Michigan Democrats re-introduce nine bills blocked by Hall and vetoed by Whitmer

Hours after the Supreme Court’s decision, Whitmer vetoed the bills, a decision that legislators and labor leaders alike called a betrayal. 

Now, legislators are bringing the bills back up, though they face an uphill battle in the Republican-controlled House. Hall’s refusal to transmit the initial versions of the bills leads most to expect that he will not push the legislation through his chamber while he remains at its helm.

House Minority Leader Ranjeev Puri (D-Canton) said that, while he hopes to get these bills passed in the last five months of the current legislative session by “holding Republicans’ feet to the fire in the House,” he would join legislators in re-introducing the bills as many times as needed to — including next session, when Democrats hope to reclaim control of the House — in order to get them passed.

“I have not had conversations with the House Republicans on this, but the offer stands that we are willing to work in good faith to get this done,” Puri said. “I’m skeptical if that’s really going to happen in this year. But you know, the alternative to that is making sure that they don’t need to be a part of the equation in 2027.”

Rep. Mai Xiong (D-Warren), who was one of the most vocal critics in the legislature of Whitmer’s decision to veto the bills, said she believes some rank-and-file House Republicans want to see these bills passed, and hopes that party leadership will be willing to work with them. 

“Anything is possible. We are all up for re-election,” Xiong said. “Certainly I look forward to hearing their response because now the ball is in their court, and if they want to take their ball home and not play, then they’re not doing the job that they were elected to do. That sends a very clear message to Michigan families.”

At a press conference on Wednesday morning, legislative Democrats were more focused on Hall’s role in keeping the bills from being passed, rather than Whitmer’s. 

Xiong noted that she hopes Whitmer will be willing to work with legislators on updated versions of the legislation. 

When asked if she believed that Whitmer would sign the bills, should they come to her desk, Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) said that she had been confident in the past and could not speculate on the Governor’s intentions.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX.

“At this point, she is requesting those bills to come to her desk, and as we are introducing them today, we will make the necessary changes so that they meet the muster,” Brinks said. “We believe that they merit her signature. But that ultimately, as we all know, is a decision that she must make.”

A spokesperson for Whitmer’s office said in response to a question about whether or not she would sign the bills, should they make it to her desk again, “As the governor said, she stands ready to work with the legislature to consider new versions.”

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, the frontrunner for the Democrats in the 2026 gubernatorial election, said in a press release following Whitmer’s veto that she would sign the bills into law if elected.

The importance of the bills, which include a shield for working families against debt collection practices that seize tax returns made possible by the Earned Income Tax Credit and a measure preventing massive healthcare costs for teachers and school employees, first responders, nurses and other public servants, was emphasized throughout the press conference. 

“For too long, the people of Michigan, the people who make Michigan run, the people who keep our children safe and educated, our communities healthy, and our state moving have been left to shoulder the burden of rising costs and economic uncertainty alone,” Michigan AFL-CIO President Ron Bieber said. “Michigan’s labor movement is committed to doing whatever is necessary to pass the bills reintroduced today by our friends in the House and Senate, these aren’t just pieces of legislation. These are lifelines for working families.”