Appeals court overturns San Marcos' marijuana decriminalization ordinance
The Brief
A Texas appellate court Thursday ruled that San Marcos' marijuana decriminalization ordinance was unenforceable and issued a temporary injunction.
The ordinance passed in 2022 with nearly 82% of voters voting in favor of decriminalization.
Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the city, saying the ordinance violated state laws.
SAN MARCOS, Texas - A Texas appellate court ruled that a voter-passed ordinance that decriminalized small amounts of marijuana in San Marcos is unenforceable under state law.
What we know
The Fifteenth Court of Appeals issued the ruling Thursday saying the ordinance, which passed in 2022, was in violation of a state law that prohibits local governments from adopting policies that will not fully enforce state drug laws.
The ordinance overwhelmingly passed in 2022 with nearly 82% of voters in favor of the measure.
Proposition A decriminalized possession of up to four ounces marijuana and ended citations and arrests by San Marcos police unless it was part of a larger investigation involving violence or felony-level narcotics.
The ordinance also ended citations for drug residue or paraphernalia, prohibited the use of city funds to test the level of THC, and stopped police from using the smell of marijuana as probable cause to search a vehicle or home.
What they're saying
"All of these Ordinance prohibitions are barriers to the full enforcement of Texas drug laws and thus conflict with Local Government Code Section 370.003," Judge April Farris said in the ruling.
In a release, representatives from Mano Amiga Action and Ground Game Texas, two of the groups that spearheaded the ordinance, called the court's decision a "deeply troubling move for local democracy."
"Texans have made their voices heard at the ballot box again and again: they don't want their money going towards unnecessary arrests," Catina Voellinger, Executive Director of Ground Game Texas, said. "This ruling is proof that the state isn't working to make communities safer—it's working to crush people-powered movements."
The backstory
In 2022, San Marcos was one of five cities in Texas that voted to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana. The other cities were Denton, Elgin, Killeen and Harker Heights.
Attorney General Ken Paxton sued San Marcos, along with Austin, Killeen, Elgin and Denton in 2024 over the policies.
A Hays County district judge dismissed Paxton's lawsuit saying the attorney general's office lacked jurisdiction and denied the state's request to prevent the ordinance from being enforced.
Thursday's ruling from the appeals court allows a temporary injunction to go into effect and establishes that the attorney general has jurisdiction to file suit against the city and city officials.
The Fifteenth Circuit Court of Appeals was created in 2023 to have jurisdiction over appeals involving disputes brought by or against the state and challenges to state stautes.
Mano Amiga Executive Director Eric Martinez called the court's decision "judicial gerrymandering."
"Let's be clear—this decision didn't come from a court grounded in community," Martinez said. "It came from a court manufactured by the same state officials bringing the lawsuit, with the express goal of silencing progressive policies that Texans are voting for at the local level."
The Source
Information in this article comes from court documents filed in the Fifteenth Circuit Appeals Court, a release from Mano Amiga Action and Ground Game Texas and previous FOX 7 reporting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
Some Texas lawmakers demand in-state tuition protections for undocumented students
AUSTIN (KXAN) — A group of Texas lawmakers called on higher education leaders in the state to protect undocumented students' access to in-state tuition, after the state agreed to end the practice earlier this week. On Wednesday, the Justice Department sued the state over the 2001 Texas Dream Act, which allowed those students to receive in-state tuition if they met certain qualifications. The lawsuit alleged this act violated federal law, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton quickly responded that his office would not contest the suit—causing the law to be repealed through a default judgment. RELATED | Justice Department sues Texas over in-state tuition for undocumented students In a letter sent on Friday, more than a dozen Democratic state representatives called on the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to create a 'provisional classification' that could allow students who previously qualified under the law to enroll this fall 'at the rate they reasonably expected.' The letter later said, in part, 'It is especially cruel and short-sighted to apply this policy change retroactively just weeks before the start of the 2025-2026 academic year. These students made plans, accepted offers, and committed to their futures in good faith.' The lawmakers urged the board to use its rulemaking authority to create this classification — for example, 'first-generation resident tuition' — at least temporarily. They called for the board to release guidance to institutions that would 'preserve tuition equity for students during the transition period.' The lawmakers also noted the move would not override statute but would provide 'a critical bridge' until the Legislature could address the matter during the next legislative session in two years. Earlier this year, during the most recent legislative session, lawmakers considered bills to repeal the Dream Act and heard hours of testimony on it, but it was left pending and failed to pass. In 2001, the Dream Act had bipartisan support and was signed into law by Republican former Governor Rick Perry. RELATED | Texas' undocumented college students no longer qualify for in-state tuition In its lawsuit, the DOJ argues that a 1996 federal law, known as the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), preempts the Dream Act. Attorney General Pam Bondi called it a 'blatant violation' of the federal law. 'Under federal law, schools cannot provide benefits to illegal aliens that they do not provide to U.S. citizens,' Bondi said. 'The Justice Department will relentlessly fight to vindicate federal law and ensure that U.S. citizens are not treated like second-class citizens anywhere in the country.' Legal experts talked to KXAN this week about whether the move by the Trump administration and Paxton's quick agreement allowed for any way for opponents of the change to challenge the decision. Josh Blackman, associate professor of law at South Texas College of Law, said the decision appears effectively final. Barbara Hines, an immigration law professor who helped craft the initial Texas Dream Act, did not share Blackman's assessment that it was the end of the road for the law. She said that in previous lawsuits related to the Dream Act or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, other parties have been allowed to intervene. RELATED | Law professors react: Texas will no longer provide in-state tuition to undocumented students According to the Texas Higher Education Commissioner, around 19,000 students will be affected by the change. The lawmakers' letter argued that the state stands to lose talent, which could affect the workforce and the economy. It said, 'This is not just a moral failure, it's a strategic and economic blunder that will be felt for generations to come.' Economic factors proved to be a driving force behind the Dream Act's passage in 2001. According to a 2015 report by The Texas Tribune, former Governor Perry said at the time, '[Texas] had a choice to make economically: Are you going to put these people in a position of having to rely upon government to take care of themselves, or are you going to let them be educated and be contributing members of society, obviously working towards their citizenship.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
'Trump movement' turns on Cornyn, poll finds
MAGA loyalists have put Sen. John Cornyn's reelection campaign in a Texas-size hole. An early May poll commissioned by the American Opportunity Alliance, a major conservative funding group linked to megadonor Paul Singer, shows the Texas Republican down 17 points in a head-to-head primary matchup with state attorney general Ken Paxton. Below the top-line of Paxton's 52-percent-to-35-percent advantage, the poll found a clear divide between those voters who were defined as 'Trump Movement' voters and those who were 'Traditional Republicans.' In the former category, which made up of 58 percent of the electorate, Paxton had a 45-point lead. Among the latter, who made up only 35 percent of voters, Cornyn had a 27-point lead. The findings reflect a increasingly prominent divide among Republican primary voters in Texas where an insurgent hard-right faction has been steadily gaining ground in recent years while ousting more traditional GOP elected officials. Paxton, who has faced federal investigation and impeachment, has long been a darling of right-wingers in Texas, while Cornyn — first elected to the Senate in 2002 — is considered a pillar of the establishment GOP. In a speculative three-way race with GOP Rep. Wesley Hunt, who is exploring a bid, the margin barely narrowed with the Cornyn trailing Paxton, 43 percent to 27 percent, with Hunt receiving 14 percent. There was some good news for the incumbent in the poll. Despite trailing Paxton significantly, he is still viewed favorably by the Republican primary electorate in the Lone Star State — just not as favorably as the state attorney general. The poll, conducted from April 29 through May 1 among 800 Republican primary voters, is among a series of public and private surveys all showing Cornyn significantly trailing Paxton. They have sparked increasing concern from national Republican operatives about a potentially ugly and costly primary, as well as the possible elevation of a scandal-plagued candidate who might be at risk in a general election. The American Opportunity Alliance's interest in the race is notable; it's one of the key donor consortiums in Republican politics and its members including Singer and Chuck Schwab are some of the biggest funders on the right.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Caddo Parish back LGBTQ+ pride month with support from community
CADDO PARISH, La. (KTAL/KMSS) — Community members, LGBTQ+ organizations, advocates, and allies packed the Caddo Parish Commissioners' meeting in support of the resolution recognizing Pride Month. Sam Ortiz, co-founder of ShrevePride, gave a passionate and direct statement, emphasizing their mission to uplift, heal, connect, and celebrate the LGBTQ+ community. 'The members of our community make up vital pieces of every fabric of this region, from the people who serve us in our restaurants to the people who serve us in public office. The diversity of those people is what makes us so rich, and the LGBTQ plus community is part of that diversity. This month, like every month, we strive to uplift,' said Ortiz. The proclamation was moved by Caddo Commissioner Victor Thomas and seconded by Commissioner Steffon Jones on June 5, 2025. ShrevePride's Q-Prom honors queer history, fashion and more 'That resolution simply states that we acknowledge that we appreciate and that we, accept the individuals in our community for their contributions to our community. That doesn't, that does not in any way, implicate or ask anyone to forgo their own personal values or their personal beliefs,' said Commissioner Thomas. One of the longest active LGBTQ+ advocacy groups for Northwest Louisiana, 'PACE' People Acting for Change and Equality, was also in attendance. 'When our son first came out to us, I realized that I'd never been prejudiced. But I just realized there was just a lot I didn't know about what it meant to be gay in the city and in this country,' shared Critcher, 'And so I started to educate myself. And as I learned about the senseless discrimination that gay people face. It made me mad. And it just woke me up! I thought, I've got to do something,' said Critcher. Critcher shared she helped bring the 'Be Fair Shreveport' Ordinance providing protection against sexual discrimination based on sexual orientation in 2013, which was an extension of former Mayor Glover's executive order. Paige Hoffpauir, a Shreveport resident, testified against the Pride Month proclamation, comparing the LGBTQ+ community to Pickleball and JobCorps. After the testimonies, the Caddo Commission asked attendees to stand if they supported or opposed the proclamation. Hoffpauir and one other person stood in opposition, while about 85% of the crowd stood up in support. Critcher said Hoffpauirs testimony was 'alarming 'jarring' but only amplifies that there is still work to do to unite the community. After more than three hours of debate and other ordinances, the Caddo Commission voted in favor of the special resolution. The vote received nine yes votes and three no votes. Chris Kracman: No Gregory Young: Yes Victor L. Thomas: Yes John-Paul Young: Yes Roy Burrell: Yes Steffon Jones: Yes Sotrmy Gage-Watts: Yes Grace Anne Blake: Yes John E. Atkins: No Ron Cothran: Yes Ed Lazarus: No Ken Epperson, Sr.: Yes Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
