A dispute between the state Senate Democratic majority and Michigan House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp.) landed Monday before a Michigan Court of Claims judge who spent more than an hour listening to arguments regarding nine bills being held in legislative limbo.
The policies in play include exempting public assistance payments from debt collection and public employee pensions, but the central issue in the legal clash is whether the House can indefinitely hold onto bills without a deadline to send them to the governor to sign or veto.
The nine bills were adopted by the Legislature during the last session when Democrats still controlled the House and the Senate. The bills were not forwarded to the governor before Republicans took over the House in January.
Attorney Mark Brewer, representing the Senate Democrats, said the Michigan Constitution clearly states bills adopted by the House and the Senate must go to the governor’s desk. He said allowing the House to sit on the bills invites future chaos.
“It’s not going to be enough that bills pass by a majority of both bodies and they go to the governor,” he said. “Every bill then can be held hostage.”
The Senate Democrats are asking for a court order instructing the House to send the bills to Whitmer.
The House Republicans argue Hall is acting within his authority since the previous legislature cannot dictate the actions of the current legislature. Hall ordered the bills to remain in the possession of the House clerk while the situation is reviewed.
One of the questions argued before the judge is whether the clerk’s office has a ministerial duty to send the bills to the governor regardless of the speaker’s instructions.
House GOP attorney Kyle Asher argued there is also a constitutional separation-of-powers question. He said this is an internal fight that should be settled within the legislative branch.
“The Legislature has tools – you know, political maneuvering, things that the Legislature can do to resolve this within the Legislature,” he said. “It’s not something that a court needs to become involved in.”
The Court of Claims Judge Sima Patel seemed most interested in how the how to reconcile the absence of a specific deadline with the constitutional requirement that bills adopted by the House and the Senate must go to the governor. Without some practical deadline, she said that might be “a ghost provision” of the Constitution.
“Is it your argument that the Legislature can just hold the bills indefinitely and not present them and doesn’t that eventuality run afoul of the pure language of the Constitution?” she asked.
Patel said she plans to issue her ruling in the next few days. Whatever she decides can be appealed.
