This week, the Michigan Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a legal challenge regarding presenting passed legislation to the governor. At the end of 2025, Michigan House Republicans appealed a Court of Appeals (COA) decision requiring them to present all legislation that passes both chambers to the governor. In the appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court, they argued that the Senate lacked standing and raised a separation-of-powers concern regarding the COA ruling.
Background:
-
- Nine bills passed both the House and Senate at the end of 2024 but weren’t presented to the governor before the end of the previous Speaker of the House’s term. Typically, all legislation passed by both chambers would have been presented before a change in House leadership.
- When Speaker Matt Hall (R-Kalamazoo) assumed his leadership role in January 2025, he declined to present them to Governor Whitmer until a legal review was completed.
- On behalf of the Michigan Senate, Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) filed a legal challenge in the Michigan Court of Claims.
- The Michigan Court of Claims ruled that the House must present the bills to the governor, but declined to set a timeframe for compliance. However, the House did not follow that ruling.
- In October 2025, the COA agreed with the Court of Claims, finding the Michigan Constitution requires that after a bill passes both chambers, it must be presented to the governor for final consideration.
The legislation in question deals with health care costs for teachers and first responders and retirement benefits for corrections officers. Additionally, it allows property tax millages for historical museums.
