10/2/20 Detroit News:
Lansing — In a landmark ruling with far-reaching implications, the Michigan Supreme Court decided Friday that Gov. Gretchen Whitmer violated her constitutional authority by continuing to issue orders to combat COVID-19 without the approval of state lawmakers.
The state's high court ruled 4-3 that a state law allowing the governor to declare emergencies and keep them in place without legislative input — the 1945 Emergency Powers of the Governor Act — is unconstitutional.
The court was unanimous in ruling that a separate law — the 1976 Emergency Management Act — did not give Whitmer the power, after April 30, to issue or renew any executive orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic after 28 days without Legislative approval.
The ruling, which was requested by a federal judge earlier this year, serves as advice to the federal court and indicates how the court would rule on a suit challenging Whitmer’s emergency powers.
And her response to being told to stop by the courts?
The order essentially brings an end to Whitmer's ability to use emergency powers without legislative approval, but there are differing takes as to when the practical effect of the ruling would be felt.
Whitmer argued her powers will remain in place for at least 21 days, an apparent reference to a 21-day period in which the governor can request a rehearing from the Michigan Supreme Court. ...
Whitmer said Friday she "vehemently" disagreed with the court's ruling, which she said made Michigan an "outlier" among the majority of states that have emergency orders in place.
The governor said that even after the Supreme Court ruling takes effect, her directives will remain in place through "alternative sources of authority."
It is almost like she thinks she is above the law. When governmental officials do not follow the law, there is only one response left.