Pending

Unlike most public services, which are financed by taxes, our court system relies heavily on collecting crippling fines, fees, and costs from low-income criminal defendants to operate. This unjust system disproportionately impacts people of color, who are overpoliced and overcharged in our criminal legal system. It also undermines the perception that judges are impartial arbiters, as they have an incentive to find defendants guilty and impose high fines and fees because the money is needed to operate the court system. Working with the Detroit Justice Center and Street Democracy, in 2021 the ACLU of Michigan filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the Michigan Court of Appeals in a case challenging this practice as unconstitutional because it violates the due process right to a fair and impartial judiciary. In May 2021 the Court of Appeals rejected our argument. However, in October 2021 the Michigan Supreme Court requested briefing in another case raising similar issues, and we filed another friend-of-the-court brief and participated in oral argument, this time arguing that separation-of-powers principles prohibit judges from raising revenue for the courts because it is the legislature’s job to fund the government. In June 2022 the Court announced it would set the case for additional briefing and reargument, and we filed another friend-of-the-court brief in January 2023. Unfortunately, in July 2023 the Court dismissed the appeal without ruling on the merits. Two justices dissented, stating that the Court should have reached our arguments and ruled in our favor. Three justices, concurring in the dismissal, declined to say whether the funding scheme at issue was constitutional, but opined that the legislature should be given an opportunity to amend the statute. If the legislature retains this constitutionally suspect funding structure beyond 2024, the Court left the door open to revisiting the issue in a similar case. (People v. Lewis; People v. Johnson; People v. Edwards; ACLU Attorneys Phil Mayor, Bonsitu Kitaba-Gaviglio, and Dan Korobkin; co-counsel Rubina Mustafa of the Detroit Justice Center, Jayesh Patel of Street Democracy, Angela Tripp and Robert Gillett of the Michigan State Planning Body, and Ann Routt of Legal Services Association of Michigan.)

When campaigning for president, Donald Trump called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States. In January 2017, one week after his inauguration, President Trump banned travel for immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries and halted the refugee resettlement program. His executive order was almost immediately halted by federal courts in lawsuits filed across the country, including by Judge Victoria Roberts in Detroit who enjoined portions of the executive order that prevented lawful permanent residents from the barred countries from returning to the United States. The ACLU of Michigan joined with the Arab American Civil Rights League (ACRL) in challenging the order in the Detroit case. In 2018 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the lower courts erred in granting a preliminary injunction against the ban because they applied the wrong legal standard, but in July 2019 Judge Roberts ruled that our case can proceed under the standard the Supreme Court set. In November 2019 the government sought and obtained permission to appeal to the Sixth Circuit. After President Biden took office, he rescinded the Muslim Ban, and in February 2021 the case was dismissed as moot. (Arab American Civil Rights League v. Trump; ACLU Attorneys Miriam Aukerman, Dan Korobkin, Monica Andrade, Elaine Lewis, and Rohit Rajan; Cooperating Attorneys Jason Raofield, Nishchay Maskay, and Alyson Sandler of Covington & Burling, Julian Mortenson of Miller Canfield, and Margo Schlanger and Samuel Bagenstos of U-M Law School; co-counsel Nabih Ayad, Rula Aoun, Kassem Dakhlallah, Mona Fadlallah, Ali Hammoud, and Natalie Qandah.)

In 2015 a Flint police officer assigned to work at an elementary school handcuffed Cameron McCadden, a seven-year-old child with a disability, when he did not immediately respond to the officer’s instruction.  Cameron was not a threat to himself or others and was handcuffed for nearly an hour solely on account of his disability-related behavior.  The ACLU made extensive attempts to work with Flint to enact policy changes to ensure that no other schoolchildren with disabilities were subjected to abusive treatment Cameron experienced, and we established an alliance with community groups calling for police officers to withdraw from elementary schools.  In 2018, after negotiations with the city proved unsuccessful, we filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Flint and the local chamber of commerce that operated the after-school program where the handcuffing occurred.  In 2019 Judge Denise Page Hood denied the city’s motion to dismiss.  In August 2020 the case was settled.  In addition to a trust for funds to address Cameron’s needs, policy changes were adopted that include, among other things, no use of restraints on children when there is no danger or threat; avoidance of use of police officers in school disciplinary matters; use of the lowest level of enforcement for elementary school-aged children; and special training in de-escalation, implicit bias, disabilities and other subjects relevant to proper responses in child disciplinary matters. 

(McCadden v. City of Flint; ACLU of Michigan Attorneys Mark P. Fancher and Michael J. Steinberg; Cooperating Attorneys Jonathan Marko, Mark Finnegan, and Denise Heberle; National ACLU Attorneys Susan Mizner, West Resendes, and Claudia Center.)

Performance Cancelled Because Actors Have Down Syndrome.  DisArt is a disability arts and culture organization that scheduled a series of public performances in Grand Rapids during the Art Prize festival.  One of the events was a drag show performed by local actors alongside Drag Syndrome, a group of performers from the U.K. who are living with Down Syndrome.  The owner of the performance venue, local business and political figure Peter Meijer, cancelled the drag show performance, questioning whether the performers had the capacity to make their own decisions and stating that persons with disabilities are “special souls” and “should be protected.”  DisArt then presented Meijer with assurances that the performers did have the capacity to understand and consent to their performances, but Meijer refused to reconsider his position.  In September 2019 the ACLU of Michigan filed a complaint on DisArt’s behalf with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, alleging discrimination on the basis of disability and sex.  (ACLU Attorney Jay Kaplan.)

Read more case background.