Hi! You’re reading the It’s Just Politics newsletter. Subscribe here to get it delivered to your inbox, and listen to the It’s Just Politics podcast for all the political news you need each week.
The Michigan Legislature’s handling of nine bills has become a legal and political conundrum, deviating from traditional legislative processes. These bills, adopted in the 2023-2024 session, are stalled and await further action, much to the chagrin of constitutional purists. The legislative stalemate raises questions about procedural integrity and the separation of powers.
Previously discussed in Part I and Part II, this issue remains unresolved. Judge Sima Patel of the Michigan Court of Claims opined that the bills should progress to Governor Gretchen Whitmer for approval or veto, yet refrained from enforcing this directive.
House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) capitalized on a legislative loophole to withhold the bills, attributing blame to former House Speaker Joe Tate (D-Detroit) for not concluding the session’s business. Hall insists that the bills are indefinitely stalled.
Senate Democrats contend that Article 4, Section 33 of the Michigan Constitution mandates that every bill passed must be presented to the governor. They argue that the House bears the obligation to submit the bills regardless of timing or leadership changes, while Republicans maintain that current legislatures are not bound by past sessions’ decisions.
Recently, the Michigan Supreme Court declined a request from Senate Democrats to expedite the case, opting instead for the Court of Appeals to prioritize it. The decision is poised to set a precedent regarding legislative and executive separations.
The independence of the judiciary is also under scrutiny. Given that justices often have political affiliations, the court’s ruling could be perceived as partisan, especially since the Michigan Supreme Court comprises a majority of justices endorsed by the Democratic Party. As Samantha Shriber from the Michigan Information and Research Service noted on the IJP podcast: “I do think it is worth keeping in mind these bills are heavily union-backed … The majority of the Michigan Supreme Court is made up of people endorsed by the Michigan Democratic Party. The MDP has a huge union activist presence. So I am curious, do Michigan Supreme court justices act fast and make a ruling that could be influenced by the Democratic Party members who put them on the ballot to begin with?”
The content of the stalled bills encompasses significant topics such as public employee pensions, Detroit museum funding, and protections against debt collection for public assistance payments. The implications of the court’s decision extend beyond these issues, touching on broader questions of governance and constitutional boundaries.
Another layer of complexity is whether Governor Whitmer herself seeks the bills. Democrats express frustration over her silence, as her involvement could impact the court’s jurisdiction over legislative affairs. Senate Democrats argue that the House’s inaction equates to an unauthorized veto, encroaching on executive powers. More details can be found in Judge Patel’s split-the-difference decision.
______________________
Have questions about Michigan politics? Or, just want to let us know what you want more of (less of?) in the newsletter? We always want to hear from you! Shoot us an email at politics@michiganpublic.org!
_______________________
_______________________
What we’re talking about at the dinner table
U.S. Senate Race: Democratic state Senator Mallory McMorrow made it official this week with a video on Wednesday making her the first candidate, Dem or Republican, to announce for Michigan’s 2026 open U.S. Senate seat. Team McMorrow was then quick to announce that she had raised a million dollars within 48 hours of going public. But, we know McMorrow is unlikely to be the only Democrat in the field. Among those still considering, or strongly considering: Democratic Congresswoman Haley Stevens, Democratic Congresswoman Kristen McDonald Rivet, outgoing Director of Wayne County’s Health, Human and Veteran Services Department Abdul El-Sayed, and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel. Things still remain relatively quiet on the Republican side as folks wait to see which offices former Gubernatorial candidate Tudor Dixon and Congressman John James toss their hats in.
Voting integrity: Michigan Secretary of State (and gubernatorial candidate) Jocelyn Benson announced this week her office found 16 non-citizens likely cast ballots in last year’s presidential election in Michigan. “Benson said it confirms many studies that show that voting by non-citizens in Michigan and the U.S. is very rare,” Michigan Public’s Tracy Samilton reported. In fact, that ends up being about, “0.00028% of the roughly 5.7 million votes cast in the election. Benson said non-citizens voting is a serious issue, but it should be addressed ‘with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.’ She said the tiny fraction of potential cases in Michigan do not justify proposed laws to require showing proof of citizenship in order to register to vote.” As Rick reported last month, Republicans have proposed an “amendment to the Michigan Constitution that would require people to show proof of citizenship to register to vote. The measure would also require people to show a government-issued ID before they cast a ballot.” Meanwhile, across Lake Michigan this week, Wisconsin voters approved a similar GOP-led voter ID law.
MPC ruling: Speaking of Benson, the state’s chief campaign finance act enforcer says it is not a violation of the ban on gifts from lobbyists for elected officials to attend the posh (and pricey) annual Detroit Regional Chamber conference on Mackinac Island without paying the admission fee. The annual event brings together elected officials, business leaders and not-for-profit organizations to network and bargain on policy questions. It’s often a venue for big policy announcements and events. For example, Governor Whitmer signed a no-fault auto insurance overhaul on the porch of the Grand Hotel in 2019. Elected officials and candidates often hold event-adjacent fundraisers (to the frustration of conference organizers). In a preliminary opinion, Benson’s office held that the free admission violates the gift ban. This week’s final ruling says elected officials have a unique function at the conference so it is not a violation of the gift ban.
_______________________
Yours in political nerdiness,
Rick Pluta & Zoe Clark
Co-hosts, It’s Just Politics
________________________
IJP ON THE ROAD:
Want to get political updates from Zoe and Rick straight to your inbox? Sign up for the It’s Just Politics newsletter!
—
Read More Michigan News
