A Court of Claims judge ruled that Gov. Gretchen Whitmer acted legally when she extended her emergency powers on April 30 under a 1945 law.
The legislature had sued Whitmer on May 6, challenging her authority to unilaterally extend a state of emergency when the lawmakers had declined to grant her authority.
Two laws authorize emergency powers: The Emergency Management Act (EMA) of 1976 requires the governor to get legislative approval after 28 days, while the Emergency Powers of Governor Act (EPGA) of 1945, which has no such restraint.
Judge Cynthia Stephens found that the 1945 law is constitutional.
But Stephens said Whitmer exceeded her authority under the EMA by issuing Executive Order No. 2020-68 without legislative approval.
Six days ago, Stephens heard oral arguments over Zoom.
Michael Williams, who represented the House of Representatives, said the case was based on whether the governor can hold “limitless” lawmaking authority for “as long as the governor wishes.”
Chris Allen, Whitmer’s attorney, argued the governor could use her emergency powers as long as an emergency exists.
The GOP had argued the EPGA only applied to local area emergencies instead of the entire state, citing past uses that involved local riots.
But the 1945 law grants the governor the authority to “designate” the area involved, which Allen argued encompassed the entire state.
Stephens ruled the legislature’s challenge to the 1945 law and Whitmer’s authority to issue executive orders as “meritless.”
Senate Minority Leader Jim Ananich, D-Flint, said, “it’s time to put this petty fight to bed and refocus on the task at hand: containing this virus and getting Michigan back to work.
“Republicans in the Legislature have made their point and their point has been refuted, so they need to stop spending taxpayer money on this politically-motivated fight against the governor,” he said in a statement. “We’re headed in the right direction and will continue to head that way if we do this right and we do it together.”
“We’re still reviewing the opinion but I’m pleased that the Court acted quickly to clarify legal issues of significant importance to the people of this State,” Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel said in a statement.
“With this clarity, it’s my hope that our public officials and residents can move forward with confidence that the Governor has acted in accordance with the authority provided to her under the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act. It’s time for us all to focus on the health and safety of the People in this State rather than fighting against each other in unnecessary legal battles in our courts.”
Whitmer said the decision “recognizes that the Governor’s actions to save lives are lawful and her orders remain in place,” she said in a statement. “She will continue to do what she’s always done: take careful, decisive actions to protect Michiganders from this unprecedented, global pandemic.”
Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey said their challenge isn’t over yet.
“While we are disappointed by aspects of this determination, we are vindicated in our assertion that the Governor acted unlawfully in attempting to extend the states of emergency and disaster under the Emergency Management Act without legislative approval,” Shirkey said in a statement. “We are confident in our position and will appeal this ruling.”
