Organizers behind Idaho’s unsuccessful medical cannabis legalization initiative campaign said the state’s voters should be concerned about elected officials’ determination to keep their petition off the 2026 ballot, but they don’t plan to pursue legal recourse.
Jeremy Chou, a partner at Givens Pursley LLP, sent a strongly worded letter to Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane on July 17, on behalf of the Natural Medicine Alliance of Idaho (NMAI), the group behind the legalization petition.
NMAI gathered more than 150,000 signatures ahead of a May 1 deadline, but McGrane’s office announced on July 14 that only 58,024 were valid – a 61% disqualification rate – putting the group well short of the 70,725 signatures needed from at least 6% of the state’s registered voters, including in at least 18 of the state’s 35 legislative districts.
McGrane’s office determined that NMAI fell short on both requirements.
The state secretary’s final determination letter suggested that NMAI missed deadlines, had insufficient circulator documentation and payment disclosures, and petition materials were incorrectly prepared or submitted late.
“NMAI does not agree with several issues raised in your letter,” Chou wrote. “Although NMAI does not intend to pursue a legal challenge, it believes a response is warranted.”
Chou called the county clerks’ offices’ acceptance of just more than 58,000 signatures “an unusually high rejection rate,” suggesting that more than 10,000 signatures from registered voters were rejected “based on technicalities or legally questionable grounds.”
The campaign needed 12,701 more valid signatures to secure its legalization proposal, the Idaho Medical Cannabis Act, on the 2026 ballot.
Chou laid out three concerns in his letter to McGrane:
- “First, counties rejected thousands of signatures because each petition sheet must contain signatures only from residents of a single county. For example, a registered voter that lives in Canyon County could unknowingly sign an Ada County petition during lunch in Boise. The voter’s signature would be rejected on that basis. Although this restriction may have served a purpose when clerks had access only to county records, Idaho now maintains a statewide voter-registration database.
- “Second, thousands of signatures were rejected because they were undated, even when the relevant date could be confirmed from surrounding signatures and the petition’s signed, dated and notarized circulator affidavit. These rejections are especially concerning because the governing statutes do not expressly require each signer to provide a date.
- “Third, thousands more were reportedly rejected because the voter was not ‘active.’ The initiative statutes do not impose a specific registration timeline. To the extent these rejections were based on Idaho Code Section 34-435, the statute does not appear to authorize retroactive cancellation of a registration that was valid when the petition was signed. It is also unclear whether affected voters had notice or opportunity to cure cancellation of their registration status.”
Chou wrote that the “rejections should concern all Idahoans, particularly the registered voters who took the time to participate in the initiative process only to have their signatures rejected afterward.”
Dr. Dori Tunney, a philanthropist, pediatrician and long-time Idaho resident who died of brain cancer in 2024, inspired the NMAI legalization campaign, including more than $3 million in contributions from a pair of donors tied to Tunney’s family.
NMAI organizers used those contributions to contract professional signature-gathering firms.
“As the campaign progressed, we saw signs that our original signature-gathering vendor’s operation was disorganized, but, when concerns were raised, we were assured that legal requirements, including requirements related to reporting and residency, were being followed and signatures were on pace to surpass the threshold,” the organizers said in a July 14 statement provided to Cannabis Business Times. “It appears that our confidence was misplaced.”
The organizers further said that they have “zero tolerance for signature fraud or prohibited conduct,” and that they believe claims raised by state officials originated with their initial vendor.
KTVB-TV reported on July 23 that NMAI’s initial signature-gathering vendor was Black Peak, which stood behind the work its petition circulators did on behalf of the campaign, adding that it confirmed each circulator's Idaho residency multiple times and operated under state laws.
“Black Peak did the job we were hired to do,” the firm said in a statement to the media outlet. “The alliance owes Black Peak a substantial sum for services rendered and has chosen to attack our work rather than pay its bills. Criticizing a vendor you have not paid is not accountability. It is deflection, and Idaho voters deserve better from a group asking for their trust.”
Chou said in the July 17 letter to McGrane that NMAI organizers believe its contractors obtained all the required information from their circulators to confirm their residency.
“In some instances, confirmation of residency may have been achieved by proof other than an Idaho driver’s license,” the attorney wrote. “NMAI’s review of Idaho law identified no requirement to record a circulator’s driver’s-license information or to prove residency through any particular set of documents.”
Chou also said the state’s identification of one petition sheet containing what election officials believe to be fraudulent signatures does not undermine the integrity of the broader campaign effort.
He also addressed possible reporting deficiencies.
“NMAI takes its reporting obligations seriously, believes its reports are complete and accurate, and will work with your office to address any specific deficiencies,” Chou wrote. “To the extent the concerns involve reporting of payments to petition circulators, NMAI engaged a professional contractor to manage circulator payments; that contractor held all payment data and was required by law to accurately report that information. In any event, reporting deficiencies of this kind do not provide a basis for rejecting otherwise valid signatures.”
Idaho voters wishing to maintain their right to vote on future cannabis legalization initiatives will need to defeat a joint resolution that lawmakers placed on the November 2026 ballot that intends to grant the state Legislature exclusive authority to legalize (or not legalize) cannabis, narcotics and other psychoactive substances.
