Editor's Note: ResponsibleOhio's lawsuit against Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted is one of two brought during this campaign.
The first, with its ruling discussed in the article below, concerned ballot language presented to the voters.
The second, brought by "John Doe" associated with ResponsibleOhio, challenges Husted's probe of the organization and its volunteers.
COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that part of the ballot wording describing a proposal to legalize marijuana in the state is misleading and ordered a state board to rewrite it.
Supporters of the measure, known in the fall election as Issue 3, challenged the phrasing of the ballot language and title, arguing certain descriptions were inaccurate and intentionally misleading to voters. Attorneys for the state's elections chief, a vocal opponent of the proposal, had said the nearly 500-word ballot language was fair.
In a split decision, the high court sided with the pot supporters in singling out four paragraphs of the ballot language it said "inaccurately states pertinent information and omits essential information."
The court ordered the state's Ballot Board to reconvene to replace those paragraphs about where and how retail stores can open, the amount of marijuana a person can grow and transport and the potential for additional growing facilities.
