Facebook Linkedin Instagram Youtube
Main Menu
Search
Close this search box.

Chamber in the News

Back to Chamber News

Find value in these articles?

Join the Michigan Chamber and get them sent directly to you.
Join the MI Chamber Today!

Defending the business community in the Courts

Advocacy News – March 21, 2024 

Businesses are facing an unprecedented number of threats in multiple state and federal courts. From issues concerning environmental policy and governmental overreach to tax policy and employment law and more, the Michigan Chamber is engaged in a record number of Amicus Curiae (or “Friend of the Court”) briefs aiming to ensure the judicial branch understands the practical implications and ramifications of pending litigation on the broader business community and our economic climate and prosperity.

Why it matters: An important function of the Chamber is to be a strong advocate for members in matters pending before the Michigan Legislature or Congress. But it’s not enough to win the legislative battle and declare victory. We must also retain these laws – and legislative intent – when they are challenged in the court. It’s critical to ensure progress is not eroded by activist judges. Here’s a round-up of some key cases we are currently engaged in:

  • Sweeping Paid Sick Leave/Minimum Wage Requirements: Mothering Justice v. Attorney General – The Michigan Supreme Court (MSC) wrapped up oral arguments in this case Thursday, Dec. 7, 2023. The outcome of this litigation will determine the fate of Michigan’s current paid sick leave and minimum wage laws — including that of tipped employees. We are currently awaiting a decision from the MSC.  Read the brief the Chamber filed with other business and trade groups HERE; read all case information HERE. Read the latest on this issue HERE.

 

  • More Litigation/Class Action Lawsuits Against Businesses: Attorney General v. Eli Lilly and Company – The Chamber is coordinating and getting ready to file a joint Amicus Brief with other business and trade associations in this case, which is awaiting argument before the MSC. While on its surface, the case seems to be about insulin pricing, it really is about much more. The Attorney General (AG) is challenging the “regulatory compliance exemption” under the MI Consumer Protection Act. The AG is asking the Court to reverse two prior Supreme Court rulings and upend over two decades of legal precedent in this matter (Smith v. Globe Life Ins. Co. (1999) and Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, Inc. (2007). If this happens, nearly every industry and profession regulated under state and federal law will be subject to lawsuits, including class action suits, under the MCPA. (This is similar to pending state legislation HBs 5199-5202.) Read all case information HERE.

 

  • Regulatory Overreach (Environmental): Michigan Farm Bureau et al v. Dep’t of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy – The MI Chamber joined forces with the National Federation of Business Michigan in a joint brief to support Farm Bureau and the state’s food and agriculture industry in challenging EGLE on whether they can change the conditions of a permit without going through the rulemaking process. Despite the clear effect on the public, EGLE refuses to call the changes a rule. The Amicus argues if agencies are allowed to exercise legislative power without following the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and regulate without input or accountability, businesses of every size and industry across Michigan will be negatively affected. The case was argued in January of 2024, and we are awaiting a decision from the MSC. Read our brief HERE and all the case information HERE.

 

  • Increased Litigation in Employment Claims: Saidizand v. GoJet Airlines – The MI Chamber submitted an Amicus with the U.S. Chamber in support of GoJet, arguing discrimination claims under Elliott-Larsen may be subjected to mandatory arbitration as a condition of employment (versus requiring them to litigated). Ultimately, our brief defends employers’ rights to manage their workplace and the terms and conditions of employment and keep these disputes out of court. Read the Brief HERE. This case is awaiting arguments; read all the information HERE.

 

  • Expanded Lawsuits for Anti-Retaliation Disputes: Cleveland Stegall v. Resource Technology Corp – The MI Chamber submitted a brief in this case, which is scheduled for April of 2024 before the Michigan Supreme Court, reviewing whether the anti-retaliation provision of the Michigan Occupational Safety & Health Administration (MIOSHA), which mirror’s Federal OSHA, provides an exclusive remedy for employees (i.e., requires employees to go through MIOSHA/OSHA for remedies, not the court). This decision could have significant impact on employers/companies across the state and is an especially important issue given the National Labor Relation Board’s recent agreement with OSHA to pursue matters under the National Labor Relations Act, where the 30-day statute of limitations under OSHA already expired. Read the brief HERE and all case information HERE.

 

  • Limiting Assessors to “Chase the Sale”: Pinewood Circle LLC v. City of Romulus – The Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Apartment Association of Michigan and International Council of Shopping Centers filed a joint brief in this case, which is pending in the Michigan Court of Appeals. This case challenges the Tax Tribunal’s rule, which gives assessors carte blanche to “chase the sale” and justify a value at or close to the sale price even though Proposal A’s implementing legislation demonstrated that the Legislature sought to prevent that from happening. If the COA affirms the Tax Commission’s decision, it will harm Michigan real estate and forever change the state’s historic emphasis on uniformity. Review case information HERE; the brief is not yet available online.

 

  • Stemming Government Price Controls: Chamber of Commerce v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) – The Dayton Area Chamber, Ohio Chamber, Michigan Chamber, and the U.S. Chamber filed suit in June against HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, HHS, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator, Chiquita Brooks-Lasure, and CMS in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The suit alleges that the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) “Drug Price Negotiation Program” does not involve a negotiation at all, but instead forces drug manufacturers to accept HHS’ determined “maximum fair price” or face a tax penalty of up to 19 times the daily gross sales of the drugs. We are involved because Congress set a dangerous precedent with these IRA provisions. Read the brief HERE.

 

Can you help? The Chamber’s Amicus program is funded by the Michigan Chamber Litigation Center, a 501(c)(6) organization. The Litigation Center’s funding comes entirely from voluntary donations from Chamber members, and we devote our efforts and resources to lawsuits that could have a far-reaching impact on the business community and our state’s economy. If you would like to learn more or help support the Litigation Center’s efforts, please contact Wendy Block at 517-371-7678 or wblock@michamber.com.

 

Advocacy News – March 21, 2024 

Businesses are facing an unprecedented number of threats in multiple state and federal courts. From issues concerning environmental policy and governmental overreach to tax policy and employment law and more, the Michigan Chamber is engaged in a record number of Amicus Curiae (or “Friend of the Court”) briefs aiming to ensure the judicial branch understands the practical implications and ramifications of pending litigation on the broader business community and our economic climate and prosperity.

Why it matters: An important function of the Chamber is to be a strong advocate for members in matters pending before the Michigan Legislature or Congress. But it’s not enough to win the legislative battle and declare victory. We must also retain these laws – and legislative intent – when they are challenged in the court. It’s critical to ensure progress is not eroded by activist judges. Here’s a round-up of some key cases we are currently engaged in:

  • Sweeping Paid Sick Leave/Minimum Wage Requirements: Mothering Justice v. Attorney General – The Michigan Supreme Court (MSC) wrapped up oral arguments in this case Thursday, Dec. 7, 2023. The outcome of this litigation will determine the fate of Michigan’s current paid sick leave and minimum wage laws — including that of tipped employees. We are currently awaiting a decision from the MSC.  Read the brief the Chamber filed with other business and trade groups HERE; read all case information HERE. Read the latest on this issue HERE.

 

  • More Litigation/Class Action Lawsuits Against Businesses: Attorney General v. Eli Lilly and Company – The Chamber is coordinating and getting ready to file a joint Amicus Brief with other business and trade associations in this case, which is awaiting argument before the MSC. While on its surface, the case seems to be about insulin pricing, it really is about much more. The Attorney General (AG) is challenging the “regulatory compliance exemption” under the MI Consumer Protection Act. The AG is asking the Court to reverse two prior Supreme Court rulings and upend over two decades of legal precedent in this matter (Smith v. Globe Life Ins. Co. (1999) and Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, Inc. (2007). If this happens, nearly every industry and profession regulated under state and federal law will be subject to lawsuits, including class action suits, under the MCPA. (This is similar to pending state legislation HBs 5199-5202.) Read all case information HERE.

 

  • Regulatory Overreach (Environmental): Michigan Farm Bureau et al v. Dep’t of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy – The MI Chamber joined forces with the National Federation of Business Michigan in a joint brief to support Farm Bureau and the state’s food and agriculture industry in challenging EGLE on whether they can change the conditions of a permit without going through the rulemaking process. Despite the clear effect on the public, EGLE refuses to call the changes a rule. The Amicus argues if agencies are allowed to exercise legislative power without following the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and regulate without input or accountability, businesses of every size and industry across Michigan will be negatively affected. The case was argued in January of 2024, and we are awaiting a decision from the MSC. Read our brief HERE and all the case information HERE.

 

  • Increased Litigation in Employment Claims: Saidizand v. GoJet Airlines – The MI Chamber submitted an Amicus with the U.S. Chamber in support of GoJet, arguing discrimination claims under Elliott-Larsen may be subjected to mandatory arbitration as a condition of employment (versus requiring them to litigated). Ultimately, our brief defends employers’ rights to manage their workplace and the terms and conditions of employment and keep these disputes out of court. Read the Brief HERE. This case is awaiting arguments; read all the information HERE.

 

  • Expanded Lawsuits for Anti-Retaliation Disputes: Cleveland Stegall v. Resource Technology Corp – The MI Chamber submitted a brief in this case, which is scheduled for April of 2024 before the Michigan Supreme Court, reviewing whether the anti-retaliation provision of the Michigan Occupational Safety & Health Administration (MIOSHA), which mirror’s Federal OSHA, provides an exclusive remedy for employees (i.e., requires employees to go through MIOSHA/OSHA for remedies, not the court). This decision could have significant impact on employers/companies across the state and is an especially important issue given the National Labor Relation Board’s recent agreement with OSHA to pursue matters under the National Labor Relations Act, where the 30-day statute of limitations under OSHA already expired. Read the brief HERE and all case information HERE.

 

  • Limiting Assessors to “Chase the Sale”: Pinewood Circle LLC v. City of Romulus – The Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Apartment Association of Michigan and International Council of Shopping Centers filed a joint brief in this case, which is pending in the Michigan Court of Appeals. This case challenges the Tax Tribunal’s rule, which gives assessors carte blanche to “chase the sale” and justify a value at or close to the sale price even though Proposal A’s implementing legislation demonstrated that the Legislature sought to prevent that from happening. If the COA affirms the Tax Commission’s decision, it will harm Michigan real estate and forever change the state’s historic emphasis on uniformity. Review case information HERE; the brief is not yet available online.

 

  • Stemming Government Price Controls: Chamber of Commerce v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) – The Dayton Area Chamber, Ohio Chamber, Michigan Chamber, and the U.S. Chamber filed suit in June against HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, HHS, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator, Chiquita Brooks-Lasure, and CMS in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The suit alleges that the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) “Drug Price Negotiation Program” does not involve a negotiation at all, but instead forces drug manufacturers to accept HHS’ determined “maximum fair price” or face a tax penalty of up to 19 times the daily gross sales of the drugs. We are involved because Congress set a dangerous precedent with these IRA provisions. Read the brief HERE.

 

Can you help? The Chamber’s Amicus program is funded by the Michigan Chamber Litigation Center, a 501(c)(6) organization. The Litigation Center’s funding comes entirely from voluntary donations from Chamber members, and we devote our efforts and resources to lawsuits that could have a far-reaching impact on the business community and our state’s economy. If you would like to learn more or help support the Litigation Center’s efforts, please contact Wendy Block at 517-371-7678 or wblock@michamber.com.