The Michigan Supreme Court on Friday struck down the 1945 law that Governor Gretchen Whitmer has been using to keep the state in lockdown since April.
This is significant because California Assemblymen Kevin Kiley and James Gallagher are suing to stop California Governor Gavin Newsom’s “one man rule.”
“The Michigan Supreme Court has just struck down their Emergency Powers of the Governor Act as unconstitutional, adopting the very arguments we are making in our case against Gov. Newsom,” Kiley wrote. “This decision is a major boost to our case.”
“The Michigan ruling terminates all of the Governor’s emergency orders. It is undoubtedly the most important decision yet. And it comes just two days after we told the California Court that ‘the time for a judicial check has arrived, as has already occurred in numerous other states.’”
A group called “Unlock Michigan” lead a petition drive to repeal the same 1945 law. On Friday, the group submitted 593,000 signatures to force a vote by the legislature, Mlive reported.
“We argued from the beginning that unlimited powers for a politician were a terrible idea. Today, we know that they are also unconstitutional,” spokesman Fred Wszolek told Breitbart.
Breitbart explained the Michigan case:
The Court concluded the Emergency Powers of Governor Act:
…is in violation of the Constitution of our state because it purports to delegate to the executive branch the legislative powers of state government–including its plenary police powers–and to allow the exercise of such powers indefinitely. As a consequence, the EPGA cannot continue to provide a basis for the Governor to exercise emergency powers.
Kiley and Gallagher explain their lawsuit:
“We are asking the court for two things: (1) “a judgment that the Executive Order so issued is null and void”; (2), a court order stopping the Governor from further exercising any “legislative powers in violation of the California Constitution.”
We were limited to 15 pages, although we are also filing a separate 15-page Opposition to the Governor’s own brief. Here’s how ours begins:
“In the case before the Court, Defendant Gavin Newsom declares that the six-month-and-counting State of Emergency centralizes the State’s powers in the hands of the Governor. This disquieting claim belies California law and defies America’s first principles.”
We then set forth the constitutional basis for the Court to step in:
“The authors of California’s Constitution learned the lesson of America’s founding even better than the Founders themselves, enshrining an explicit separation-of-powers provision. A California Governor is constitutionally forbidden from doing the very thing Gov. Newsom has done here: exercise legislative powers.”
“Reading the Court’s opinion was a surreal experience since it so closely resembles our own briefing to the California Court,” Kiley said. “In fact, the Michigan Supreme Court uses the exact quote from the Federalist Papers with which we began our dispositive brief:
“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
Most importantly as Kiley notes, the Separation-of-Powers provision of Michigan’s Constitution is almost identical, word for word, to the one in California’s Constitution.
Kiley concludes: “In our case, Newsom now faces a’“heads you win, tails I lose scenario.’ If the Court agrees with our statutory arguments, Newsom will be found to have violated the Constitution. But even if the Court buys his arguments, by the reasoning of the Michigan case the statute itself will be found unconstitutional.”
Read Kiley’s blog post HERE.
Read Breitbart’s account of the Michigan Case HERE.
Read California Globe’s articles about Kiley and Gallagher’s lawsuit HERE.