Updates About Supreme Court Rulings

The Michigan Supreme Court has declined to immediately take up a lawsuit filed by the state Senate against the House of Representatives, confirming the case will go through the normal legal process by having the Court of Appeals review it first. The ongoing dispute centers on the House’s refusal to formally present nine bills passed by the Senate during the last session, a procedural step required to send legislation to the governor.

While Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks had asked both the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court to weigh in on the matter immediately, the court said it was not persuaded to skip the usual legal process. However, it did order the Court of Appeals to expedite its review so the matter can move forward more quickly.

Related Articles: BRINKS SEEKS SUPREME COURT RULING AND MAKES SENATE RULE CHANGE IN ONGOING FIGHT OVER HOUSE BILLS • MICHIGAN HOUSE DECLINES TO SEND NINE BILLS TO GOVERNOR • SENATE DEMOCRATS FILE LAWSUIT AGAINST SPEAKER HALL

Attorney General Dana Nessel is part of a 24-state coalition that has successfully secured a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) from terminating nearly $11 billion in federal public health grants — cuts that include more than $379 million originally promised to Michigan. Affected programs include vaccination funding for children, infectious disease prevention, mental health care for those with severe conditions, and opioid treatment for vulnerable populations. The TRO halts those cuts for now, ensuring continued funding while the legal challenge moves forward in federal court.

Members of the coalition, including attorney generals from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin, plus the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania, argue the terminations were made without proper notice or legal justification.

Specifically, the lawsuit claims DHHS acted unlawfully by ending the grants under the justification that the COVID-19 pandemic has ended — despite Congress not tying the funding to the pandemic’s status. According to state officials, this lack of funding is already disrupting services and creating confusion for health departments and organizations that rely on these dollars.

Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) and the Senate have escalated their legal battle with the House, filing appeals with both the Michigan Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court. The dispute centers on the House’s refusal to present nine bills, passed last session, to the governor. Leader Brinks is seeking an expedited ruling, arguing that withholding the bills violates the state constitution by allowing one chamber to indefinitely block legislation. In response, the Senate also adopted a rule change allowing its secretary to present House-approved bills to the governor if the House fails to do so.

House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) pushed back, stating the Michigan Constitution does not permit the current House to present bills from a prior session. He criticized Brinks’ alternative proposal that the House send the bills to the Senate for presentation, calling it unconstitutional. Meanwhile, Brinks defended the Senate’s rule change as a way to ensure legislative compliance with the court’s ruling. The legal fight continues as the courts weigh whether to intervene.

Related Articles: MICHIGAN HOUSE DECLINES TO SEND NINE BILLS TO GOVERNOR • SENATE DEMOCRATS FILE LAWSUIT AGAINST SPEAKER HALL