In Michigan, a recent legal battle has brought attention to the dynamics of gun legislation and public access to legislative processes. Two advocacy groups, Michigan Open Carry and Great Lakes Gun Rights, are at the forefront of this challenge, questioning whether the legislative committees adhered to the state’s open meetings law when discussing new firearm regulations.
This dispute stems from the 2023 hearings in the Michigan House and Senate, where bills focusing on secure gun storage and enhanced criminal background checks were passed. At the time, the state’s Democratic majority in the Legislature supported these measures, which were subsequently endorsed by Governor Gretchen Whitmer.
The gun-rights organizations argue that these legislative sessions violated Michigan’s open meetings law, which mandates public bodies to allow citizens the opportunity to “address” them. Attorney Tom Lambert, representing the groups, emphasized the importance of public testimony, stating, “The overall issue here is the public’s access to their lawmakers, the ability to stand before them in an open meeting and provide their viewpoint.”
Despite these claims, a Michigan Court of Claims judge asserted that while the Legislature might need to establish clearer rules on public testimonies, there was no evidence that anyone, including Lambert and other activists, was denied the chance to speak. The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld this stance, with Judge Mark Boonstra writing, “The sole issue before us in this case is whether the trial court erred by deciding that ‘the Legislature intended to allow the public’s right to address public bodies under the OMA to be satisfied through oral and written submissions.’ We conclude that it did not.”
Lambert acknowledged that the groups are not against reasonable restrictions during open meetings. He stated, “Things like limiting the time that a speaker can speak, which is completely fine… If there’s a lot of speakers that day and you say, okay, everybody gets one minute, then that can be reasonable.”
As the House, now under Republican control, and the Senate have yet to comment, Lambert is contemplating the possibility of an appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court.
—
Read More Michigan News
