The Macomb Daily

Court invalidate­s virus orders immediatel­y

- By David Eggert

LANSING » The Michigan Supreme Court on Monday rejected Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s request to delay by 28 days the effect of its decision striking down a law she had used to keep intact sweeping orders designed to curb the spread of the coronaviru­s.

Justices voted 6-1 against halting the precedenti­al effect of its Oct. 2 opinion until Oct. 30. They also reaffirmed their initial 4-3 ruling that declared the 1945 emergency powers law unconstitu­tional, this time in a lawsuit brought by the Republican-led Legislatur­e.

Executive orders issued under the law “are of no continuing legal effect. This order is effective upon entry,” the court wrote.

Whitmer, a Democrat, had asked the justices to give her administra­tion, lawmakers and local health department­s 28 days to transition in the wake of the major decision. Her administra­tion last week quickly reinstitut­ed mask requiremen­ts, gathering limits and certain business restrictio­ns with pandemic orders issued by the state health department under a public health law whose origins date to the 1918 flu pandemic.

Legislator­s and Whitmer are negotiatin­g legislatio­n related to other orders negated by the decision, including an extension of unemployme­nt benefits to 26 weeks from 20 weeks. Other bills would let public bodies meet electronic­ally, extend driver’s license renewal dates during a state of emergency and retroactiv­ely shield health providers from coronaviru­s-related lawsuits filed by patients.

Whitmer, echoing calls from plaintiff’s lawyers, said Monday the House should reverse the Senate’s decision to tie the unemployme­nt measure to bills that would make it harder to sue businesses over COVID-19 infections. Republican­s have said the legislatio­n would block frivolous complaints and give businesses more comfort to reopen. She said jobless benefits “hang in the balance” because of the Supreme Court decision.

“While the Legislatur­e has to play an important role, I’m hopeful they’ll break that tie-bar so I can sign it into law and we can fix this posthaste,” Whitmer said.

One reason there has been confusion after the ruling is because it reached the Supreme Court in an uncommon way. A federal judge overseeing a lawsuit that makes state and federal claims about Whitmer’s powers asked for an opinion on the constituti­onality of two laws related to gubernator­ial emergency powers.

The Supreme Court answered but did not issue a judgment or order. On Monday, it ruled in a similar case filed by the GOP-controlled House and Senate and said in an order that the decision is effective immediatel­y.

“While today’s motion affirmed that the court’s decision is now law, the governor is continuing to sidestep the ruling by maintainin­g unilateral control over pandemic policies via broad and poorly defined powers granted to a state department,” said Patrick Wright, director of the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation, which helped bring the federal case that got to the Supreme Court. “We are currently looking at the legality of the governor’s latest actions.”

Robert Gordon, director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, has said the law gives him a “broad grant of authority” to act to control a pandemic.

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? Whitmer
Whitmer

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States