The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled, for the second time in less than 30 days, that Governor Gretchen Whitmer illegally overstepped her authority, substituting executive orders for legislation during the COVID crisis.
The state’s Supreme Court struck down all executive orders Whitmer had issued during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 4-to-3 ruling declared the executive orders Whitmer issued under the Emergency Powers of Governor Act have “no continuing legal effect.”
In a separate ruling, the Michigan justices ruled 6-to-1 to reject Whitmer’s request to delay the annulment of her orders until October 30, 2020.
READ MORE: Michigan’s Whitmer Admits State Isn’t Prepared To Tabulate Votes On Election Day
Michigan House Speaker Lee Chatfield (R), celebrated the ruling, writing on Twitter, “Another big win at the Supreme Court today!”
Another big win at the Supreme Court today! The law is the law, and partisan politics can’t change that. The people will finally have their voices heard in this process. The House is in again tomorrow, and I hope the Governor is ready to cooperate. It’s time to work together!
— Lee Chatfield (@LeeChatfield) October 12, 2020
“The law is the law, and partisan politics can’t change that. The people will finally have their voices heard in this process,” he continued.
Almost immediately following the initial October 2, 2020, ruling calling Whitmer’s issuance of executive orders during the COVID event “unconstitutional,” Whitmer’s health director, Robert Gordon, moved an emergency order that covered a great many of Whitmer’s orders, circumventing the spirit of the court’s decision.
READ MORE: Trump-Hating Anarchist At Center Of Whitmer Kidnapping Plot
Gordon’s public health order requires people wear masks and limits indoor gatherings in residences to 10, 500 in non-residences. Outdoor gatherings of up to 100 at residences are allowed, and of up to 1,000 at non-residences.
The Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a non-profit organization that has challenged Whitmer’s executive orders, is looking into the legality of Gordon’s order.
