Rollback on Rights: Inside the Anti-Cannabis Campaigns Threatening Adult-Use Legalization

How repeal campaigns in Maine and Massachusetts target adult-use cannabis markets, threaten patients and revenues, and raise urgent questions for Arizona and other legalization states.

Across the country, cannabis debates usually move in one direction. Voters decide whether to legalize, legislatures refine the rules, and markets slowly mature.

The new push in Maine and Massachusetts flips that script. Instead of trying to stop legalization, well-funded campaigns are working to pull the plug on existing adult-use cannabis markets that voters already approved.

This reversal is not theoretical. Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), a national prohibitionist group, has announced that it is providing multi-million-dollar support to efforts in both states that would end licensed adult-use cannabis sales while keeping limited possession technically legal.

The goal is not to fix a broken system. The goal is to shut down legal adult-use cannabis storefronts and push people back into a narrower, more restricted model of access.

That kind of rollback would not just be a setback for cannabis policy.

It would threaten patient care, destabilize state budgets, and set a precedent that any voter-approved adult-use cannabis system can be quietly reversed by moneyed interests.

For Arizona patients and providers, including The Marijuana Doctor, this is a warning shot, not distant drama.

The Players and the Plan

SAM has long opposed cannabis legalization, yet its latest strategy marks a sharp turn. In a video posted on X, SAM co-founder and president Kevin Sabet describes a new priority: bankrolling grassroots campaigns to end marijuana sales and commercialization in Maine and Massachusetts. Reporting estimates that SAM’s backing is meant to help kill a combined total of roughly $1.8 billion in annual cannabis sales across the two states.

Those dollars do not tell the whole story about SAM’s influence. The group’s political arm, SAM Action, is set up as a 501(c)(4) “social welfare” organization. That structure allows it to spend heavily on ballot fights while keeping its donor list largely hidden from public view under federal IRS rules. In a campaign aimed at reversing voter-approved cannabis legalization, that lack of transparency matters. Voters deserve to know who is paying to change the rules after the fact.

In Massachusetts, the prohibitionist campaign operates under the name Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts.

The group is advancing a measure titled “An Act to Restore a Sensible Marijuana Policy,” which would repeal provisions of the state’s cannabis legalization law that allow commercial adult-use cannabis sales and home cultivation.

Adults 21 and older could still possess and gift small amounts, but they would lose licensed adult-use cannabis stores and the right to grow at home.

State officials have confirmed that the coalition submitted more than enough valid signatures to send the measure to lawmakers and potentially onto the 2026 ballot.

Critics in Massachusetts have already raised alarms about the coalition’s signature-gathering tactics. Complaints describe petitioners who allegedly misled voters by disguising the rollback effort behind cover sheets that referenced unrelated issues such as housing or voter reform.

Whatever the legal status of those tactics, they reinforce how easy it is to obscure the stakes of dismantling adult-use cannabis rights.

In Maine, prohibitionist organizers are pursuing a similar approach. State officials recently cleared a ballot initiative that would amend both the Cannabis Legalization Act and the Maine Medical Use of Cannabis Act. The measure would repeal key provisions of the voter-approved Cannabis Legalization Act that allow commercial adult-use cultivation and sales, and it would eliminate home cultivation for adults while preserving limited possession. Adult-use cannabis storefronts would disappear, while the medical program would remain the only legal supply channel.

Supporters of the Maine repeal argue that more stringent rules and additional testing for medical products are needed. That framing sounds patient-centered on the surface. Yet the core of the proposal is not a nuanced medical cannabis reform.

It is a near-total shutdown of the state’s adult-use cannabis market, which currently generates hundreds of millions of dollars in annual sales.

What Repeal Would Actually Do

Repeal advocates like to say that cannabis would remain “legal” in Maine and Massachusetts under their proposals. In practice, adult-use cannabis would become legal in theory and scarce in reality.

Adults could still possess small amounts, but they would lose convenient, regulated storefronts that offer tested products, clear labeling, and consumer protections.

Eliminating adult-use cannabis stores would force everyone who does not qualify for medical certification into a tighter funnel.

People who use cannabis for pain, sleep, anxiety, or other conditions, but lack the time, money, or documentation for a medical card, would have three options: navigate a more expensive medical system, turn to the illicit market, or forgo cannabis altogether despite ongoing symptoms.

There is no serious evidence that this kind of forced shift improves public health. There is abundant evidence that it increases reliance on unregulated sources.

In Massachusetts, adult-use cannabis establishments now generate well over a billion dollars in annual sales and have surpassed many billions in cumulative revenue since the market opened.

These revenues support substance use treatment, local programs, and state budgets. The chair of the state’s cannabis regulatory agency has already warned that ending the adult-use cannabis market would threaten tax dollars earmarked for public health initiatives.

Maine’s adult-use cannabis market is smaller but still significant, with a growing ecosystem of small, locally owned businesses.

The proposed rollback would dismantle that market, shutter retail shops, and eliminate legal adult-use cannabis cultivation for the commercial sector.

Workers would lose jobs, municipalities would lose tax revenue, and many small operators, including social equity entrepreneurs, would likely go under.

Prohibitionists sometimes claim that returning to a medical-only model would concentrate resources on “real patients.” That assumption does not hold up in practice.

When adult-use cannabis is stripped away, patients often lose nearby dispensaries, product variety, and price competition. Medical programs that are already under strain rarely receive new funding at the same time that adult-use cannabis revenues disappear.

Patients, Not Politics: Who Gets Hurt

Medical cannabis access is not the same as medical equity. A state can technically maintain a medical program on paper while making it difficult or unaffordable for patients to participate.

That pattern is already visible in Massachusetts, where the medical market has shrunk and patients report traveling long distances or juggling limited dispensary options, even as the adult-use cannabis system thrives.

Many people with legitimate medical needs choose adult-use cannabis products because they are easier to access.

They may struggle to find a certifying clinician, work multiple jobs, or lack reliable transportation. In some states, they face high annual card fees or additional costs linked to renewals and physician visits.

When adult-use cannabis is available, they can walk into a licensed store, present an ID, and purchase a regulated product. When adult-use cannabis disappears, these patients bear the brunt of that decision.

Arizona offers a clear example of how policy design shapes real access. Voters approved adult-use cannabis through Proposition 207 in 2020, with sales starting in 2021.

Since then, the medical registry has shrunk sharply as many residents who once relied on medical cards shifted into the adult-use cannabis system, often to avoid state card fees that can cost hundreds of dollars each year.

At the same time, Arizona’s adult-use cannabis tax revenue has become a steady funding source for public education, infrastructure, and health programs, with hundreds of millions in marijuana tax revenue reported in recent fiscal years.

Those numbers tell a simple story. When Arizona added adult-use cannabis on top of an existing medical program, patients gained more choices, not fewer.

Home delivery for recreational customers, recently approved and implemented, further expanded access for people who are homebound, immunocompromised, or living in rural communities. Rolling back adult-use cannabis in a state like Maine or Massachusetts would move in the opposite direction, narrowing channels of access, especially for those with the least time, money, and political power.

The Marijuana Doctor works every day with Arizonans who rely on cannabis for chronic pain, PTSD, cancer-related symptoms, and other conditions. For many of these patients, the medical program remains essential. A card can mean lower taxes, higher purchase limits, or access to specific formulations.

The patient community also includes people who use adult-use cannabis products because they cannot afford or navigate the medical process, even though their use is clearly therapeutic. These are not hypothetical cases.

They are people juggling work, caregiving, disability, and limited income. Restricting adult-use cannabis does not protect them. It punishes them for needing relief.

Why This Is a National Inflection Point

Anti-legalization campaigns are not new. For years, groups like SAM have opposed cannabis reform initiatives at the front end, urging voters to reject adult-use cannabis legalization. Those efforts have had mixed success, with defeats in some states and clear wins in others.

What is new is the focus on rolling back adult-use cannabis rights that already exist. If the Maine and Massachusetts campaigns succeed in unwinding their adult-use cannabis markets while leaving only possession and narrowly defined medical programs intact, they will establish a dangerous template. Any state with adult-use cannabis could become a target for similar repeal drives financed by national groups whose donors remain hidden.

The stakes extend beyond cannabis. Both Maine and Massachusetts originally legalized adult-use cannabis through voter-approved ballot measures. The current rollback campaigns depend on indirect initiative processes that give lawmakers a first look and then send the question back to voters only if politicians do not act.

Pair that with undisclosed donors and opaque messaging, and it becomes easier to chip away at voter-approved policies without a clear, honest public debate.

For Arizona, where adult-use cannabis was also approved at the ballot, this moment is a stress test of how durable direct democracy really is.

If voters watch New England markets being dismantled a decade after legalization, the message is obvious: rights won once can be challenged again whenever a motivated, well-funded opposition decides to try.

Moral Clarity, Legal Reality

Prohibitionist groups have framed these repeal efforts as a public health intervention. Their messaging emphasizes high-THC products, youth risks, and concerning data on emergency room visits and cannabis use disorder.

Some of those concerns are legitimate. Studies have documented rising cannabis-related hospitalizations in some legal markets, and clinicians are seeing more patients who struggle with problem use.

The question is not whether cannabis can cause harm. It can, especially for young people and heavy users. The question is whether dismantling regulated adult-use cannabis markets actually reduces that harm. Emerging evidence suggests the answer is far from clear.

National survey data indicate that adolescent marijuana use has fallen or remained stable over the last decade, even as more states have legalized adult-use cannabis.

Several studies find no consistent spike in teen use directly attributable to adult-use cannabis legalization, though results do vary by region and methodology.

Regulated markets are not risk-free, yet unregulated markets carry their own public health threats.

The vaping-associated lung injury crisis of 2019, for example, was driven largely by illicit THC cartridges rather than licensed dispensary products. Illicit grows can damage ecosystems, and illegal sellers do not check IDs, track potency, or test for contaminants.

When adult-use cannabis markets are shut down while possession remains legal, supply does not evaporate. It shifts. People still seek out cannabis for pain, sleep, stress, and recreation.

Without legal adult-use cannabis outlets, they are more likely to buy from unlicensed vendors, rely on friends, or mix medical and non-medical systems in unsafe ways.

The public loses age verification, product testing, accurate labeling, and complaint mechanisms in the process.

For The Marijuana Doctor, moral clarity starts with this reality: patients and communities are safer when cannabis is regulated, not when it is pushed back into the shadows.

That does not mean every adult-use cannabis system is perfect. States should improve packaging rules, restrict youth-targeted marketing, and invest more tax revenue into prevention and treatment.

It does mean that ending adult-use cannabis sales while claiming to protect public health reverses the logic of harm reduction.

Conclusion: Let the People Decide, Fully Informed

The campaigns in Maine and Massachusetts are about more than two regional markets. They test whether adult-use cannabis rights, once approved by voters, can be quietly reversed through a combination of dark money, confusing petitions, and fear-based messaging.

They test whether states will protect regulated adult-use cannabis systems that generate billions in revenue and support millions of patients and consumers, or trade those systems for symbolic wins that drive people back to unregulated sources.

Arizona patients, advocates, and professionals need to pay close attention. The state has already shown that medical and adult-use cannabis can coexist.

Proposition 207 expanded access, generated hundreds of millions in tax revenue, and allowed new tools such as home delivery that matter immensely to patients with mobility, transportation, or income barriers.

The Marijuana Doctor sees daily how both systems, together, support patient choice, safety, and dignity.

If prohibitionist rollbacks succeed in New England, similar campaigns will almost certainly appear elsewhere. That possibility makes honest, evidence-based public education essential.

Voters should get to decide the future of adult-use cannabis, just as they did when legalization first appeared on the ballot. This time, the choice needs to be fully informed: between regulated adult-use cannabis markets that can be improved, or a return to scarcity, stigma, and the illicit trade that legalization was designed to replace.

The money behind repeal efforts is real. So are the patients, workers, and communities whose lives have been shaped by adult-use cannabis reforms.

Facts, lived experience, and democratic precedent remain powerful tools. Arizona’s cannabis community should be ready to use them.

***

Marijuana Doctor is your premier destination for seamless medical marijuana licensing. Our compassionate team guides you with expertise, ensuring a smooth process. Discover the therapeutic benefits in a supportive environment that prioritizes your well-being.

Join a community championing alternative healing methods for a healthier life. Choose Marijuana Doctor for personalized, patient-centered care, and step into a revitalized future.

Follow us on Instagram!