{"Feature":[{"Photos":[{"Id":141504,"Name":"1631829MichiganSupremeCourt-web.jpg","ArticleId":1631829,"Description":"","IsMainPhoto":false,"Ordering":0}],"id":1631829,"location_id":1,"title":"Michigan Supreme Court conducts public administrative hearing Nov. 18","summary":"Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 1997-11, the Michigan Supreme Court will hold a public administrative hearing on Wednesday, November 18. Speakers will appear by videoconference (Zoom); attendees who are not speaking may view the livestream on the court’s YouTube channel.
","text":"Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 1997-11, the Michigan Supreme Court will hold a public administrative hearing on Wednesday, November 18. Speakers will appear by videoconference (Zoom); attendees who are not speaking may view the livestream on the court’s YouTube channel.
The hearing will begin promptly at 9:30 a.m. Registered speakers will join the videoconference meeting no later than 9:30 a.m. and will be called on by the chief justice.
Each registered speaker will be allotted three minutes to present their view on each agenda item for which the speaker has registered to speak, after which the Justices may present questions to that speaker. Speakers may not interject or respond to other speakers outside of the allotted time to address the court.
Comments offered at a public hearing must pertain directly to a matter on the public hearing agenda. Pursuant to the Code of Judicial Conduct, the court cannot entertain comments that pertain to a case or controversy.
To reserve a place on the agenda, complete the registration form online at www.courts.michigan.gov/rules-administrative-orders-and-jury-instructions/public-administrative-hearings no later than Thursday, November 12, at 5 p.m.
Those who are not able to register online may e-mail or call the Office of Administrative Counsel at ADMComment@courts.mi.gov or 517-373-1239.
A few days before the hearing, all registered speakers will receive an emailed invitation to participate in the Zoom meeting. Speakers must turn on their camera and properly identify themselves by using their legal name in order to participate in the public hearing.
The administrative matters on this hearing’s agenda are:
1. 2022-19 Proposed Amendments of MRPC 1.5, 1.15, and 1.15A and Proposed Additions of MRPC 1.15B and 1.15C
Issue: Whether to adopt the proposed amendments of MRPC 1.5, 1.15, and 1.15A and proposed additions of MRPC 1.15B and 1.15C that would amend the rules governing IOLTAs.
2. 2024-15 Proposed Addition of MCR 6.426 and Proposed Amendments of MCR 7.216 and 7.315
Issue: Whether to adopt the proposed addition of MCR 6.426 and proposed amendments of MCR 7.216 and 7.315 that would ensure that self-represented criminal defendants are advised of the right to counsel in remand proceedings from the appellate courts and would facilitate appointment of such counsel.
3. 2024-34 Proposed Amendment of MCR 7.316
Issue: Whether to adopt the proposed amendment of MCR 7.316 that would allow the Court to accept late applications for leave to appeal or cross-appeal in limited circumstances.
4. 2025-23 Proposed Amendment of MCR 7.210
Issue: Whether to adopt the proposed amendment of MCR 7.210 that would explicitly exempt full transcripts for appeals from certain domestic relations actions.
5. 2026-09 Amendment of MCR 6.201
Issue: Whether to retain the amendment of MCR 6.201 that requires a defendant to provide a written notice of intent to introduce expert evidence of diminished capacity (to assist courts and parties in implementing the Court’s decision in People v Madison, ___ Mich ___ (2026) (Docket No. 167120)).
6. 2026-10 Addition of MCR 2.114 and Amendment of MCR 7.209
Issue: Whether to retain the addition of MCR 2.114 that provides a process for special motions under the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (MCL 691.1853 et seq.), and the amendment of MCR 7.209 that clarifies the availability and applicability of the stay during an appeal as contemplated by this new Act.
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-10-23T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null},{"Photos":[{"Id":141505,"Name":"1631830NathanInks-web.jpg","ArticleId":1631830,"Description":"Nathan Inks","IsMainPhoto":false,"Ordering":0}],"id":1631830,"location_id":1,"title":"Community ties Attorney displays passion for serving the public","summary":"Sometimes a sudden career shift can lead to a positive outcome. That seems to be the case for Nathan Inks, an attorney with Bloom Sluggett in Detroit and Grand Rapids, who specializes in planning and zoning law and telecommunications and energy and utilities.
","text":"By Jeanine Matlow
Legal News
Sometimes a sudden career shift can lead to a positive outcome. That seems to be the case for Nathan Inks, an attorney with Bloom Sluggett in Detroit and Grand Rapids, who specializes in planning and zoning law and telecommunications and energy and utilities.
Inks originally planned to pursue a completely different career path when he earned a BS in Meteorology from Central Michigan University.
“I had a math minor and a science background, so this was definitely a pivot,” he says about his law career. “I had planned on working for the National Weather Service or the Air Force that has a dedicated meteorology division. But the job market was a bit saturated with meteorologists when I was getting ready to graduate, so I decided to go to law school. In addition to meteorology, law had always appealed to me. From a young age, I was always interested in law and politics.”
Inks earned his law degree from Wayne State University Law School. His undergrad education has also been helpful when he reads scholarly journals or expert reports.
“They are easy to digest, which has helped my legal career,” he says. “There was certainly not much of an overlap, but it was beneficial.”
When asked about the biggest challenge that comes with his work, Inks mentions the breadth of issues the firm handles.
“From property law and labor and employment law to zoning and planning, we do so much,” he says. “There are a lot of different legal issues to cover.”
Still, he feels equipped to handle multiple specialties.
“I clerked for the Michigan Supreme Court for five years and I was a senior clerk for the last year and a half,” says Inks. “The experience there set me up for success in my career. I saw all kinds of law and I had to be prepared to work on new issues I had never seen before.”
In his current role, he finds one aspect especially rewarding.
“I work for a private law firm, but the large majority of work we do for municipalities I view as an act of public service,” Inks explains. “We are helping communities navigate their policies and handle other tricky issues. We have helped to advocate for lower rates for electric utilities and improve coordination between utilities and municipalities.”
In his spare time, Inks also serves the public on the Sterling Heights Planning Commission, where he has been involved for the past six years.
“We went through a process to update the master plan for the next 20 to 30 years to see what land use will look like for the city,” he says. “The next step is the Lakeside Mall redevelopment. The property will soon be demolished and turned into a larger mixed-use development.”
He also serves on the Sterling Heights Sustainability Commission where he was one of the first members to draft a sustainability plan. Aspects of the plan included decreasing carbon emissions and increasing the number of electric vehicles in the city’s fleet.
Inks also enjoys his involvement with the Michigan Association of Planning.
“Planning and zoning is something I find really fun,” he says. “I like to help municipalities.”
His passion for his role at the firm and his role as a city planning commissioner is evident as both allow him to help others.
“My interest in planning is why I became involved in the community in Sterling Heights. That is where my wife and I have lived since we were married and where our son was born and where we hope to stay for years to come,” says Inks. “To help shape the future makes it more rewarding when you have that personal connection. It’s fun to see things I had a hand in shaping come to fruition in the community.”
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-10-23T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null},{"Photos":[],"id":1631831,"location_id":1,"title":"Voting right advocates highlight safeguards in place to protect Michigan elections before and after ballots are cast on November 3","summary":"At a press conference held by the nonpartisan Michigan Election Protection Program (EPP) today, voting rights advocates shared plans they have put in place to protect Michigan elections before and after votes are cast November 3
","text":"At a press conference held by the nonpartisan Michigan Election Protection Program (EPP) today, voting rights advocates shared plans they have put in place to protect Michigan elections before and after votes are cast November 3. Specifically, they detailed how hundreds of election officials, volunteers, and legal professionals have been working for the past 18 months to ensure voters’ rights are protected and Boards of County Canvassers follow the law and certify election results.
“While we have our work cut out for us this election season, I can say with complete confidence, we have never been more prepared,” said Jessica Ayoub, ACLU of Michigan deputy political director, and co-leader of the EPP, which is made up of more than 100 voting advocacy organizations. “We have gamed out dozens of potential election-threat scenarios and rapid response strategies that we can deploy as needed to ensure that voters can cast their ballots free of intimidation, that our elections are protected, and our democracy remains intact.”
With nine days of early in-person voting set to begin statewide on Saturday, Oct. 24, voting rights advocates assured voters that they can trust Michigan elections and their local clerks who, along with their staff, and poll workers recruited from local communities, oversee the process.
“They ensure our elections are fair, secure, and have accurate results,” added Ayoub.
Voting rights advocates also detailed election protection protocols put in place following the 2020 election when election denialists began making false claims about election integrity across the country, including many Michigan jurisdictions.
“Detroit became central to the false narrative that many election deniers were pedaling to undermine our elections for political gain,” said Chris Thomas, who served as Michigan’s Elections Director for 36 years, and has been an advisor to the Detroit City Clerk since 2020. “As a result of what ensued in 2020, we have added security measures to deter any disruptions to the counting of mail ballots. Our focus is on?maintaining our reputation as the gold standard when it comes to tabulating absentee ballots.”
Also, following the 2020 election, the League of Women Voters of Michigan started its Nonpartisan Canvass Observer Program.
“The League launched the program to educate our communities about what the certification process is and how it works, as well as to build trust in our election system and security,” said Sarah Warner, League of Women Voters of Michigan Project Manager. “We view ourselves as the bridge between the public and the election certification process. Our observers serve as the eyes and ears, providing transparency for the public as their votes are certified.”
The League trains observers to not interfere, challenge, or participate in the canvass, explained Warner.
For many folks, volunteering as a nonpartisan canvass observer is an attractive program because they can learn more about the democratic process and how many security protocols exist to protect our votes,” added Warner. “We often hear from our volunteers that they didn’t realize how many checks and balances there truly are to the election process. It’s proof of the strength of our election system.”
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-10-23T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null},{"Photos":[],"id":1631832,"location_id":1,"title":"The GOP wants to revamp the Supreme Court. It’ll be tough. ","summary":"Republicans face an uphill battle in their bid to oust two sitting Supreme Court justices on Election Day.
","text":"By Robin Bravender
Gongwer News Service
Republicans face an uphill battle in their bid to oust two sitting Supreme Court justices on Election Day.
Two GOP-backed candidates are campaigning to unseat justices with Democratic support in the races that are technically nonpartisan but where parties back their favored picks. The outcome will be hugely significant: The state’s highest court has the final say on issues including criminal sentencing, consumer protection, election procedures and much more.
But Republicans are facing a raft of challenges that could keep the court’s current makeup of 6-1 Democratic-endorsed justices intact.
Their problems include tough headwinds for Republicans across the nation this fall as President Donald Trump’s approval rating has plummeted. Ad spending for the Democratic-backed candidates dwarfs that of the GOP-endorsed judges. The sitting justices are buoyed by an incumbent designation that puts them atop their competitors on the ballot. And this year, two candidates who aren’t eligible to serve on the court will also appear on the ballot, potentially siphoning votes from the Republican-endorsed judges.
“I think any non-incumbent is an underdog in any judicial election,” said Michael Warren, a judge on the Oakland County Circuit Court and a Republican Party nominee for the Supreme Court.
“The incumbency designation is powerful and not impossible to overcome,” Warren said. “But it’s an uphill battle for sure.”
Even the best-case scenario for Republicans is to pick up two seats on the court, which would still leave them in a 4-3 minority position, adding two GOP-backed justices alongside the court’s current Republican, Justice Brian Zahra. Still, it would be a critical step toward potentially reclaiming the court in a future election.
—————
Meet the candidates
Warren grew up in Detroit and St. Clair Shores before he attended Wayne State University and the University of Michigan Law School. He fought to help the Ann Arbor Hash Bash keep its permit, he said. He clerked for Justice Dorothy Comstock Riley on the Michigan Supreme Court in the 1990s when he thought, “It’s my dream to come back, but as a justice,” he told Gongwer in a recent interview.
Warren joined the Detroit law firm Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP and went on to serve on the State Board of Education until he lost his 2002 re-election bid. That was a “blessing in disguise,” he said, because it opened him up to be appointed to the Oakland County Circuit Court in December 2002 by outgoing Republican Gov. John Engler. Warren has since been re-elected several times.
The other Republican-nominated candidate for the Supreme Court, Casandra Morse-Bills, was born and raised in Osceola County. A graduate of the University of South Florida and the Thomas M. Cooley Law School, she worked in private practice before she was elected as prosecuting attorney of Oscoda County. She was elected in 2018 and reelected in 2024 as presiding judge of Michigan’s 23rd Circuit Court spanning four counties – Alcona, Arenac, Iosco and Oscoda.
The Republican-backed challengers are taking on Supreme Court Chief Justice Megan Cavanagh and Justice Noah Hood, the Democratic nominees.
Cavanagh, the daughter of a former Supreme Court chief justice, grew up in East Lansing, trained as an engineer at the University of Michigan and earned a law degree from Wayne State University. She practiced appellate law in Detroit before she was first elected to the Supreme Court in 2018 and elevated to chief justice in 2025 by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
Hood is facing his first election to the court after his 2025 appointment by Whitmer. He’s a Detroit native with an undergraduate degree from Yale University and a law degree from Harvard University. He returned to Michigan for a stint with the Miller Canfield firm before serving as assistant U.S. attorney in Toledo and Detroit.
Whitmer appointed Hood to serve as a judge on the Wayne Circuit Court in 2019 and on the Michigan Court of Appeals in 2022.
Two candidates backed by the U.S. Taxpayers Party of Michigan — Thomas Howe and Jody White — are also on the ballot this year, although they aren’t eligible to take office if they win, as they aren’t attorneys and don’t meet the requirements for service.
—————
Challenges for the challengers
The inclusion of Howe and White on the ballot could make a tough race for the GOP-backed candidates even harder.
“They’re not even lawyers. They don’t even qualify to serve as a judge anywhere in the state, let alone on our Supreme Court,” Morse-Bills said. “We definitely are the underdogs because now we not only have two incumbents and two non-incumbents, but we have two individuals that are going to split the non-incumbent vote that don’t get the designation.”
The Constitution prohibits anyone from serving on the court without having been admitted to the practice of law for at least five years but does not bar someone from running without that level of experience.
The Democrats’ favored candidates have a money advantage, too. Advertisement spending or reservations for Cavanagh and Hood totals $3.3 million between Sept. 1 and Election Day, according to data from AdImpact. Most of that — $2.2 million — comes from the pro-Democratic super PAC Justice for All.
GOP spending for advertising on the races: $0, per AdImpact.
Cavanagh and Hood have also dramatically outraised their opponents so far this cycle.
Cavanagh’s campaign raised a cumulative $595,303 so far this cycle and Hood raised $645,356, according to their latest filings that tallied contributions through mid-September. Warren’s campaign raised $229,225 in contributions through mid-September, while Morse-Bills raised $13,481.
—————
Tipping the scales
Warren, Morse-Bills and their Republican allies are all hoping to make a dent in the court with a 6-1 Democratic-backed majority.
Democrats have held the court’s majority since 2021; Republicans were in the majority for most of the two decades before that.
“On the Democratic and progressive side, people have really upped their game in terms of focusing on the court and getting people out to vote for it,” said Mark Brewer, an attorney and former longtime chair of the Michigan Democratic Party.
“The previous court, which had its origins when [John] Engler was governor and he managed to nominate and/or elect a majority of the court, was extremely conservative — very anti-consumer, anti-voter, anti-civil rights just across the board. And what this court has done is bring the court back to where it belongs, which is in the middle,” Brewer said.
Republicans have a very different view of the current court’s balance.
The current bench has a “supermajority of far-left judicial activism,” said Sen. Jim Runestad, chair of the Michigan Republican Party. He criticized the court’s recent track record on criminal justice cases and its decision to require the removal of sex offenders whose crimes predated 2011 from a sex offender registry.
“I don’t think this is what the people want. It’s just that there just hasn’t been enough education, I think primarily by the media, to kind of parse out, ‘What are we talking about in these justices?’” Runestad said.
Warren and Morse-Bills are eager to shake things up, too.
“We have a very unbalanced court,” Warren said. “It’s a 6-to-1 Democrat-nominated majority, and they have been issuing a number of decisions that are reflective of that very unbalanced court perspective.”
Morse-Bills criticized the current bench for a lack of judicial experience before they assumed their current jobs. “If you take all of the justices combined on our Supreme Court, I have more judicial experience than all of them together, aside from their time on the Supreme Court,” she said.
Of the seven current justices, only two served on a court prior to their election or appointment.
—————
‘Not partisan shills’
Cavanagh and Hood are defending the court’s recent decisions as they campaign to keep their jobs.
Hood pointed to some of the court’s recent big decisions as evidence that the justices aren’t splitting down partisan lines. He noted two of the court’s “most political-seeming cases from the past term.” That included the Attorney General v. Eli Lilly and Company case, a 4-3 ruling that backed Attorney General Dana Nessel.
He also referred to a 6-1 decision on the Line 5 tunnel project, where Zahra, the court’s lone GOP-nominated justice, penned the dissent. That ruling “ostensibly is six-to-one, but you’ve got to read Zahra’s dissent,” said Hood. Zahra concurred with part of the majority opinion in that case.
“There’s also a lot of our cases that are unanimous,” Hood said. It’s “not partisan shills dictating the result. You’ve got seven jurists trying to sort out a case based on its facts and based on the law.”
Cavanagh dismissed critics’ claims that “you’re not qualified to be a Supreme Court justice if you haven’t been a trial judge.” Those arguments are “non-starters,” she said.
“Obviously, I’ve been a judge for eight years doing this job in particular,” she said. “We’re a multi-member bench, right? We make decisions among seven of us, and having differing backgrounds and experiences absolutely, I think, contributes to better decisionmaking.”
Runestad is hopeful that the conservative candidates will get a boost heading into the race’s final stretch.
“I think the stakeholders, like the Chamber of Commerce and many other stakeholders, need to step up,” he said.
The Michigan Chamber of Commerce was once the top funder of Republican-nominated Supreme Court candidates, paying for informational ads supporting them and criticizing the Democratic nominees. But they have discontinued those efforts in recent years.
“We have two weeks left to go, and you never know in campaigns what will happen,” Runestad said. “Certainly, when you have an off-year election and you’re in a party where the president is in power, it’s a headwind. There’s no doubt about that. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t pull out a victory.”
Upsets can happen. Just ask Cavanagh, who narrowly defeated incumbent Supreme Court Justice Kurtis Wilder in 2018.
“I’m not taking anything for granted,” she said. “I’ve defeated an incumbent, so I never trust that that incumbent designation is going to be some magic bullet.”
","author_id":0,"date":"2026-10-23T00:00:00","type":"Featured","uri":null,"category":"feature","homepage_order":0,"subdomain":null,"LocalHeadLines":null,"LocationName":null},{"Photos":[],"id":1631833,"location_id":1,"title":"Daily Briefs","summary":"The Negligence Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan, in conjunction with Michigan chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates, will present its 2026 Fall Seminar.
","text":"Section conducts Fall Seminar with look at AI Nov. 20
The Negligence Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan, in conjunction with Michigan chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates, will present its 2026 Fall Seminar.
“AI Lab for Lawyers & Judges: Exploring What’s Possible with AI” will take place Friday, November 20, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. at the MSU Management Education Center 811 West Square Lake Road in Troy.
To register for the seminar, visit
https://connect.michbar.org/neglaw/home.
Friendsgiving Brunch hosted by WBA Nov. 14
The Women’s Bar Association (WBA), Oakland County region of the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan, will host a Friendsgiving Brunch on Saturday, November 14, from noon to 2 p.m. at Mother Handsome, 14661 W. Eleven Mile Rd. in Oak Park.
Friendsgiving is a casual meal or celebration shared with friends around Thanksgiving.
The WBA is using this opportunity not only to celebrate its membership and connections, but also to give back to the local community.
The brunch will support Open Door Outreach Center in Waterford. The following donations are appreciated:
• Gift cards of $25 or less to, Meijer, Kroger, Walmart, Shell, BP, Speedway.
• Food items: peanut butter, canned soup, canned fruit, canned vegetables, canned stew, canned fish, canned beans, pasta (most prefer whole grain), rice (most prefer brown rice), olive oil, spices, salt, pepper, baby food, baby formula.
For those unable to attend this event but wish to provide a donation, visit https://opendoormi.org/donate.
Admission to the brunch is $10, payable by Zelle or cash, with proceeds benefiting the new WBA Legacy Scholarship that will be awarded at the WBA Annual Dinner. WBA will be providing food and non-alcoholic beverages.
To register for the brunch, email Natasha Rao at natasha-rao@hotmail. com by noon on Thursday, November 5.
Webinar looks at handling clients’ childhood trauma
The National Association for Public Defense (NAPD) will present the webinar “Record Review and Telling the Story of Child Trauma” on Monday, November 16, from 1 to 2 p.m.
Even when clients are cooperating to the best of their ability, their reports of trauma are often incomplete.
Cost for the webinar is $50. To register, visit
https://thenapd.org/events.