(The Center Square) – A constitutional challenge to Michigan’s earmark spending process scored a major court victory this week after a judge halted further payments tied to certain taxpayer-funded grants.
The Michigan Court of Claims granted a preliminary injunction in Mackinac Center for Public Policy v. Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity, temporarily freezing the challenged funding until the court reaches a final decision in the case.
The lawsuit, first filed last year, argued lawmakers violated the Michigan Constitution by approving billions in earmarks and “community enhancement grants” without the required two-thirds supermajority vote in both legislative chambers.
“This ruling was a major win for Michigan taxpayers and an important check on lawmakers seeking to funnel billions in taxpayer dollars to special projects without the required supermajority vote,” Patrick Wright, vice president for legal affairs at the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation, exclusively told The Center Square.
In its initial filing, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy pointed to two specific appropriations for local sports stadiums. While the budget argued those appropriations were for a “public purpose,” the lawsuit argued the “two grants are illegal and unconstitutional expenditures of state funds” because they are for local or private purposes.
The court ruled that some grants tied to statewide systems, such as highways, or major cultural institutions like the Detroit Institute of Arts would not qualify as local-purpose spending. However, it found that one-year appropriations primarily benefiting a local community still require a two-thirds vote in both legislative chambers.
Wright said the case will now continue through the legal process.
“We will finalize the decision at the trial court and wait to see if the government will appeal,” Wright said.
On June 17, the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity responded to the lawsuit, arguing the “test case” should not have been filed against the agency because it is “simply the vehicle through which the funds are to be expended.”
The Mackinac Center alleged there were 342 earmarks totaling $1.6 billion in fiscal year 2023-24. The lawsuit also stated there were about $1 billion in earmarks in fiscal year 2024-25, with “requests in for $4 billion in earmarks in this budget cycle.”
While the lawsuit only challenged earmarks tied to those sports stadiums, the Mackinac Center said it hopes a final ruling in its favor could affect hundreds of previous earmarks and billions of dollars in spending.
“A favorable outcome would restore constitutional safeguards against illegal earmark spending, improve transparency, and protect taxpayers from misuse of their money,” Wright said. “A win would signal that lawmakers can’t bypass the law to award special favors.”
Wright added that he hopes the ruling sends a message that lawmakers must comply with constitutional requirements when approving special project funding.
“If Michigan lawmakers want to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on special projects, they must follow the Constitution,” Wright said. “Doing otherwise would be an illegal misuse of taxpayer money.”
