Whether the actions of Florida constitute government action that discriminates between similarly situated members of a suspect class based solely upon their race without serving a compelling governmental interest and narrowly tailored to support that interest

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW In November, 2016, Florida voters approved what became Article X § 29 of the Florida Constitution (the Amendment). This Amendment authorized Florida, through its Department of Health, to register Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers (MMTCs). In 2017 to establish a regulatory framework, the legislature codified the Amendment into what it is today, F.S. § 381.986(8)(a)(1). Further, in an effort to address generations of past racial discrimination, the legislature, through the efforts of the Democratic Black Law Caucus, passed F.S. § 381.986(8)(a)2.b. (the Statute). Previously, this had been known as Emergency Rule 64ER21 (the Rule) instituted by the Florida Department of Health (DOH). This legislation establishes an exception for recognized class members of the Pigford and Black Farmers litigation. No provisions have ever been made for a recognized class member of Keepseagle, the class action for Native American Farmers and Ranchers, of which Petitioner belongs. 1. Whether the actions of Florida, through its legislative and executive branches in passing, implementing, and enforcing the Rule and the Statute constitute government action that discriminates between similarly situated members of a suspect class based solely upon their race without serving a compelling governmental interest and narrowly tailored to support that interest. ii 2. Whether strict scrutiny is the correct standard of Constitutional review to apply to race-based discrimination and did the trial court properly apply that standard. 3. Whether Florida has violated the Petitioner’s rights to Equal Protection under the United States Constitution, the Florida Constitution, and United States Supreme Court precedent by affording greater rights and protections to recognized blackclass members to the exclusion of Native Americanclass members similarly situated. 4. Whether the actions of the lower courts either singularly or combined violate the Due Process rights afforded under the U. S. Constitution and the Florida Constitution and inure for the benefit and protection of the Petitioner, a Native American and Keepseagle class member. 5. Whether this Court and the lower courts have the Inherent Power to order the Florida Department of Health to issue a Medical Marijuana Treatment Center (MMTC) license to Petitioner based upon the well-settled powers and principles of the Inherent Powers Doctrine.