Ravnsborg Appeals Arcane and Erased Legislative Restrictions on Petitioners, Lets Amendment A Die Without Appeal

Last updated on 2021-02-21

When I beat Jason Ravnsborg in court last year and secured the defeat of 2019 House Bill 1094, the Attorney General didn’t roll over and take his lumps. Even as the Legislature scurried to erase that unconstitutional law and replace it with an entirely different statute oppressing a smaller group petition circulators, A.G. Ravnsborg appealed, determined to do his duty and defend the state’s laws (even a law that no longer exists) in court.

But when Governor Kristi Noem beats his half-hearted lawyering for Amendment A in court, Jason Ravnsborg decides his duty to defend our laws ends after one shot:

South Dakota’s attorney general says his office will not participate in appealing a ruling that struck down a voter-approved constitutional amendment legalizing recreational marijuana.

…Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg is obligated to defend state laws when they are challenged in court. But office spokesman Timothy Bormann said Ravnsborg concluded his office fulfilled its obligation and doesn’t have to participate in an appeal to the South Dakota Supreme Court [“Ravnsborg Won’t Appeal Ruling Rejecting Legalized Marijuana,” AP, 2021.02.12].

Now back in December, A.G. Ravnsborg said something about taking cases to the United States Supreme Court because his office “listened” to “thousands of calls and emails from concerned citizens.” I’m pretty sure there’s a truckload more public hue and cry for the Attorney General to fight for Amendment A, the constitutionalization of marijuana, than there is for him to appeal the overturning of 2019 HB 1094, the Legislature’s technical restrictions on petition circulators. (Seriously, do a poll on mere top-of-mind awareness of “Amendment A” and “HB 1094”, and I’ll bet you get 50%+ recognition of Amendment A and 0.002% recognition of HB 1094.) But I get the impression Attorney General Ravnsborg isn’t taking phone calls and emails this month. He leaves Amendment A supporters and their lawyer Brendan Johnson to carry on the fight by themselves.

Ravnsborg similarly surrendered without appeal in 2019 when he lost the argument for Initiated Measure 24.

So just to be clear: when legislators pass a law that doesn’t withstand judicial scrutiny, the Attorney General will appeal that ruling and go to the Supreme Court. But when regular citizens pass a law that doesn’t survive first contact with a judge, the Attorney General drops the case.

Voters, you know where you rank in Jason Ravnsborg’s eyes.