{"Feature":[{"Photos":[{"Id":140516,"Name":"1628934JBAM-Jul-web.jpg","ArticleId":1628934,"Description":"(Photo by John Meiu)","IsMainPhoto":false,"Ordering":0}],"id":1628934,"location_id":1,"title":"Lunch & Learn","summary":"
The Jewish Bar Association of Michigan (JBAM) conducted a Lunch & \r\nLearn event on Wednesday, July 15, in the 2nd Floor Judicial Conference \r\nRoom of the Oakland County Circuit Court in Pontiac.
","text":"
The Jewish Bar Association of Michigan (JBAM) conducted a Lunch & Learn event on Wednesday, July 15, in the 2nd Floor Judicial Conference Room of the Oakland County Circuit Court in Pontiac. Among those participating in the event were (left to right) Jeremy Glogower, Jordan Goldberg of Jordan Goldberg Law PLC, Ariel Drissman of Drissman Law PLLC, Loren Shevitz of Loren Legal Services, Steve Reina of Law Office of Steve Reina, JBAM President Jordan Zuppke of Zupac Law, Rabbi Menachem Caytak of Chabad Jewish Center, and Zachary Grant of the Oakland County Prosecutor's Office.  Hosted by Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Lorie Savin, the program featured Rabbi Caytak who shared inspiring insights relevant to attorneys’ professional and spiritual lives.
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-07-28T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null},{"Photos":[{"Id":140500,"Name":"1628935SamuelBagenstos-web.jpg","ArticleId":1628935,"Description":"","IsMainPhoto":false,"Ordering":0}],"id":1628935,"location_id":1,"title":"Michigan Law professor cited in SCOTUS?dissent","summary":"
The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided Landor v. Louisiana Department \r\nof Corrections and Public Safety et al. 6-3, finding that a Louisiana \r\nman can’t sue corrections officers for damages for violating his \r\nreligious rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized \r\nPersons Act (RLUIPA).  

","text":"
The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety et al. 6-3, finding that a Louisiana man can’t sue corrections officers for damages for violating his religious rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA).  

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson filed a dissenting opinion to the ruling that Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined. In arguing that the majority misconstrued the Constitution’s spending clause and necessary and proper clause, Jackson cited a paper that Professor Samuel Bagenstos wrote, “Spending Clause Litigation in the Roberts Court,” which was published in the Duke Law Journal in 2008.

Jackson wrote that “the Court takes a step toward embracing what one scholar has criticized as the ‘strong contract theory’: the radical notion that Spending Clause legislation is not just ‘“in the nature of” a contract,’ but is in fact ‘nothing but a contract,’” referring to Bagenstos’s paper. 

Bagenstos, the Frank G. Millard Professor of Law, had argued in that paper that the Supreme Court was likely to limit Congress’s conditional spending authority—but indirectly, by limiting private parties’ ability to enforce funding conditions. In Landor, the court has done just that, Bagenstos said. 

At the center of this case is Damon Landor, a practicing Rastafarian whose religious convictions require him to leave his hair uncut. When he was transferred from one corrections facility to another, officers held him down and shaved his head, even after he had informed them of his religious convictions and RLUIPA. 

Landor filed suit against the Louisiana Department of Corrections and some of its individual officers, seeking damages. The Supreme Court held that Landor can’t sue the individual officers for damages.

Bagenstos recently answered five questions about this case and its implications:

—————

1. What is at issue in the Landor case?

The precise issue in the case was whether a prisoner whose religious rights were violated could sue the individual prison official who violated their rights or whether their only lawsuit could run against the state itself. The court had already said you can’t sue the state for damages, because the state has sovereign immunity against damages. So the only way that an individual could get effective relief would be to sue the individual prison official who violated their rights. And the court here said you can’t sue them either.

The RLUIPA statute says if a state prison accepts federal funds, then it has an obligation to provide accommodations to the religious exercise of prisoners. And what the court said is: That may be binding on the state, but that’s not binding on the people who work for the state, at least to the extent that they can’t be individually sued for violating it. 

But the state only operates through people. In Landor, the court said that the person whose rights are at stake, whose rights are being protected by Congress, has no ability to challenge the individual action of the person who actually violated their rights under the statute. 

—————

2. In Landor, has the majority done exactly what you predicted the Supreme Court would do to limit private parties’ ability to enforce funding conditions?

They’ve certainly done that, and I think they’ve gone further. What I tried to do in that paper almost 20 years ago was predict the various directions the court’s jurisprudence on the spending clause might go. I said it would certainly be the case that a conservative Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts would limit the ability of private parties to enforce spending clause laws. Before Landor, they also did it in the Medina case involving Planned Parenthood last year and in a number of other cases. That’s been a pretty consistent theme. 

I also said in the paper that there is this more extreme argument that they might endorse in order to achieve that goal of limiting the enforcement of spending clause statutes. This argument is that statutes that Congress adopts under the spending clause aren’t really laws in any traditional sense—that they essentially are proposals to enter into a contract. 

The court adopted this idea that a spending clause statute is really just a contract and can’t bind anybody who works for the entity who contracted with the federal government. It can only bind the particular party that contracted with the federal government. The dissent quoted my argument and said this extreme theory really doesn’t make sense as a constitutional matter.

—————

3. What implications does this decision have beyond religious rights?

The crucial thing is that Congress said you can sue an official for damages, and the court said, no, you really can’t. They’re reading the Constitution as limiting what Congress can do in a way that causes very significant harm to Congress’s ability to create remedies.

As Justice Jackson points out in her dissent, there are an incredible number of really significant statutes that Congress adopted under its spending power. That includes a lot of civil rights statutes, like Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which protects against race discrimination; and Title IX of the Education Amendments, which protects against sex discrimination in education; and the Rehabilitation Act, which protects against disability discrimination. It also includes things like Medicaid, the unemployment insurance system, and the foster care system. 

There are lots of programs that people rely on every day that are based on conditional federal spending. By saying that those terms of Congress’s grants can only be constitutionally enforced against the state itself and not against the individuals who actually are tasked with carrying them out, that can substantially limit the ability of Congress to make sure that the important purposes of these spending clause statutes are carried out.

—————

4. How has the legal landscape changed on this issue in the last couple of decades?

The reason I wrote the article about the spending clause in the Roberts court back in 2008 is because it seemed pretty clear that the spending clause was going to be a big focus for a conservative court moving forward. 

The court has, on a number of fronts, made it much harder for Congress to attach conditions to federal spending. When they invalidated the Medicaid expansion in Obamacare, they adopted a new constitutional rule making it harder for Congress to attach conditions, but they’ve also—in a very significant way—made it much harder to enforce those conditions.

In Landor, they’re saying there’s also potentially constitutional limitations to who is covered by spending clause legislation and how they’re covered by it. I think there’s been a steady constriction of the ability of individuals who have rights under spending clause statutes to vindicate them—and a steady constriction of Congress’s ability to use the spending clause to vindicate important national priorities.

—————

5. Where do we go from here?

There’s still going to be a lot of litigation about this. There are so many statutes that attach conditions to federal spending, and they really matter to people. 

If you think about the applications of the civil rights laws in the university context, or you think about Medicaid—which is the largest item on most state budgets—and all the controversies over what gets covered in Medicaid, how it gets covered, how much is spent, all of that is the subject of litigation all the time. So we’re bound to see future tests of just how broadly the Supreme Court’s new ruling shielding states will extend.
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-07-28T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null},{"Photos":[],"id":1628936,"location_id":1,"title":"Attorneys receive state appointments","summary":"
On July 23, Governor Gretchen Whitmer announced the appointments of five attorneys to various state boards and commissions.
","text":"
On July 23, Governor Gretchen Whitmer announced the appointments of five attorneys to various state boards and commissions.

Macomb County Circuit Judge James Maceroni, of Saint Clair Shores, was appointed to the Michigan Indigent Defense Commission. Maceroni also serves on the State Bar of Michigan Prisons and Corrections Committee and the Criminal Law Committee of the Michigan Judges Association. The Macomb County judge holds a Bachelor of Arts in interdisciplinary studies in social science from Michigan State University and a Juris Doctor from Wayne State University Law School. He is appointed as a member submitted by the Michigan Judges Association for a term commencing July 23, 2026, and expiring April 1, 2030. Maceroni succeeds James Fischer, whose term has expired. 

Also appointed to the Indigent Defense Commission was Stacia Buchanan, of Lansing, who serves as chief judge of the 54-A District Court. Judge Buchanan is also the secretary of the Michigan District Judges Association and serves on the Judicial Section of the State Bar of Michigan, the Ingham County Indigent Collaborative Committee, and the Community Corrections Advisory Board. Buchanan holds a Bachelor of Arts in psychology from Oakland University and a Juris Doctor from the Michigan State University College of Law. Buchanan is appointed as a member submitted by the Michigan District Judges Association for a term commencing July 
23, 2026, and expiring April 1, 2030. Buchanan succeeds Judge Paula Mathes, whose term has expired. 

The Michigan Indigent Defense Commission was created as a result of efforts to improve legal representation for indigent criminal defendants. The Commission develops and oversees the implementation, enforcement, and modification of minimum standards, rules, and procedures to ensure that indigent criminal defense services providing effective assistance of counsel are delivered to all indigent adults in this state consistent with the safeguards of the United States Constitution, the State Constitution of 1963, and with the Michigan Indigent Defense Commission Act.  

Jim Townsend, of Royal Oak, has been appointed to the Michigan Gaming Control Board. Townsend is the director of the Levin Center for Oversight and Democracy at Wayne State University. He also represented the 26th District in the Michigan House of Representatives from 2011-17. Townsend holds a Bachelor of Arts in history from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a Master of Business Administration and Master of Public Policy from the University of Michigan, and a Juris Doctor from Wayne State University Law School. Townsend will be appointed to represent Democrats for a term commencing August 1, 2026, and expiring December 31, 2028. Townsend also will be designated as Chair for a term commencing August 1, 2026, and expiring at the pleasure of the Governor. Townsend will succeed Jim Ananich, who is resigning.

The Michigan Gaming Control Board ensures the conduct of fair and honest gaming to protect the interests of the citizens of the state of Michigan. The Board provides Detroit commercial casinos gaming operations licensing and regulation, licenses and regulates online gaming and sports betting operators, platform providers and suppliers, regulates pari-mutuel horse racing and casino-style charitable gaming, and audits tribal gaming compact agreement compliance.  

Timothy Pinto, of Ann Arbor, has been appointed to the Governor’s Task Force on Child Abuse and Neglect. Pinto is a clinical professor of law at the University of Michigan Law School. Pinto previously served as general counsel for the United States Soccer Federation. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in political economy from Williams College and a Juris Doctor from the University of Michigan Law School. Pinto is appointed to represent attorneys involved in both civil and criminal court proceedings related to child abuse and neglect, including individuals involved with the defense as well as the prosecution of such cases, for a term commencing July 23, 2026, and expiring December 31, 2029. Pinto succeeds Nicole Smithson, who has resigned. 

Elizabeth Rios-Jones, of Lansing, has been appointed to the Michigan Interagency Council on Homelessness. Rios-Jones is a deputy state court administrator in the Michigan State Court Administrative Office. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in political science and sociology and a Juris Doctor from the University of Michigan Law School. Rios-Jones is reappointed to represent courts for a term commencing July 23, 2026, and expiring January 30, 2030.
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-07-28T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null},{"Photos":[{"Id":140501,"Name":"1628937ZenellBrown-web.jpg","ArticleId":1628937,"Description":"","IsMainPhoto":false,"Ordering":0}],"id":1628937,"location_id":1,"title":"America250: What did you do this summer?","summary":"
“What did you do this summer?” What was once a universal question may be\r\n a relic of the past, based on the “meh” reaction my 7-year-old grandson\r\n gave when I asked what he would be writing about in his report when he \r\nreturned to school after Labor Day.
","text":"
By Zenell Brown

“What did you do this summer?” What was once a universal question may be a relic of the past, based on the “meh” reaction my 7-year-old grandson gave when I asked what he would be writing about in his report when he returned to school after Labor Day.

I, on the other hand, am excited to report to the Detroit legal community about my America250 summer experience.

I started with the expected themes of independence, truth, and justice, but the themes of transformation and civic courage emerged over the past few weeks. 

Transformation represents the evolution of traditional ideas into their current and future forms. Civic courage means accepting individual and collective responsibility for protecting democratic values and the rule of law.

Work and personal travels from July 11–25 took me to Jacksonville, Florida; New Orleans, Louisiana (NOLA); and Chicago, Illinois. At each stop, I ventured out to engage with the local history, culture, and community and to connect those experiences with the commemoration of America250 and my work to help ensure that our justice system works for all.

Jacksonville offered me James Weldon Johnson Park. Established as the city’s first public park, it was known as Hemming Park until 2020. The park is a symbol of transformation: What was once a site of racial violence, including the Ax Handle Saturday incident, is now an urban space dedicated to “engaging diverse communities and restoring vitality to the public square.”

In 1900, James Weldon Johnson’s poem “Lift Ev’ry Voice and Sing” was sung by students during a celebration of Abraham Lincoln’s birthday. In 1919–20, the song was recognized as the national anthem for Black America. It was the greatest moment of my career thus far to recite words I learned in early elementary school before an audience of court professionals from across the nation as part of my acceptance speech for the National Association for Court Management’s Award of Merit.

NOLA provided an opportunity to gain and share new perspectives on the civil rights era. With my 7-year-old grandson, I stood on the steps of William Frantz Elementary School and shared the story of Ruby Bridges, the courageous 6-year-old who integrated the school. We talked about how integration is not ancient history and how Ms. Bridges is about the age of his great-aunt. Like his aunt, Ms. Bridges is still living and active. I do not think he fully understood it all, but the seeds have been planted.

In Chicago, the National Association of Women Lawyers convened for its annual meeting July 22–23, and the rule of law was front and center. Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court Ketanji Brown Jackson, the keynote speaker, emphasized that the rule of law is at the heart of our democracy and that the legal community must educate the public about what that means. According to the National Center for State Courts’ 2025 survey, 62% of Americans indicate that they trust state courts. That leaves considerable work for those of us responsible for strengthening public understanding and confidence.

An America250 summer visit to Chicago would not have been complete without a visit to the Obama Presidential Museum. Through its omnipresent theme, “The Power of Us,” various exhibits recognize leaders who helped transform America’s democratic promises. One display asks visitors to respond to the following critique of democracy: “The Constitution was last amended before the internet was really a thing—and it’s so hard to change. How can it still be relevant?” One interactive exhibit indicates that most visitors have voted in favor of continuing change while upholding democracy. Change requires civic courage, and civic courage requires conversation. Individually and collectively, we are responsible for determining what kind of country we want, and reflective questions help advance the conversation.

Finally, on July 25, I landed at the “Freedom Plane National Tour” exhibit at The Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn. There was still an hour-long wait, although I had tickets for an appointed time. But what is an hour when compared with 250 years? That hour also created space for conversation. I shared a laugh with a fellow boomer when his daughter, a teacher, had no idea who Detroit radio personality Dick Purtan was. Now she can include that lesson in her “What I Did This Summer” report.

More importantly, the hour gave me an opportunity to reflect on the pieces of history from my July travels and how they fit into America250. They represented the transformation of our founding ideals.

The doors opened, allowing me to view the documents on display, among them the original engraving of the Declaration of Independence (1823) and the Articles of Association (1774). The genesis of civic courage was demonstrated by the oaths and ledgers signed by men who were willing to bet all they had on independence and a system intended to ensure equality and establish that no one is above the law. These documents were drafted during the lifetimes of my sixth great-grandmothers, who were most likely enslaved and certainly not contemplated as beneficiaries of the freedoms and rights they prescribed. I stood in awe of their creation and in reverence for their transformation. The civic courage required to shape and fulfill these ideals has never been easy, but it has always been worthwhile. I exited the exhibit inspired.

My America250 summer reminded me that I inherited the responsibility to ensure that our democratic ideals are understood, protected, and transformed so that no one is forgotten.

How about you? What did you do this summer?

\"\"
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-07-28T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null},{"Photos":[],"id":1628938,"location_id":1,"title":"Daily Briefs","summary":"
The Alternative Dispute Resolution Section of the State Bar of Michigan \r\nwill host a special virtual Lunch & Learn featuring leaders from the\r\n American Arbitration Association.  “Practice Insights for ADR \r\nProfessionals” will take place online Monday, August 24, from noon to 1 \r\np.m. via Zoom.
","text":"

ADR Section to feature
American Arbitration Association leaders


The Alternative Dispute Resolution Section of the State Bar of Michigan will host a special virtual Lunch & Learn featuring leaders from the American Arbitration Association. “Practice Insights for ADR Professionals” will take place online Monday, August 24, from noon to 1 p.m. via Zoom.

This interactive program will offer practical insight into AAA administration, trends in arbitration and mediation, effective advocacy in ADR proceedings, and what neutrals and advocates should know when working with the AAA.

The discussion will explore case management, arbitrator and mediator selection, party expectations, best practices for efficient proceedings, and emerging developments across AAA practice areas – including new technologies to support ADR processes. Attendees will have an opportunity to hear directly from AAA leadership and gain a better understanding of how to navigate the process from both the advocate and neutral perspectives.

Participating in the discussion will be AAA’s Cassie Lively, vice president, Employment Division; Aaron Schmidt, vice president, Labor Division; and Lise Prisarojn, mediation director.  

The program will be moderated by Lisa W. Timmons, AAA arbitrator and mediator and immediate past chair of the ADR Section of the State Bar of Michigan.

To register for the free online program, visit https://connect.michbar.org/adr/home.


Attorney discusses HR as a
business’ first line of legal protection


Maddin Hauser continues its Breakfast Bites: Employment Law Series with “HR as the Business’ First Line of Legal Protection: How HR Protects the Company’s Business Interests Every Day” presented Tuesday, August 18, from 8 to 9:30 a.m. in-person at One Towne Square, Fifth Floor, in Southfield, and online via Zoom.

Speaking at the program will be Jordan B. Segal, shareholder  focused on mergers and acquisitions, commercial real estate, and entity formation and governance. 

As a writer and speaker, Segal has been published in Michigan Business Law Journal, Compliance Today, and Cooley Law Review. His articles and presentations include business legal insights on corporate data security, nondisclosure agreements, nonprofits, and cannabis law.

For additional information or to register for either the webinar or in-person seminar, visit https://maddinhauser.com and click on “events.”
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-07-28T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null}],"NationalNews":[{"Title":"How to use AI but steer clear of hallucinated cases","Link":"https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/how-to-use-ai-but-steer-clear-of-hallucinated-cases/"},{"Title":"Lawyers for low-income clients strike in NYC","Link":"https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lawyers-for-low-income-clients-strike-in-nyc/"},{"Title":"Top prosecutor for International Criminal Court accused of sexual misconduct","Link":"https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/top-prosecutor-for-international-criminal-court-accused-of-sexual-misconduct/"},{"Title":"Big Tech companies facing new wave of lawsuits over copyright and AI","Link":"https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/big-tech-companies-facing-new-wave-of-lawsuits-over-copyright-and-AI/"},{"Title":"Lawyer says he was ‘manic’ when he bought Cape Cod mansion in danger of falling into ocean","Link":"https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lawyer-says-he-was-manic-when-he-bought-cape-cod-mansion-in-danger-of-falling-into-ocean/"},{"Title":"Judge regrets ‘entitled little snot’ comment but still fit for the bench, lawyer says","Link":"https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/judge-regrets-entitled-little-snot-comment-but-still-fit-for-the-bench/"}],"LocationId":1}