A proposal filed by 17 Republican lawmakers in South Dakota would change how medical marijuana patients interact with law enforcement, requiring cardholders to immediately provide their registry identification card upon request or risk arrest.

The measure, Senate Bill 95, has now been scheduled for a public hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 29.

Under current law, registered cardholders are broadly protected from arrest, prosecution, or penalties for the lawful medical use of marijuana as long as they remain within possession limits and follow cultivation and transport rules. The new proposal would carve out a significant exception to those protections.

Specifically, the bill adds language stating that “notwithstanding any other provision,” a cardholder would be subject to arrest if, upon request by a law enforcement officer, they fail to provide their registry identification card or registry identification card number.

The same requirement would apply to nonresident cardholders traveling in the state. Even though nonresident patients are currently protected from arrest when transporting, purchasing, possessing, or using medical marijuana within the legal limits, the bill would allow their arrest if they cannot produce either the card or the card number when asked by police.

This marks a notable shift from the existing framework of South Dakota’s medical marijuana law, which was approved by voters in 2020 and designed to shield qualifying patients from criminal penalties when acting within the program’s rules. Instead of focusing solely on whether a patient is compliant with possession limits and usage regulations, the proposal introduces an on-the-spot documentation requirement that could override those protections.

The bill does not specify any grace period, alternative method of verification, or requirement that officers confirm a person’s status through the state registry before making an arrest. As written, the failure to immediately present the physical card or recite the card number could be enough to justify an arrest under chapter 23A-3 of state law.

Because the new language is inserted with a “notwithstanding any other provision” clause, it would effectively supersede the broader arrest protections currently granted to patients under sections 34-20G-2 and 34-20G-3.

If approved by the Legislature and signed into law, the change would mean that even fully compliant medical marijuana patients could face arrest simply for not having their card or card number readily available during an encounter with law enforcement.

The Senate Judiciary Committee will take public testimony on the measure on January 29.