Senate Bill 144 revises the regulations for physical therapists and physical therapist assistants, primarily impacting how patients can access physical therapy services. The bill eliminates the general requirement for a patient to have a prescription from another healthcare professional to receive physical therapy treatment. It allows physical therapists to treat patients directly, either for a limited period (21 days or 10 treatments) or for injury prevention and fitness, while also clarifying when a physical therapist must refer a patient to another healthcare professional. Additionally, the bill updates the legal definition of the "practice of physical therapy" to clarify what activities are included and excluded from a physical therapist's scope.
SB 517 amends Michigan's school code to clarify how school districts can use bond funds. It allows districts to borrow for physical infrastructure (like buildings, playgrounds, and initial technology hardware/software purchases) but explicitly prohibits using bond proceeds for ongoing technology costs - such as software upgrades, maintenance, training, or repairs. The bill directly affects school districts by restricting their borrowing options for technology-related expenses. It also requires independent audits of bond spending and permits residents to sue if districts violate these rules.
SB 591 clarifies that health club owners, operators, and employees are not legally required to provide emergency medical assistance using an on-site AED during a medical emergency. It specifically removes any duty to render such service, while confirming that existing Good Samaritan protections (under 1963 PA 17) still apply to those who choose to help. The bill directly affects health club staff by limiting their legal obligation during medical incidents. This is a procedural revision to update the cross-reference in Michigan's health club regulations (MCL 333.26313), with no new requirements or penalties added.
SB 590 protects bystanders who voluntarily apply bleeding control (like pressure, dressings, or tourniquets) during emergencies. It shields these individuals from civil lawsuits for injuries resulting from their actions, as long as they acted in good faith and without duty to help. The law specifically excludes liability for gross negligence or willful misconduct. This directly affects ordinary citizens responding to medical emergencies, such as car accidents or violent incidents, by encouraging life-saving first aid without fear of legal repercussions.
HB 5120 eliminates fees for serving documents in personal protection order (PPO) cases. It amends Michigan's civil procedure law to prohibit charging fees for serving process under the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act or for any order issued in a PPO case, including petitions, orders, and related documents. This directly affects PPO petitioners (who no longer pay service fees) and process servers (who cannot charge for these specific services). The bill also clarifies that law enforcement may charge a $50 flat fee from a dedicated fund for multiple PPO-related documents served at once, but not per document. The change aims to remove financial barriers for individuals seeking protection orders.
HB 5121 eliminates the cost for serving personal protection orders (PPOs) in Michigan. It directly affects individuals seeking PPOs to protect against harassment, stalking, or sexual assault by removing the requirement that petitioners pay for service of the order on the respondent. The bill amends Michigan’s court procedures to eliminate this fee, making it easier for petitioners - especially those with limited resources - to obtain and enforce PPOs without upfront costs. This change applies to all PPOs filed under the specified sections of Michigan law, streamlining the process for victims.
This bill would amend Michigan's Child Custody Act to establish a presumption that equal or approximately equal parenting time with both parents is in a child's best interest. It requires courts to inform parents about joint custody options and the presumption of equal time during custody disputes, and specifies that "joint custody" means either shared decision-making for important child welfare matters or equal physical time with each parent. The bill also clarifies that joint custody does not affect child support obligations, which remain based on each parent's resources and the child's needs. This applies directly to parents involved in custody cases and judges handling such cases under Michigan law.
HB 5211 would amend Michigan's Child Custody Act to create a legal presumption that equal or nearly equal parenting time between both parents is in a child's best interest for disputes between parents. This presumption would apply unless a court finds clear and convincing evidence that equal time is not appropriate. The bill does not change the existing "best interests of the child" standard (listed in Section 3), but establishes equal parenting time as the default starting point under Section 5. This applies specifically to custody disputes between parents, not involving agencies or third parties, and does not affect provisions addressing cases involving criminal sexual conduct by a parent.
HB 5213 requires Michigan's Friend of the Court offices to provide parents with an informational pamphlet explaining the legal presumption of equal or approximately equal parenting time in child custody cases. This pamphlet must detail the presumption as outlined in Michigan's Child Custody Act (MCL 722.26a), alongside information about joint custody options. The bill amends existing law to ensure parents receive this specific information early in domestic relations proceedings. It directly affects parents involved in custody disputes who interact with the Friend of the Court system. The change focuses on informing parents of their rights, not altering custody standards.
SB 712 updates qualifications for district court magistrates in Michigan by replacing the requirement that magistrates must be "registered electors" in their district with a new rule requiring them to either reside in or be employed by the appointing county (or an adjoining district under specific plans). This change applies to all magistrates except those in the thirty-sixth district, which maintains its existing limits. The bill does not alter appointment procedures (still requiring judge appointment and county approval) or magistrate duties, only the eligibility criteria. It focuses on ensuring magistrates have a local connection to the county they serve.
This bill creates a new legal cause of action in Michigan allowing individuals to sue anyone who deprives them of rights protected by the U.S. Constitution while acting under the authority of the law. It establishes that victims of such civil rights violations can seek redress in court, while also defining specific rules for when judges can be held personally liable and limiting the types of relief available against them. The legislation sets a two-year time limit for filing these lawsuits and permits courts to award reasonable attorney fees to successful plaintiffs, though it preserves existing defenses like sovereign immunity and qualified immunity.
This bill establishes a new Office of American Freedmen Affairs within the Michigan Department of Civil Rights to support descendants of individuals emancipated from slavery. The office would be led by a five-year director appointed by the governor and tasked with researching disparities, advising state leaders on policies, and improving access to resources for this community. Key duties include developing economic opportunities, assisting with genealogy and historical research, and submitting annual reports on the social and economic conditions of American Freedmen in the state.
