This week, Attorney General Dana Nessel issued a formal opinion concluding that a “disapproval” mechanism, which allows one legislative committee to unilaterally terminate funding previously appropriated by the full Legislature and the Governor, is unconstitutional. The opinion was requested by Senator Sarah Anthony (D-Lansing), following a December 2025 vote of the House Appropriations Committee to disapprove nearly $645 million in state funding that had already been enacted into law.
Key Points:
-
- The disapproval mechanism contained in the Management and Budget Act was the subject of Senator Anthony’s request.
- The statute allows funding approved by the Legislature and the Governor for a prior fiscal year to continue to be used for its intended purpose for a new fiscal year.
- The State Budget Director is authorized under the Management and Budget Act to approve this continued use of previously approved funding. These are referred to as “work projects.”
- The same statute also authorized either the Senate or House Appropriations Committees, acting alone, to disapprove those work projects.
- In her opinion, the Attorney General concluded that this disapproval mechanism violates both the Separation of Powers and Bicameralism and Presentment requirements in the Michigan Constitution.
- She found the mechanism amounts to an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers because it impermissibly allows a single legislative committee to exert control over the executive’s implementation of enacted laws.
- Furthermore, the Attorney General determined that this constituted a violation of the Constitution’s bicameralism and presentment requirements because the committee veto doesn’t comply with the constitutional requirement that legislative action be approved by both Legislative chambers and presented to the Governor.
Attorney General Nessel also concluded that the unconstitutional legislative committee veto disapproval mechanism is severable from the rest of the Act. Therefore, the remaining portions of the statute pertaining to work projects remain intact and enforceable.
Next Steps:
-
- An Attorney General Opinion is legally binding; as such, the departments can proceed with spending the $645 million appropriated to them in the FY25 budget.
- Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp.) has stated he intends to challenge the opinion in court.
More Information:
-
- Click here to read the full opinion.
- Click here to watch a video of Attorney General Nessel discussing her opinion.
