Hi! You're reading the It's Just Politics newsletter. Subscribe here to get it delivered to your inbox, and listen to the It's Just Politics podcast for all the political news you need each week.
Who doesn’t love a twist-and-turn tale of institutional prerogative? We certainly do.
The House Republican majority upped the stakes this week when it adopted a resolution instructing the House clerk to continue to sit on nine bills that were adopted last session by both chambers of the Legislature but never sent to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer before the end of the year.
Wow. There is a lot packed into that sentence so let’s break it down:
The Michigan Constitution says that all bills adopted by the House and the Senate must go to the governor to sign or veto. It is also a constitutional principle that one legislature cannot tell a future legislature what it must do.
A Michigan Court of Claims judge ruled late last month the House clerk should, in fact, send the bills to Whitmer’s desk. But Judge Sima Patel did not issue a corresponding order instructing the House to do so, averting a constitutional conundrum on whether the judicial branch can tell the legislative branch how to do its job.
This week’s resolution (adopted without a record roll call vote) affirms that Republicans have no intention of letting go of the nine bills.
House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp.) is basically telling the former House Democratic majority: “You snooze, you lose.” He says it’s in his purview to stop any House business left unfinished before Republicans took control of the chamber this year.
“It was a very unprecedented situation, and there has been a lot of confusion,” Hall said in a statement released by his office. “Today, the House gave us clear direction on how to proceed. We are going to follow that direction.”
But Senate Democrats, who filed the lawsuit to get their bills to the governor, say the Court of Claims judge already provided that direction.
"[Hall] lost in court, so now he wants to change the rules," Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) said in a statement after the House resolution vote. "It's not a good look for him and certainly not helpful for the thousands of people who are counting on these bills getting to the governor."
Speaking of, where does Gov. Gretchen Whitmer stand on all of this?
“No comment due to pending litigation,” emailed Whitmer Press Secretary Stacey LaRouche.
Which robs the Democrats of a helpful legal tool – unquestioned standing to file the legal challenge. As noted above, House Republicans argue this is an internal legislative matter and so courts should stay out of it. But, if the executive branch were to engage (i.e. if Whitmer were to join the case by filing an argument that these bills should be sent to her desk so she can do her job) that could change things.
“There is a recognition that she could be very much more front-facing on this and outspoken that these bills should come to her desk, even if she has issues with some of them,” said a source with knowledge of how members of the Senate Democratic caucus are thinking about this episode.
The lawsuit most notably involves HB 6058, which would require public employers to pay a larger share of health insurance premiums for employees. This is a union-friendly bill that doesn’t fly with a Republican House majority. There is also a bill that would allow Detroit historical museums (the Detroit Historical Museum and the Charles H. Wright Museum of African American History, to be specific) to ask Wayne County voters to approve an operating millage (that is, a tax hike) as well as a bill that would shield public assistance, workers compensation and disability benefits from garnishment and debt collection.
Senate Dems are deciding their next move. But Republican Speaker Hall – always on offense – says he’s already planning to take the case to the Michigan Court of Appeals to challenge the aspects of the decision where Republicans did not prevail.
In other words, to be continued…
______________________
Have questions about Michigan politics? Or, just want to let us know what you want more of (less of?) in the newsletter? We always want to hear from you! Shoot us an email at politics@michiganpublic.org!
_______________________
_______________________
What we’re talking about at the dinner table
2026 sorting: Two decisions this week helped to focus the open races for governor and U.S. Senate in ‘26. First, Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist announced he’s running to succeed term-limited Governor Whitmer. While not a huge surprise, there was speculation over the past few months that he might be considering the Senate race or this year’s Detroit mayoral race. (Rick spoke with Gilchrist about his decision this week and on this week’s It’s Just Politics pod we dug into why LG candidates haven’t fared well in the past when they try to take the top job.) So, we’ve got Gilchrist, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and Flint Sheriff Chris Swanson running in the Democratic primary. As we’ve written a lot about in the newsletter, Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan is making his quixotic independent bid for the race, and Republican Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt is running in the GOP primary (we’re still waiting for former Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox and Congressman John James to make it official). Things also got interesting this week in the state’s open U.S. Senate race. Eyes have been on whether former U.S. Transportation Secretary (and presidential candidate) Pete Buttigieg was going to make a run for the seat Senator Gary Peters is leaving. This week the Traverse City transplant declined (leaving most to assume he’s got eyes instead on a second presidential run in 2028). That means the field continues to be wide open on both the Democratic and Republican sides (which is actually kind of shocking after weeks and weeks of who-will-who-won’t speculation). Serious Democratic contender state Senator Mallory McMorrow (D-Royal Oak) was quick to tweet after Buttigieg’s announcement that she’s still making up her mind, as was Democratic Congresswoman Haley Stevens (D-Birmingham), and Attorney General Dana Nessel hasn’t taken her name out of the mix. On the Republican side, Axios has this piece on 2024 U.S. Senate candidate Mike Rogers, who’s definitely looking like he’s ready to run again next year.
Whitmer goes to Washington: Progressives are piqued that the fight-like-hell, that-woman-from-Michigan version of Whitmer has given way to a more accommodating version that plays nice with President Donald Trump. Whitmer met Thursday with the President at the White House to discuss tariffs, Great Lakes protection and defense spending in the state. Obviously, governors have to work with the president, and Whitmer has made plain her concerns about tariffs and U.S. Department of Education cuts. And the fact that Trump won Michigan last year would signal he has the upper hand at the moment. But there are certainly progressives who still yearn for the days when the governor was part of the Trump resistance. Let’s also link that to the decision by eight state House Democrats to join with Republicans to vote for a non-binding resolution asking the Michigan High School Athletic Association to follow President Trump’s executive order to ban transgender girls from girls’ sports teams. Those cross-over votes infuriated Michigan LGBTQ rights groups that had unanimous or near-unanimous backing from Democrats in the last session.
It’s been too long: We miss seeing you! Let’s fix that, no? The first It’s Just Politics Issues & Ale of the year is happening later this month in Lansing. And, boy, do we have a lot to catch up on! We’ll be joined by a bipartisan panel of state lawmakers to talk about the first three months of divided power at the state Capitol). We’ll be Lansing Brewing Company Thursday, March 27th at 7 p.m. and we so hope you can come and join us (or watch virtually). As always, it’s free - but you do need to register to attend. Hope to see you soon!
_______________________
Yours in political nerdiness,
Rick Pluta & Zoe Clark
Co-hosts, It’s Just Politics
