Michigan Court of Appeals to Hear Legislative Dispute
The Michigan Supreme Court has opted not to immediately intervene in a legislative dispute involving key political figures in the state government. This decision directs the case to the Michigan Court of Appeals after a previous ruling by a Court of Claims judge.
The conflict centers around allegations made by Democrats, who claim House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) breached Article 4, Section 33 of the Michigan Constitution. The controversy arises from Hall’s directive to the House clerk to withhold nine bills passed by the last Legislature, preventing them from reaching Governor Gretchen Whitmer before the legislative session ended.
Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) insists that it is mandatory for all passed bills to be sent to the governor, describing the duty to transmit these bills as “automatic.” On the other hand, Hall contends that the current House is not responsible for completing tasks left unfinished by the previous House majority, and Republicans argue that court intervention in legislative procedures is inappropriate.
In February, Court of Claims Judge Sima Patel sided with the Democrats, stating that the bills should indeed be forwarded to Governor Whitmer. However, she refrained from enforcing her decision, indicating that “the procedures through which this takes place is a legislative function in which the court will not interfere.”
This ongoing legal battle has significant policy implications, potentially affecting issues such as the exemption of public assistance payments from debt collection, the proposal of a millage for Detroit historical museums to voters in southeast Michigan, and the enhancement of state contributions to employee health care.
—
Read More Michigan News
