Big Win for “No on 64” Campaign as California Court Rules Against Pro-Legalization Campaign Claims

By August 13, 2016Uncategorized
 Big Win for “No on 64” Campaign as California Court Rules Against Pro-Legalization Campaign Claims

 

Court says Proposition 64 could roll back ban on smoking ads on TV; forces pro-legalization campaign to change incorrect claim that pot use among minors had decreased in states that have legalized marijuana

 

[Alexandria, VA] – The campaign against Proposition 64 — the initiative on this November’s ballot that would legalize marijuana for recreational use in California — won a major victory in court today, when a California judge ruled that a litany of claims that legalization proponents had placed in its ballot argument and rebuttal were misleading and had to be changed. Principal among the court’s findings was that Proposition 64 could, contrary to legalization proponents’ claims, allow pot smoking ads on TV, rolling back the ban on TV advertising for smoking that has existed since the 1970s.

 

“Just as we predicted, the court’s decision shows how Proposition 64 will undo decades of progress in public health in one fell swoop, through the massive commercialization of pot,” said Kevin Sabet, SAM Action’s President. “The undoing of advertising restrictions is one of the principal reasons that public health luminaries like pioneering anti-Big Tobacco advocate Dr. Stan Glantz oppose Proposition 64.”

 

Moreover, the court ruled that a number of other claims made by legalization proponents were misleading and had to be changed, including a claim that pot use among minors had decreased in states that had legalized marijuana, and a statement that drugged driving had decreased in legalized states.  It also forced the pro-legalization campaign to revise exaggerated estimates on cost savings sharply downwards.

 

“The court’s ruling demonstrates how Proposition 64 is regressive in the most literal sense of the word,” said Jeffrey Zinsmeister, SAM Action’s Executive Vice President. “It would roll back the clock to 1971, when our country banned cigarette smoking ads on TV. It’s ironic that the same legalization lobby that claims to be fighting ‘Nixon-era’ drug policies is actually turning back the clock to the Nixon administration on smoking ads.”

 

###

Kevin Sabet

Author Kevin Sabet

More posts by Kevin Sabet

Join the discussion One Comment

  • Sherry Gillis says:

    Thank you SO MUCH, SAM, for fighting the marijuana lobby in this country. It is such a relief to know you are leading the charge against the lies and deception being disseminated online and elsewhere, and the people at SAM are heroes for helping our nation to fight against the scourge of marijuana.

    The last thing we need in California is to relax the marijuana laws even more than they are already. Californians have to live with the constant smell of marijuana in the air, neighbors growing marijuana, commercial grows in residential neighborhoods, the destruction of our forests by illegal grows and the theft of our water in the midst of a water crisis in our state – all in the guise of “medicinal marijuana.” Making it legal would increase the problems exponentially.

    I”m so glad the Court in California have barred the Marijuana Lobby from printing their lies on the ballot. Bravo, SAM!!!!!

Leave a Reply