Taxpayers of Michigan Against Casinos v. State

Summary

The Michigan Supreme Court held that amendatory provisions in tribal gaming compacts, and Governor Granholm's exercise of those provisions, did not violate the Michigan Constitution's Separation of Powers Clause. The Court also held that an Appropriations Clause challenge was outside the scope of the remand order and therefore was not properly before the Court. The Court reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded for entry of summary disposition in favor of the defendants.

Holdings

1. The amendatory provision did not violate the Separation of Powers Clause because the Legislature properly approved the compacts and their amendment procedure by resolution, and the Governor's authority remained subject to the limits of the constitution and the compacts.
2. The Governor's exercise of the amendatory provision, including the 2003 amendments to the Little Traverse Bay Bands compact, did not violate the Separation of Powers Clause.
3. The claim that tribal payments under the compacts violated the Appropriations Clause was not properly before the Court because it exceeded the scope of the prior remand order.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the tribal gaming compacts' amendatory provision, which authorized the Governor to amend the compacts without further legislative approval, violated the Separation of Powers Clause of the Michigan Constitution.
2. Whether Governor Granholm's exercise of the amendatory provision violated the Separation of Powers Clause.
3. Whether the alleged violation of the Appropriations Clause was properly before the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court on the limited remand.
4. Whether the Court of Appeals properly struck the portion of the plaintiff's brief raising the Appropriations Clause issue.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded