Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has ignited yet another legal battle over marijuana laws, this time targeting the city of Dallas for its recent decision to decriminalize marijuana possession of up to four ounces. The lawsuit follows the overwhelming support from Dallas voters, who approved Proposition R—also known as the Dallas Freedom Act—by nearly 67% during the November election. This charter amendment enables the city's police department to bypass arrests and citations for minor marijuana offenses, except as part of investigations related to serious felonies.
By instituting this new policy, Dallas has positioned itself as the largest Texas city to push back against state marijuana laws, which currently classify recreational use as illegal. The amendment explicitly forbids police officers from considering the smell of marijuana as probable cause for searches, limiting their authority significantly when it involves local enforcement. This directive not only alters policing practices but also signals to state officials, including Paxton, who have been staunchly opposed to such changes.
Paxton swiftly condemned the move, asserting, "Cities cannot pick and choose which state laws they follow." He argues the amendment is unlawful, stating it undermines the Texas Constitution and the state’s drug laws. His office has characterized the city's initiative as what he termed "a backdoor attempt to violate the Texas Constitution," threatening legal repercussions for any city attempting to enact similar policies.
Given Paxton's previous lawsuits against other Texas cities including Denton, Austin, Killeen, and Elgin—where he challenged their respective marijuana decriminalization efforts—many anticipated his legal response to Dallas's Proposition R. His earlier attempts have yielded mixed results, with courts dismissing suits against Austin and San Marcos for lack of legal justification. Still, he remains determined to take on the cities he views as champions of what he labels pro-crime initiatives.
The Dallas lawsuit has drawn attention not only for its content but also for its timing; city leaders recently reaffirmed their commitment to implementing the amendment, doing so against the backdrop of Paxton’s threats. Recently, the interim police chief issued guidance to officers, instructing them to halt enforcement of marijuana possession laws, reinforcing the city’s stance and adding fuel to the fire of this legal showdown.
Within the Dallas City Council, council member Cara Mendelsohn has publicly expressed concern about the legal ramifications of the new policy, even proposing amendments to delay its implementation until state laws changed to legalize marijuana. Yet, her efforts were swiftly voted down by fellow council members, who backed the proposition and its public support. Mendelsohn criticized the ensuing legal confrontation as wasteful, calling it "such a waste of your tax dollars" and expressing frustration with the potential consequences for the Dallas Police Department.
The Dallas City Council's adoption of Proposition R has been especially significant following the Dallas Freedom Act's grassroots campaign lead by the non-profit organization Ground Game Texas. This initiative is part of a broader trend wherein cities across Texas are increasingly seeking to distance themselves from state regulations on recreational marijuana, reflecting shifting public attitudes and increasing calls for reform.
Ground Game Texas has celebrated the passage of Proposition R as not just another progressive victory but as part of their larger mission to advocate for marijuana reform at the local level. The organization’s representatives argue Paxton's lawsuit is not only against the city’s charter amendment but also against the will of the elected voters advocating for reform.
This clash has placed Dallas at the forefront of the marijuana conversation within Texas, highlighting the struggles between local governance and state authority over drug laws. Proponents of the decriminalization measures argue for the social and economic benefits of reducing unnecessary arrests and freeing up police resources to address more pressing public safety issues.
Nevertheless, the legal complexity surrounding marijuana laws continues to fuel debates across Texas. Advocates see this legal confrontation as part of the broader struggle to reshape drug policies in the state, which has historically held conservative perspectives on recreational marijuana. With the spotlight now on Dallas, many are eager to see how this legal battle will play out and whether it will set any precedent for future local reforms within Texas.
