> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.newbostonpost.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Marijuana Repeal Question Cleared For Massachusetts November Ballot
- URL: https://www.newbostonpost.com/marijuana-repeal-question-cleared-for-massachusetts-november-ballot/
- Published: 2026-07-21T20:22:41.000Z
- Updated: 2026-07-21T20:22:41.000Z
- Description: Massachusetts voters will decide whether to repeal the state's recreational marijuana law after the State Ballot Law Commission rejected a signature challenge and ordered the initiative onto the November ballot.
- Author: State House News Service
- Tags: News, Politics, State Government, Massachusetts, #lead, #morning-bell, morning-bell, #3

Katie Castellani  
State House News Service

The State Ballot Law Commission on Tuesday overruled an objection to nomination signatures supporting an initiative petition seeking to repeal the state's adult-use recreational cannabis laws and ordered the question to be printed on November's ballot. 

In a 16-page decision, the commission found that objector Kevin Gilnack, who filed the signatures challenge on behalf of the Stop the Repeal campaign that opposes the ballot question, "did not meet the burden of proof" to disqualify enough signatures to scrap the initiative petition. 

In a seven-page objection filed last week, Gilnack contended numerous signatures were "obtained through fraudulent means," were not "genuine," were "illegible," excluded required addresses or included stray marks. As a result, Gilnack said, the committee behind the ballot question did not file the required 12,429 certified signatures. That marked the final batch of signatures petitioners had to collect after [a p](https://www.statehousenews.com/news/legislature/committee-recommends-no-action-on-ballot-questions/article%5F699b5a78-72c9-4f5e-b04c-3bf74f042a19.html?ref=newbostonpost.com)[anel of lawmakers decided](https://www.statehousenews.com/news/legislature/committee-recommends-no-action-on-ballot-questions/article%5F699b5a78-72c9-4f5e-b04c-3bf74f042a19.html?ref=newbostonpost.com) that none of the initiative petitions brought before them this year warranted legislative attention.

The committee backing the initiative petition filed 12,551 certified signatures with the Secretary of State's office, meaning 123 would have to be invalidated to knock the question off the ballot, according to the commission's decision.

Commissioners declined to disqualify 231 signatures Gilnack argued should be invalidated because of stray marks. The commission said the stray marks appear mostly on the back of the petitions and "do not appear to be intentional markings and do not present voters with any information. Instead, they are errant pen marks that have no material effect on the remainder of the content of the petition." 

Also, the commission declined to invalidate another 99 signatures Gilnack contended were "non-genuine," meaning one person signed multiple names. The commission said Gilnack didn't "prove by substantial evidence" that the signatures were signed by the same person.

Jennifer Naso, a handwriting expert Gilnack called in as a witness, testified it was "inconclusive" whether those signatures were signed by the same person, according to the decision. Commissioners said that Naso's assessment was limited to what is on the petition like the signature and other printed information including the signee's address. Naso testified that some of the printed information on the petition was "similar" and that she did not review voter registration records or handwriting samples for any of the 99 signatures challenged as "non-genuine." Commissioners also said Gilnack didn't present other evidence to support his argument that signatures were "non-genuine" like testimony from anyone who said they signed another person's name or that a signature in question was not their signature.

Commissioners ruled to invalidate four certified signatures Gilnack challenged because they didn't include necessary addresses, or the addresses were incomplete. The commission found Gilnack had "shown by substantial evidence" those signatures were improperly certified. 

This is the second challenge to its nomination signatures the initiative petition has [survived](https://www.statehousenews.com/search/?l=25&s=start%5Ftime&sd=desc&nfl=advertorial%2Ccontributed&f=html&t=article%2Cvideo%2Cyoutube%2Ccollection&app=editorial&nsa=eedition&q=repeal+marijuana+laws&ref=newbostonpost.com). Also, in June, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the initiative petition could move forward onto the ballot after opponents argued that Attorney General Andrea Campbell's summary of the proposal was not fair.