S-25-0503 John Kuehn (Appellant) v. James D. Pillen, in his official capacity as Governor of Nebraska; Robert B. Evnen, in his official capacity as Nebraska Secretary of State; Steven L. Corsi, in his official capacity as Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Health and Human Services of Nebraska; Thomas D. Briese, in his official capacity as the State Treasurer of Nebraska; James R. Kamm, in his official capacity as the Tax Commissioner of Nebraska, Bruce D. Bailey, in his official capacity as a member of the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission; Monica Oldenburg, in her official capacity as a member of the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission; Lorelle Mueting, in her official capacity as a member of the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission; Kim M. Lowe, in her official capacity as a member of the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission; Anna Wishart, Crista Eggers, and Adam Morfeld (Appellees)
Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County, Judge Susan I. Strong
Attorneys: Andrew La Grone (La Grone Law, LLC for Appellant), Edward D. Greim and Katherine Mitra (Graves Garrett Greim LLC as pro hac vice for Appellant)
Alexander S. Arkfeld and Danield J. Gutman (Gutman Law Group for Appellees Anna Wishart, Crista Eggers, and Adam Morfeld and have waived oral argument)
Jason W. Grams and Karson S. Kampfe (Grams Law, LLC for Appellees Bruce D. Bailey, Monica Oldenburg, Lorelle Mueting, and Kim M. Lowe, members of the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission)
Michael T. Hilgers, Cody S. Barnett, and Zachary B. Pohlman (Nebraska Attorney General’s Office for Appellees Gov. Pillen, Sec. Evnen, Steven L. Corsi, Thomas D. Briese, James R. Kamm)
Civil: Injunctive relief and standing
Proceedings below: Appellant requested a declaratory judgment that the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Patient Protection Act and the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Regulation Act are unlawful, and he sought an injunction to prohibit the use of taxpayer monies to enforce these laws. The district court determined that Appellant lacked standing, and it dismissed the suit. Appellant filed a direct appeal to the Nebraska Supreme Court pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 24-1106(1).
Issues: Appellant assigns the following errors: 1) Chambers v. Lautenbaugh, 263 Neb. 920 (2002),does not apply to Appellant’s taxpayer standing claim; 2) A heightened standard for public expenditures is necessary for taxpayer standing; 3) Appellant does not allege illegal public expenditures to state a claim for taxpayer standing; 4) The State has not funded the NMCC to support taxpayer standing; 5) The taxpayer standing doctrine does not apply for public policy reasons; 6) GPC standing may have been solely applicable to Cunningham v. Exon, 202 Neb. 563 (1979); 7) Holdings from Thompson v. Heineman, 289 Neb. 798 (2015), on standing may not have precedential effect; 8) Only Nebraska constitutional issues, not the pressing federal constitutional issues in this case, should be analyzed for GPC standing; 9) An unprecedented GPC standard—i.e. whether a constitutional issue feels too “mundane” to be an issue of GPC—applies; 10) Violations of the Nebraska Constitution’s separation of powers principle, the Nebraska Constitution’s limits on legislative and initiative powers, and the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, all of which implicate citizens’ form of government, are not issues of GPC; 11) This case is analogous to Nebraskans Against Expanded Gambling v. Nebraska Horsemen’s Assn., 258 Neb. 690 (2000), and State ex rel. Reed v. State, Game & Parks Comm’n, 278 Neb. 564 (2009), not Cunningham and Thompson; 12) Appellant lacks taxpayer and GPC standing because other parties have standing; and 13) The district court lacks jurisdiction to reach the merits.