The tug-of-war over legislative authority in Michigan has seen a significant development as the state's Attorney General, Dana Nessel, weighed in on a controversial disapproval mechanism within the state's fiscal processes. In a formal opinion released Thursday, Nessel declared this mechanism, which essentially permitted a legislative committee to cancel funding already greenlit by both the Legislature and Governor, unconstitutional. Specifically, it targeted the Management and Budget Act's clause allowing committees in either chamber to unilaterally rescind the so-called work projects, which involve rolling over previously approved funds into a new fiscal year.
The statute in question, MCL 18.1451a(3), had come under scrutiny after the Michigan House Appropriations Committee attempted to exercise this power in December, seeking to "disapprove" nearly $645 million in state funds. According to a statement by the Attorney's office, Nessel indicated that this mechanism clashed with the Michigan Constitution's Separation of Powers and Bicameralism and Presentment requirements, stating, "This disapproval mechanism effectively creates a ‘legislative veto’—or, more accurately, a ‘legislative committee veto.’ This comprises an unconstitutional reservation of administrative control that interferes with the executive branch’s core function of executing the laws. Under Article 3, § 2, when an appropriation is enacted, the Legislature’s role ends, and the executive branch’s duty to faithfully execute the law begins.'"
Notably, Nessel's analysis dissected the constitutional principles at stake, concluding that a single committee’s authority to negate decisions by the State Budget Director, representing the executive’s operational duties, resulted in an overreach. Her legal stance upholds that the Separation of Powers is designed to prohibit one branch of government from commandeering the functions of another, as it would blur the distinct roles that balance governmental operations.
The bipartisan request for this opinion came from Senate Appropriations Chair Sarah Anthony, exemplifying the deep legislative concerns over the scope of committee power in fiscal matters. The Attorney General's findings underscored their constitutional foundation: "By empowering a single legislative committee to negate the State Budget Director’s work-project designations, the statute reserves the very administrative control that the separation of powers forbids." Despite identifying this constitutional breach, Nessel clarified that the legislative veto is severable from the rest of MCL 18.1451a, meaning the rest of the act remains effective and legally binding. Those elements include the directives regarding the initiation of work projects, their duration, criteria, and the mandated reporting requirements, as mentioned on Attorney General website.
The intervention by Michigan's Attorney General is poised to recalibrate the checks and balances within the state's budgetary operations and reaffirm the roles outlined by the constitution. A video further explaining the opinion has been made available by Nessel's office and is accessible for public viewing and dissemination.
.jpg){kind=link}