MICHIGAN UNITED CONSER. CLUBS v. Secretary of State
| Decision Date | 30 April 2001 |
| Docket Number | Docket No. 119027, COA No. 233331. |
| Citation | 463 Mich. 1009,625 N.W.2d 377 |
| Parties | MICHIGAN UNITED CONSERVATION CLUBS, Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners, Ross Dykman, David K. Felbeck, and Corrie Williams, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SECRETARY OF STATE, and the Board of State Canvassers, Defendants-Appellees, and People Who Care About Kids, Intervening Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration and the motion for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae are GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal from the April 9, 2001, decision of the Court of Appeals is considered, and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(F)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE the Court of Appeals order and REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for plenary consideration of the complaint for mandamus. The issue in this case is whether the referendum sought is with respect to a law "making appropriations for state institutions or to meet deficiencies in state funds." Const. 1963, art. 2, § 9. This controversy is ripe for review because it is not dependent upon the Board of Canvassers' counting or consideration of the petitions but rather involves a threshold determination whether the petitions on their face meet the constitutional prerequisites for acceptance. See Scott v. Secretary of State, 202 Mich. 629, 644, 168 N.W. 709 (1918); Leininger v. Alger, 316 Mich. 644, 654-655, 26 N.W.2d 348 (1947). All of the information necessary to resolve this controversy, i.e., whether 2000 PA 381 constitutes a law which is excepted from the referendum process under Const. 1963, art. 2, § 9, is presently available.
The Court of Appeals shall give expedited treatment to this case and issue its decision by June 1, 2001. This order shall not be construed as staying the canvass of the petition.
We do not retain jurisdiction.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mich. United Conservation Clubs v. Secretary of State
...to appeal, this Court remanded the matter to the Court of Appeals for plenary consideration of the complaint for mandamus.8 463 Mich. 1007-1008, 625 N.W.2d 377 (2001). On remand, the Court of Appeals denied plaintiffs' request for mandamus, holding that "2000 PA 381 is not an act making app......
-
Ass'n of Businesses Advocating Tariff Equity v. Mich. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, Consumers Energy Co. (In re For)
...on any further decision by the MPSC. Citizens , 280 Mich.App. at 283, 761 N.W.2d 210 ; see also Mich. United Conservation Clubs v. Secretary of State , 463 Mich. 1009, 625 N.W.2d 377 (2001) (holding that a controversy was ripe for review when it involved a "threshold determination" of wheth......
-
Citizens Protecting Const. v. Sec. of State
...excepted from the referendum process under Const 1963, art 2, § 9, is presently available. [Michigan United Conservation Clubs v. Secretary of State, 463 Mich. 1009, 625 N.W.2d 377 (2001) (MUCC I) (internal citations Here, plaintiffs are arguing that, for reasons other than the sufficiency ......
-
Stand UP for Democracy v. Sec'y of State
...involves a threshold determination whether the petitions” meet the prerequisites for acceptance. Mich. United Conservation Clubs v. Secretary of State, 463 Mich. 1009, 625 N.W.2d 377 (2001). CFR's challenges probe this “threshold determination” because they contend that the petitions failed......