The Michigan Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on whether legislative leaders have the discretion to decide whether bills will or will not go to the governor’s desk once they are adopted by the House and the Senate.
The arguments in the first-of-its-kind case are a step toward determining the fate of nine bills passed by both chambers but were still being reviewed by clerks when Republicans took control of the House in January 2025. The bills have languished since then in the House clerk’s office on the orders of House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township).
Senate Democrats want the Supreme Court to enforce a lower court decision that the bills should go to the governor to sign or veto, but stopped short of issuing a formal order.
“If the House’s anti-majoritarian tactic is allowed to succeed, it will unilaterally and drastically change Michigan’s bicameral legislature, its separation of powers, our checks and balances and the majoritarian principles which underlie everything we do in state and local government in this state,” the Senate Democrats’ attorney Mark Brewer told the court. He said no legislative leader should have unilateral power to stop a bill once it has been approved by both the House and Senate.
But House Republican attorney Kyle Asher said the leaders of the House and the Senate do have that power because the Michigan Constitution leaves them wide latitude, even if that power has not previously been used.
“Nothing in the constitution says who must present the bills, nothing in the constitution says every bill must be presented, nothing in the constitution says when a bill must be presented,” he said. “That’s all left to the Legislature through the Legislature’s rules. It’s always been left to the Legislature.”
He argued language in the Michigan Constitution’s presentment clause is often misinterpreted as a requirement, but he said it merely states the fact that a bill cannot become a law without first being presented to the governor.
“It’s a mere predicate step that has to occur before a bill can become law,” he said. “It’s not a requirement that every bill must be presented.”
Lower courts have held the House Republicans acted unconstitutionally by refusing to forward the bills to Governor Gretchen Whitmer. The Senate Democrats want the Supreme Court to order the House to comply with that determination. Whitmer has not weighed in on the case.
The nine bills in limbo would require public employers to pick up a larger share of employee health insurance costs, exempt public assistance payments from debt collection, move corrections officers into the Michigan State Police pension system and allow Detroit historical museums to seek a millage.
