Request for Advisory Opinion, Enrolled House Bill No. 5250 (Being 1975 PA 227), In re, 57623

• Decision Date: 25 November 1975
• Docket Number: No. 57623,57623
• Citation: 235 N.W.2d 321,395 Mich. 148
• Parties: In re REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION, ENROLLED HOUSE BILL NO. 5250 (BEING 1975 PA 227). 395 Mich. 148, 235 N.W.2d 321
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

Page 321

235 N.W.2d 321

395 Mich. 148 In re REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION, ENROLLED

HOUSE BILL NO. 5250 (BEING 1975 PA 227).

No. 57623.

395 Mich. 148, 235 N.W.2d 321

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Nov. 25, 1975.

PER CURIAM.

1975 P.A. 227 was enacted on August 27, 1975. Section 200 states:

'Pursuant to article 3, section 8 of the state constitution of 1963, the state supreme court shall rule on the constitutionality of chapters 4, 5, and 6 before January 1, 1976.'

On October 16, 1975, the Clerk of the House of Representatives sent the following letter to the Chief Justice:

'Enclosed are seven copies of Public Act No. 227 of 1975 (Enrolled House Bill No. 5250). I hereby call your attention to section 200 on the last page of the bill.'

We have construed this as a request for an advisory opinion and respectfully deny the request without prejudice.

Const.1963, art. 3, § 8 provides that:

'Either house of the legislature or the governor may request the opinion of the supreme court on important questions of law upon solemn occasions as to the constitutionality of legislation after it has been enacted into law but before its effective date.'

As set forth in concurring opinion in Advisory Opinion re Constitutionality of 1972 PA 294, 389 Mich. 441, 482, 483, 208 N.W.2d 469, 483 (1973):

'Michigan's Constitution, thus, restricts advisory opinions to

'--important questions of 'law,'

'--concerning the 'constitutionality' of legislation,

'--'upon solemn occasions' when requested by either house of the Legislature or the Governor,

'--after the legislation has been enacted into law but before the effective date.'

As suggested by the 'important questions of law' requirement, the request for an advisory opinion must 'particularize any claims of unconstitutionality'. Advisory Opinion re Constitutionality of 1972 PA 294, supra, 389 Mich. 441, 484, 208 N.W.2d 469; Advisory Opinion re Constitutionality of 1974 PA 242, 394 Mich. 41, 53, 228 N.W.2d 772 (1975). A request stated too broadly cannot be considered. Advisory Opinion re Constitutionality of 1974 PA 272, 393 Mich. 916 (1975).

Viewed against what the Constitution requires, Section 200 of 1975 P.A. 227 is insufficient to invoke this Court's discretionary power to render an advisory opinion. The request does not specify the 'important questions of law' upon which the House of Representatives wishes us to speak. ¹ In addition, the request was made during the enactment process itself, whereas the Constitution requires that the request be made after enactment and before the effective date. ²

Since chapters 4, 5, and 6 of 1975 P.A. 227 have not yet become effective, either House of the Legislature may request an advisory opinion specifying any constitutional questions it wishes us to address.

T. G. KAVANAGH, C.J., and LINDEMER, LEVIN, COLEMAN, WILLIAMS and FITZGERALD, JJ., concur.

1 In contrast, see the specific questions set forth by the Senate in Advisory Opinion re Constitutionality of 1973 PA 1, 390 Mich. 166, 172, 211 N.W.2d 28 (1973) and in Advisory Opinion re Constitutionality of 1972 PA 258, 389 Mich. 659, 660, 209 N.W.2d 200 (1973).

2 This requirement might be satisfied by a...