By Alethia Kasben
Gongwer News service
The Supreme Court has asked for arguments to be scheduled on the state’s anti-terrorism statute that has been reviewed by the Court of Appeals twice already.
The Supreme Court has asked for arguments to be scheduled on the state’s anti-terrorism statute that has been reviewed by the Court of Appeals twice already.
In People v. Kvasnicka (MSC Docket 169039), the Court of Appeals last year first ruled the anti-terrorism statute was facially unconstitutional. Later, the Supreme Court vacated the ruling in an unsigned order. On remand, the Court of Appeals upheld the law.
Now, the Supreme Court is ordering oral argument on an appeal challenging the law. Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy and Attorney General Dana Nessel have both defended the statute. Recently, Nessel also
advocated for further clarification to strengthen the law from future challenges.
In an order issued last week, the Supreme Court asked for oral argument and supplemental briefs on if the law includes an intent or knowledge of wrongdoing element consistent with the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Counterman v. Colorado.
The court also wants briefs to address if a construction of the statute is fairly possible while avoiding the constitutional question and if it would be appropriate to adopt a limiting construction of the law.
The case involves a man accused of sending messages to a young girl threatening a mass shooting at her school.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
