Michigan Supreme Court Rules Against Gov. Gov. Whitmer Emergency Orders

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has been the Managing Editor of Ordinary Times since 2018, is a widely published opinion writer, and appears in media, radio, and occasionally as a talking head on TV. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter@four4thefire. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast. Subscribe to Andrew'sHeard Tell Substack for free here:

Related Post Roulette

28 Responses

  1. Oscar Gordon says:

    Oh, NOW the GOP cares about executive over-reach….Report

  2. George Turner says:

    I watched the oral arguments in the case, and from the judge’s questioning, the outcome was a foregone conclusion. Whitmer also sent one of the most arrogant and incompetent young lawyers I’ve ever seen to argue her case. At one point, he basically told the judges to shut up and let him talk because they were stupid.Report

  3. The vote was party-line: 4 Republican justices to 3 Democratic, once again demonstrating the importance of our independent judiciary.

    I hope I’m wrong in expecting to see spikes in both infections and deaths there.Report

    • Marchmaine in reply to Mike Schilling says:

      Dang, so you’re saying 3 judges voted for unconstitutional usurpation by the Executive for purely political partisan or possibly consequentialist reasons? We *do* need an independent judiciary.Report

      • Kolohe in reply to Marchmaine says:

        I would say that most legislatures would give the executive temporary emergency authority in a time of crisis.

        But the Michigan legislature is now run by Republicans, who absolutely don’t give a darn about this crisis. And are in power due to a gerrymander; more people voted for the Dems in the 2018 legislative elections.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Kolohe says:

          We’re really, really good at dealing with acute problems.

          And we totally suck at dealing with chronic ones.Report

        • Marchmaine in reply to Kolohe says:

          Even Victor Orban gave up his Emergency Powers in June.

          But that’s ok… my point isn’t that we should never have emergency powers, it’s that we really prefer Executive Power… and we’ll all be pleased when the good guys decide its just a better way to do things.Report

          • Stillwater in reply to Marchmaine says:

            “my point isn’t that we should never have emergency powers, it’s that we really prefer Executive Power”

            If “we” prefer executive power why are “we” celebrating an Executive getting her powers curtailed?

            We /= we, right?Report

            • Marchmaine in reply to Stillwater says:

              Why? I can have the temptation too… I think that’s the point. ‘We’ see executive overreach when ‘they’ do it, but when ‘we’ do it it’s for good and justified causes. So the tendency is increasing among ‘us’ but ‘we’ only see it half the time.Report

              • George Turner in reply to Marchmaine says:

                “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” – C.S. Lewis

                Report

              • Stillwater in reply to George Turner says:

                CS Lewis, noted crime expert.Report

              • Stillwater in reply to Stillwater says:

                Adding:

                I have to say I love this bit lifted directly from the Catholic playbook”

                “for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

                Nothing quite like Religious Folk telling other people what and how and why they think what they do lol.

                *No religious people were harmed in the above comment.Report

              • Stillwater in reply to Marchmaine says:

                Sure succumb to the temptation. But once you’ve recgonized it it’s like a thing you can’t unsee and then you’re no better than any other partisanly motivated nitwit you want to criticize.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Stillwater says:

                Curtail executive power, says the party of Send In The Troops.Report

              • Stillwater in reply to Chip Daniels says:

                Well, that’s just it Chip. March isn’t a part of the party who said “send in the troops”, but he “is” of the party (non-political I guess…) which wants to undermine liberalism, which is the same party which sent in the troops.Report

              • Stillwater in reply to Stillwater says:

                “As a Catholic I believe in doing Good Deeds, but not if coerced. Coercion leads to less good deeds. Therefore, as a Catholic, I’m a libertarian at heart.*”

                *Except on the right to choose.Report

              • George Turner in reply to Stillwater says:

                Why would the GOP want to undermine liberalism when they’re watching the left crush liberalism under a boot heel, with speech codes, mandated Fascist salutes and racist chants, the smashing of Jewish-owned businesses, attacks on museums and libraries, and Molotov cocktails hurled at anyone who tries to stop them?Report

              • Stillwater in reply to George Turner says:

                Biden’s at +8% nationally and leading in all swing states and has even made red states into swingy. Liberalism appears to have a life all its own.Report

        • George Turner in reply to Kolohe says:

          When will Democrats figure out how voting works?

          They constantly try to run up their vote totals in super-blue urban districts, which is a complete waste. For example, in MI House district 9, Democrats won 25,838 to 630. Well, not only does that strike any sane person as likely to be evidence of fraudulent election rigging, it means they threw away 25,207 extra votes that they didn’t need to win that seat. I’ll call those “wasted extra votes.” In 2018 Democrats had 193,686 more wasted extra votes than the Republicans did.

          Now those 630 Republican votes in District 9 are “wasted losing votes”, votes that were in vain, so to speak, because the candidate didn’t win. In 2018 Democrats had 304,220 more wasted losing votes than the Republicans did.

          In total, the Democrats threw away 497,906 more votes than the Republicans threw away, which is why they got fewer seats despite getting 193,686 more total votes. That means Republicans had 304,220 more “useful” votes than Democrats.

          Or look at wide-margin races, where one party completely dominates a district, which is wildly inefficient. For margins greats than 75%-25%, the Democrats won 23 seats, the Republicans won 0. In fact, the Republicans only won by more than 70% in two districts. The Democrats got more than 90% of the votes in 7 districts.

          And here’s their basic problem. When it comes to these local house races, it doesn’t matter how many extra fraudulent votes they generate in blue districts, so they can stuff ballot boxes with dead people’s names all day long, trying to win some of the up-races, but that won’t win them the state House, it’ll just create blow-outs for the seats that weren’t even in doubt in the first place. They’re stuffing the ballot boxes in their own districts, instead of their opponent’s districts. That may win them the governorship and representation in Washington, but it creates an odd imbalance down-ticket.Report

          • Philip H in reply to George Turner says:

            you do know how gerrymandering works, right? and that for the last decade or so its been Republicans packing districts to keep themselves in power? I’m sure you think its a great owning of the libs, but situations like this show why its a disaster.Report

  4. Saul Degraw says:

    The timing of this decision is very on-brand for 2020.Report

  5. Michael Cain says:

    The Michigan legislature has been in session all year (they no longer adjourn sine die, simply recess from time to time). Does anyone know whether they have passed any bills related to the pandemic?

    The times I’ve worked for the government it’s always been on the legislative side, so I have an in-built tendency to have the legislature not delegate authority to the executive. OTOH, retaining all of that implies a responsibility to react in a timely fashion when situations arise.Report

    • North in reply to Michael Cain says:

      The court decision is probably for the best. Whitmer has done some pretty over the top stuff with her authority (banning gardening supplies for instance). This way the legislature is going to have to decide what to authorize and what not to rather than simply carping on the sidelines.Report

      • Philip H in reply to North says:

        given their complete unwillingness to do so to this point, I suspect they will continue to authorize exactly nothing. To Michigan’s detriment.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Michael Cain says:

      the Majority Republican legislature in Michigan has not taken up any legislation related to this. They have made a stated public case to try and sink the Democratic Governor at all costs.Report