In the 2024 elections, four states had marijuana-related initiatives on the ballot, and one state had psychedelic therapy centers on the ballot. Florida, North Dakota, and South Dakota tried to follow in Ohio’s footsteps and proposed measures to legalize recreational marijuana use for adults 21 and over, while Nebraska presented new proposals or reintroduced measures from past years with some revisions and Massachusetts proposed the decriminalization and regulation of certain psychedelic substances. In Florida, Amendment 3 focuses on allowing recreational use, a significant shift in one of the more conservative states to address legalization. Meanwhile, Nebraska's two initiatives would establish a medical marijuana program, offering regulated access for qualifying patients.
Florida: No!
Florida’s marijuana legalization amendment, known as Amendment 3, ultimately did not pass because it fell short of the required 60% majority vote. Florida has one of the strictest thresholds for passing amendments; unlike other states that typically require only a simple majority, Florida mandates a supermajority, or 60% of the vote, for constitutional amendments.
This high bar has often made it challenging for more controversial or progressive measures, like recreational marijuana legalization, to succeed. Amendment 3 would have made Florida one of the few Southern states to adopt such a policy. Proponents argued that legalization would reduce the burden on the criminal justice system, provide safer, regulated access to marijuana, and generate significant tax revenue for the state. Supporters also highlighted polls showing high public approval for legalization across party lines, but those numbers didn’t fully translate to the ballot box. Several factors likely contributed to Amendment 3 falling short.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and other conservative leaders publicly opposed the measure, citing concerns about public health, safety, and potential impacts on youth. Opposition groups, such as "Keep Florida Clean," actively campaigned against the amendment, raising millions in contributions to fund ads and outreach warning about the risks of legalization. These groups used ads emphasizing the potential for increased youth access, impaired driving incidents, and overall community health concerns to sway voters.
Additionally, Florida’s stringent requirements for ballot initiatives also limited the way the amendment could be framed, complicating advocacy efforts. The result is a disappointment for proponents who saw Florida as a potential leader in the South for recreational cannabis legalization. However, public opinion in Florida remains largely supportive of legalization, so advocates may consider revisiting the issue in future election cycles. Some observers note that shifting attitudes around marijuana use, coupled with continued reform efforts in other states, may eventually lead Florida to re-evaluate its stance.
Although the amendment did not pass, the close results reflect a significant shift in Floridian attitudes, signaling that marijuana reform could remain a critical issue in Florida politics and might reappear on future ballots.
Both South Dakota and North Dakota saw measures to legalize recreational marijuana, but these initiatives did not pass either, despite previous efforts and growing national support.
South Dakota: No!
South Dakota’s 2024 attempt to legalize recreational marijuana followed a 2020 measure that initially passed with 54% support. However, this earlier decision was overturned by the South Dakota Supreme Court, which ruled that the 2020 measure violated the state’s single-subject rule, thus preventing its implementation. The 2024 measure sought to address previous legal and procedural concerns by simplifying the initiative. However, opposition groups, along with Governor Kristi Noem, continued to campaign against legalization. The opposition emphasized concerns about marijuana’s potential impact on public safety, youth access, and impaired driving, issues that particularly resonated with voters in a state known for its conservative values.
North Dakota: No!
North Dakota’s recreational marijuana initiative in 2024 marked another attempt following a failed effort in 2022, where a similar measure was defeated with about 55% of voters opposing it. The 2024 initiative aimed to address previous criticisms by limiting possession and cultivation amounts, focusing solely on personal use rather than establishing a commercial cannabis market. However, voters remained hesitant, possibly due to concerns about law enforcement challenges, addiction, and public health. Campaigns against the measure highlighted these points, appealing to North Dakota's more traditional perspectives on substance use.
Another significant factor was the lack of strong financial backing and organization for the pro-legalization campaigns in both North and South Dakota. Unlike in larger, more progressive states where national cannabis advocacy groups have invested heavily, the campaigns in North and South Dakota operated on smaller budgets with limited advertising and outreach capabilities. This imbalance allowed opposition campaigns to more effectively communicate their concerns to voters.
Additionally, rural areas in both states tend to be more resistant to drug policy reform, and without a robust urban population to drive support, reaching the 50% threshold was challenging. Given these factors, the results underscore the continued difficulty in achieving marijuana reform in conservative regions of the U.S. Despite increasing support nationwide, success for marijuana initiatives in these states will likely require sustained advocacy, education, and perhaps more incremental approaches focused initially on medical marijuana expansion rather than full recreational legalization.
Nebraska: Yes!
Nebraska voters successfully passed a medical marijuana measure after years of advocacy and prior challenges in getting such initiatives on the ballot. Nebraska’s success this year reflects changing attitudes toward cannabis, especially for medical purposes, and significant public support for providing treatment options for patients with serious health conditions.
Over 70% of Nebraska residents indicated support for medical marijuana in early polling, showing strong public backing. Supporters of the initiative emphasized the benefits of medical cannabis for patients with debilitating conditions like epilepsy, cancer, and chronic pain, which helped frame the conversation as one centered on healthcare rather than recreational use. Campaigns focused on testimonials from patients and families who struggled to access medical marijuana under previous regulations, creating a persuasive emotional appeal. Advocates worked to ensure the measure complied with Nebraska’s strict single-subject rule after previous initiatives were struck down. They filed two separate initiatives: one to legalize medical use and another to establish a regulatory commission. These moves made the initiative more legally robust, helping it survive procedural challenges.The passage of Nebraska’s medical marijuana measure is part of a broader trend across conservative-leaning states that have opted to legalize cannabis for medical rather than recreational purposes. The success may signal a pathway forward in similar states, where public support for medical use is often much stronger than for recreational legalization.
Massachusetts: No!
Massachusetts voters rejected the 2024 ballot measure aimed at decriminalizing certain psychedelics, such as psilocybin and DMT, for therapeutic use. Despite strong support from advocates highlighting the mental health benefits of psychedelics, the proposal failed due to concerns over public safety and the rapid pace of change. Opponents argued that the measure went too far, too quickly, citing potential risks such as black market growth, accidental consumption, and challenges in managing adverse reactions at therapy centers. These concerns, along with fears of inadequate regulation and insufficient medical oversight, contributed to the defeat.
