The Michigan Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of Senate Democrats Regarding Held Bills
In a recent ruling, the Michigan Court of Appeals sided with Senate Democrats in a dispute over nine bills that were being held in the Republican-controlled House. The court stated that these bills, which were adopted by both chambers of the Legislature, should be sent to Governor Gretchen Whitmer for approval.
The bills in question were initially passed last year when the Legislature was under Democratic control. However, some bills were not transmitted to the governor before Republicans gained control of the House in January. House Speaker Matt Hall ordered the clerk to hold onto the bills, arguing that the new majority was not obligated to address unfinished business from the previous Democratic majority.
According to the appeals court panel, the transmission of bills to the governor is a requirement mandated by the Michigan Constitution. This ruling aligns with a previous decision by a Michigan Court of Claims judge, although the judge expressed concerns about potential violations of the separation of powers.
The case has now been returned to the Court of Claims with an instruction that the judicial branch has the authority to issue an enforcement order regarding the release of the bills. Judge Thomas Cameron, appointed by Republican Governor Rick Snyder, emphasized the importance of upholding constitutional rules in his written opinion.
Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks, who initiated the lawsuit, celebrated the ruling as a victory for the rule of law. She highlighted the significance of respecting the Constitution, especially in a political climate where legal boundaries are being tested.
Among the bills awaiting transmission are measures related to exempting public assistance payments from debt collection, granting Detroit historical museums the ability to seek voter approval for a millage, and integrating corrections officers into the same pension system as Michigan State Police officers.
House Speaker Matt Hall has not provided a comment on the ruling, but there is a possibility of an appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court.
