed a lawsuit in Hughes County Circuit Court seeking to block Amendment A from taking effect, arguing that the measure contained more than one subject and that the measure did not simply amend the constitution, but rather revised it. In South Dakota, all citizen initiatives must consist of only one subject.[14]

On February 8, 2021, Circuit Judge Christina Klinger ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, ruling that Amendment A was unconstitutional because it violated South Dakota’s single-subject rule and was a revision of the constitution rather than an amendment to the constitution.

There were some differences between Amendment A and Initiated Measure 27.

  • Amendment A authorized the State Department of Revenue to issue marijuana-related licenses for commercial cultivation, testing, manufacturing, wholesale, and retail. Initiated Measure 27 did not cover licensing.
  • Amendment A imposed a 15% tax on marijuana sales, while Initiated Measure 27 did not cover any taxation.
  • Amendment A authorized local governments to enact regulations surrounding licensees operating in its jurisdiction, while Initiated Measure 27 did not cover local regulations.
  • Amendment A required the South Dakota State Legislature to pass laws providing for a program for medical marijuana and the sale of hemp by April 1, 2022. Initiated Measure 27 did not cover hemp or medical marijuana.

2022 marijuana laws in South Dakota

In 2022, marijuana was legal in South Dakota for medical use, having been legalized by Initiated Measure 26 on November 3, 2020.

As of 2022, recreational marijuana was illegal in South Dakota. Possession of more than 2 oz of marijuana, or any hash or concentrates, was a felony. Fines and incarceration depended on the amount of marijuana possessed.[15]

Recreational marijuana laws by state

See also: Marijuana laws in the United States

The map below shows recreational marijuana laws by state.

  • States in dark green have legalized recreational marijuana
  • States in light green have decriminalized marijuana
  • For states in gray, marijuana is illegal

Comparison of ballot measures to legalize recreational marijuana

The following table compares a selection of ballot measure provisions, such as possession limits, local control, taxes, and revenue dedications.

Click "Show" to expand the table.

Political context of recreational marijuana ballot measures

The following table summarizes the political context surrounding recreational marijuana ballot measures, including whether the state's presidential voting history in the preceding three elections was Democratic, mixed, or Republican.

  • Among states with Democratic presidential voting histories, eight marijuana legalization ballot measures were approved and one was defeated.
  • Among states with Republican presidential voting histories, four marijuana legalization ballot measures were approved and nine were defeated.
  • Among states with mixed presidential voting histories, three marijuana legalization ballot measures were approved and one was defeated.

Partisan control of the 15 states approving marijuana legalization measures was Democratic in four states, divided in five states, and Republican in six states. Partisan control of the eight states rejecting marijuana legalization measures was Democratic in one state, mixed in one state, and Republican in six states.

Click "Show" to expand the table.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in South Dakota

The state process

In South Dakota, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated state statute for the ballot is equal to 5 percent of the votes cast for governor in the previous gubernatorial election. Signatures must be submitted by the first Tuesday of May during a general election year.

The requirements to get an initiated state statute certified for the 2022 ballot:

Once the signatures have been gathered and filed, the secretary of state verifies the signatures using a random sample method.

Details about this initiative

  • The initiative was filed by Melissa Mentele, executive director of New Approach South Dakota.[17]
  • The measure was approved for circulation on October 12, 2021.[17]
  • On April 14, 2022, campaign director for South Dakotans for Better Marijuana laws, Matthew Schweich, reported that "our conservative estimate right now is that we're at 13,500 valid signatures."[18]
  • On May 3, 2022, the signatures of this measure were submitted. Matthew Schweich, campaign director of South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws, said the campaign independently verified about 19,250 registered voters.[19]
  • On May 25, 2022, the South Dakota secretary of state announced that the measure would appear on the ballot after finding that 25,023 (79.22%) signatures were deemed valid based on the random sample of submitted signatures. The figures mean the campaign submitted around 31,587 signatures in total.[20]

Cost-per-required-signature (CPRS)

See also: Ballot measure signature costs, 2022

South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws accepted an in-kind contribution from New Approach Advocacy Fund for the purpose of signature gathering. A total of $68,435.54 was spent to collect the 16,961 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $4.03.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in South Dakota

Click "Show" to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in South Dakota.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 South Dakota Secretary of State, "Initiative Petition," accessed June 21, 2022
  2. ↑ Smart Approaches to Marijuana, "MJ Laws Map," accessed June 15, 2022
  3. ↑ Marijuana Policy Project, "Map of state marijuana laws," accessed June 15, 2022
  4. ↑ This number does not include South Dakota, where voters approved a marijuana legalization initiative in 2020 that was later struck down by the state's supreme court
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  6. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State, "2022 Ballot Questions" accessed Sep 20, 2022
  7. ↑ South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws, "Homepage," accessed May 16, 2022
  8. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State, "2022 Ballot Questions," accessed October 27, 2022
  9. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State, "Statement of Organization," accessed August 5, 2022
  10. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State, "2022 Ballot Questions," accessed October 27, 2022
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 South Dakota Secretary of State, "Campaign Finance Reporting," accessed November 11, 2022
  12. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State, "Campaign Finance Reporting System," accessed June 21, 2022
  13. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State, "General State Canvas Final Certificate," accessed June 21, 2022
  14. ↑ South Dakota Department of Public Safety, "Election Contest: Verified Complaint," accessed June 21, 2022
  15. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named penalties
  16. ↑ Prior three elections before and/or including the election at which measure was voted on
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SoS
  18. ↑ Keloland.com, "Recreational marijuana petition drive ramps up efforts," accessed April 14, 2022
  19. ↑ Keloland.com, "S.D. marijuana, Medicaid measures filed for fall ballot," accessed May 3, 2022
  20. ↑ Office of the Secretary of State, "Ballot question validated for 2022 election," May 25, 2022
  21. ↑ South Dakota Secretary of State, “General Voting Information,” accessed July 23, 2024
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 South Dakota Secretary of State, “Register to Vote, Update Voter Registration or Cancel Voter Registration,” accessed July 23, 2024
  23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 NCSL, "State Profiles: Elections," accessed July 23, 2024
  24. ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 South Dakota Secretary of State, "General Voting Information," accessed July 23, 2024
v • e
2022 ballot measures
I&R States
 • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Florida • Idaho • Illinois • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Mexico • North Dakota • Ohio • Oregon • South Dakota • Utah • Washington • Wyoming
Non I&R States
 • Alabama • Connecticut • Georgia • Hawaii • Iowa • Kentucky • Kansas • Louisiana • New Hampshire • New York • Rhode Island • South Carolina • Tennessee • Texas • Vermont • West Virginia
Political topics
Other
Flag of South Dakota
v • e
State of South Dakota
Pierre (capital)
Elections

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy

Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=South_Dakota_Initiated_Measure_27,_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2022)&oldid=9582786"