Legally Brief:
Michigan

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether the federal prohibition on firearm possession by drug users violates the Second Amendment. The case centers on 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), which makes it a felony for any “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” to possess a firearm.

The case carries outsized significance for Michigan, where recreational marijuana has been legal since 2018. Under current federal law, any Michigan resident who uses cannabis — even in full compliance with state law — is technically barred from owning or purchasing firearms.

A ruling striking down the provision could harmonize the tension between Michigan’s cannabis framework and federal firearms law. A ruling upholding it would perpetuate a legal gray zone affecting an estimated 2.5 million Michigan adults who have used marijuana in the past year.

The Department of Justice’s evolving corporate enforcement policy has particular resonance for Michigan’s automotive industry. Updated DOJ guidelines emphasize voluntary self-disclosure, cooperation credit, and compliance program effectiveness as key factors in corporate resolution decisions.

For Michigan’s Big Three and the extensive supplier network, these policies shape internal investigation protocols, whistleblower programs, and board-level compliance oversight. Recent enforcement actions across the auto sector — from emissions compliance to safety recall transparency — underscore the DOJ’s willingness to pursue corporate accountability.

Michigan-based compliance counsel should assess current programs against the updated evaluation criteria, paying particular attention to data analytics capabilities and real-time monitoring systems the DOJ now views as hallmarks of effective compliance.

The Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, expanded in 2023 to include sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes, continues to generate new case law as courts interpret the amended statute’s scope. Michigan employers face an evolving compliance landscape as judicial decisions clarify the law’s application to hiring, workplace accommodations, and benefits administration.

Recent administrative complaints and circuit court filings suggest an uptick in claims under the expanded categories, particularly in healthcare, education, and public accommodation contexts. Employment law practitioners should monitor developing precedent on intersectional discrimination claims and the interplay between ELCRA and federal Title VII protections.

Michigan’s position as the center of American automotive manufacturing places it at the nexus of evolving federal and state regulations on autonomous vehicles, electric vehicle mandates, and emissions standards. The state’s regulatory framework for AV testing and deployment remains among the most permissive in the nation.

Upcoming regulatory developments include updated NHTSA guidelines on Level 3+ autonomy, EPA emissions standards affecting MY2027+ vehicles, and state-level debates over EV infrastructure funding and dealer franchise law modifications to accommodate direct-to-consumer EV sales models.

For Michigan’s legal community, these intersecting regulatory tracks create substantial advisory demand across product liability, regulatory compliance, labor law, and environmental practice areas.