Michigan Court's Decision Threatens Liberty and Business Rights
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 3 hours ago
**Taxpayer Burden: Michigan Supreme Court’s Dismissal Widens Gateway for Overreaching Pandemic Powers**
In a stunning legal blow, the Michigan Supreme Court has dismissed a significant challenge to the pandemic authority exercised by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), a decision likely to embolden governmental overreach and leave businesses vulnerable to unnecessary restrictions in future health crises.
The court’s ruling not only nullifies a lower court’s determination that DHHS overstepped its bounds with sweeping COVID-19 mandates, but it also leaves unresolved questions about the constitutional limits of such authority. Critics view this as a dangerous precedent, raising alarms about the unchecked powers afforded to state agencies.
Dissenting justices Richard H. Bernstein and David F. Viviano expressed strong concerns about the ruling, warning that the court’s decision to dismiss the case without addressing its core constitutional questions dramatically affects the rights of Michigan citizens. Bernstein pointed out the potential for future restrictions that could echo the extensive imposed limitations of the past pandemic era, which devastated small businesses, many of which are still struggling to recover.
The implications of this ruling resonate deeply within the conservative community, highlighting a growing neglect for individual liberties in favor of expanded bureaucratic control. The court’s failure to reign in DHHS’s authority is a call to action, emphasizing the need for legislative processes to reinstate accountability and safeguard Michiganders' rights.
The case emerged after River Crest, a catering business forced to shutter due to COVID-19 mandates, sought a declaration that the state health department’s actions represented an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. Despite a compelling argument regarding the DHHS's overreach, the court's dismissal reflects a troubling prioritization of bureaucratic power over business rights and consumer choice.
Furthermore, this legal outcome invites scrutiny of the DHHS's practices moving forward, as it accentuates the absence of legislative checks on rampant executive authority during emergencies. As the nation contemplates its pandemic response, the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision stands as a cautionary tale about the importance of maintaining a balance of power that duly protects the freedoms of all citizens.
As we move closer to the next election, it remains crucial for conservatives and all Americans to advocate for a government that respects individual freedoms and limits overextension by bureaucratic agencies. The fight for accountability at every level of government is more vital now than ever, ensuring that future health crises do not result in the erosion of our liberties under the guise of safety.
Sources:
theepochtimes.com
100percentfedup.com
theepochtimes.com
In a stunning legal blow, the Michigan Supreme Court has dismissed a significant challenge to the pandemic authority exercised by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), a decision likely to embolden governmental overreach and leave businesses vulnerable to unnecessary restrictions in future health crises.
The court’s ruling not only nullifies a lower court’s determination that DHHS overstepped its bounds with sweeping COVID-19 mandates, but it also leaves unresolved questions about the constitutional limits of such authority. Critics view this as a dangerous precedent, raising alarms about the unchecked powers afforded to state agencies.
Dissenting justices Richard H. Bernstein and David F. Viviano expressed strong concerns about the ruling, warning that the court’s decision to dismiss the case without addressing its core constitutional questions dramatically affects the rights of Michigan citizens. Bernstein pointed out the potential for future restrictions that could echo the extensive imposed limitations of the past pandemic era, which devastated small businesses, many of which are still struggling to recover.
The implications of this ruling resonate deeply within the conservative community, highlighting a growing neglect for individual liberties in favor of expanded bureaucratic control. The court’s failure to reign in DHHS’s authority is a call to action, emphasizing the need for legislative processes to reinstate accountability and safeguard Michiganders' rights.
The case emerged after River Crest, a catering business forced to shutter due to COVID-19 mandates, sought a declaration that the state health department’s actions represented an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. Despite a compelling argument regarding the DHHS's overreach, the court's dismissal reflects a troubling prioritization of bureaucratic power over business rights and consumer choice.
Furthermore, this legal outcome invites scrutiny of the DHHS's practices moving forward, as it accentuates the absence of legislative checks on rampant executive authority during emergencies. As the nation contemplates its pandemic response, the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision stands as a cautionary tale about the importance of maintaining a balance of power that duly protects the freedoms of all citizens.
As we move closer to the next election, it remains crucial for conservatives and all Americans to advocate for a government that respects individual freedoms and limits overextension by bureaucratic agencies. The fight for accountability at every level of government is more vital now than ever, ensuring that future health crises do not result in the erosion of our liberties under the guise of safety.
Sources:
theepochtimes.com
100percentfedup.com
theepochtimes.com
Latest News