AG refuses to respond to request for legal opinion

Rep. Mark Meadows (D-East Lansing) has requested formal legal opinions from Attorney General Bill Schuette on the constitutionality of two pieces of legislation but Schuette has declined that request.

Meadows, the Democratic Vice Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, issued a press release explaining what issues he hoped to have addressed and reacting to the denial:

“These potentially damaging proposals are being rushed through the Legislature without adequate consideration of their legality,” Meadows said. “I have asked the Attorney General to consider the constitutionality of the issues raised by these bills so that lawmakers and the public have a better understanding of these proposals if they move forward.”

Meadows requested an opinion on the constitutionality of the provisions of House Bill 4214, which allows an “emergency manager” (EM) to impair the obligation of contracts, and to supplant local governments and school districts under certain financial circumstances. Under the bill, EMs will have the power to terminate or alter any existing contracts and collective bargaining agreements without any due process. The Attorney General refused to provide an opinion on this issue.

Meadows has also requested that the Attorney General issue an opinion on House Bill 4152, which would amend the Public Employees Employment Relations Act to prohibit any existing “step increase” to occur during collective bargaining negotiations. Meadows is seeking a ruling as to whether the bill encroaches on the Civil Service Commission’s constitutional authority over compensation of state employees.

“In times like these, our lawmakers and elected officials must be completely sure that they are making the right decisions for our state,” Meadows said. “The legislation introduced in the House as part of the Governor’s budget proposals appear to infringe on the rights of our residents, our workers and our communities. If these bills become law, they could also result in litigation expenses that will waste countless sums of taxpayer dollars. I am perplexed by the Attorney General’s refusal to issue an opinion on a matter of constitutionality, especially since he is required by law to do so by MCL 14.32, which has been in place since 1846. I hope my fellow lawmakers and state leaders will take a closer look at these bills and work together to make sure we are focused on real solutions that will move Michigan forward.”

MCL 14.32 says that it “shall be the duty of the attorney general, when required, to give his opinion upon all questions of law submitted to him by the legislature, or by either branch thereof, or by the governor, auditor general, treasurer or any other state officer.”