by In a significant constitutional and consumer-protection decision, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that nine bills duly enacted by both chambers of the Legislature—including HB 4901, the long-awaited modernization of Michigan’s bankruptcy exemptions—must be presented to the Governor for consideration. The opinion, released October 27, 2025, reverses the Court of Claims and directs issuance of a writ of mandamus compelling presentment.
MI Court of Appeals Opinion
The Court concluded that Article 4, Section 33 of the Michigan Constitution imposes a mandatory, ministerial duty on the Legislature: “Every bill passed by the legislature shall be presented to the governor before it becomes law.” Rejecting arguments that the duty expired with the prior legislative session, the Court emphasized that the text creates an obligation of the Legislature as a whole, not merely one session.
Because the House Clerk retained physical possession of the nine bills, the Court held the presentment duty necessarily fell on the House. The Court also reaffirmed that the judiciary has inherent authority to enforce constitutional mandates even when a provision does not specify a particular enforcement mechanism.
The Court of Appeals held:
- Presentment is mandatory, not discretionary
- The duty applies to the Legislature as an institution, not merely the session that enacted the bills
- The absence of an explicit constitutional time frame does not create unlimited discretion to delay presentment indefinitely
- The judiciary may issue a mandamus to enforce constitutional commands
- The Legislature must present all nine enrolled bills to the Governor
Because the Court of Claims’ declaratory judgment did not provide an enforceable remedy, the Court of Appeals ordered the issuance of a writ of mandamus.
NCBRC, NACBA, and NCLC File Amicus Brief Supporting Mandatory Presentment
On June 17, 2025, the National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center (NCBRC), National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys (NACBA), and National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) filed an amicus brief urging the Court of Appeals to require presentment of the bills.
The brief was drafted by NCBRC Officer and NACBA member Matt Mason, with co-counsel Alexander Berry-Santoro.
The amicus emphasized the immediate impact on consumer debtors—particularly seniors, widows, and low-income homeowners—who remain trapped under outdated bankruptcy exemption levels last updated in 2005. HB 4901 (and its Senate counterpart SB 409) would bring Michigan exemptions in line with modern housing and vehicle values, allowing debtors to preserve essential assets such as homes, vehicles, and minimal funds needed for daily living.
Without updated exemptions, many Michigan debtors—especially elderly homeowners on fixed incomes—face the impossible choice of losing their homes in Chapter 7 or entering Chapter 13 repayment plans they cannot afford merely to protect modest “paper” equity created by rapidly rising property values.
Importance for Michigan Consumers
NCBRC applauds the Court’s recognition that faithfully enforcing constitutional duties ensures the functioning of representative government—and protects the rights of Michigan residents who urgently need updated exemption laws.
The ruling ensures that HB 4901 and the other eight duly enacted bills will reach the Governor’s desk, restoring voters’ expectations and enabling long-delayed reforms to move forward.
Opinion and Brief