Whitmer Vetoes 9 Bills After Supreme Court Showdown — What Troy-Area Public Employees and Residents Lose

For Troy-area public employees and residents receiving public assistance, a nearly two-year Lansing standoff ended July 10 with the loss of benefits they had been waiting on. The Michigan Supreme Court declined to hear a case over whether nine bills from the 2023-24 legislative session had to be sent to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, leaving a Court of Appeals ruling in place that the House had a constitutional duty to present them to her. When the bills finally reached her desk, Whitmer vetoed all nine that same day.

The nine bills had been passed by the Michigan Legislature in December 2024, when Democrats controlled both chambers. House Republicans withheld them after taking control of the chamber in January 2025, and the bills remained stuck in legal limbo for approximately 18 months until the July 2026 Supreme Court decision. The Michigan Senate filed a lawsuit to compel the House to present the bills to the governor. The Supreme Court majority stated that it was not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed, effectively confirming that Matt Hall, Speaker of the Michigan House of Representatives, and the GOP majority lack the authority to keep bills in limbo after they have passed both chambers.

House Bill 6058, one of the vetoed measures, changed the existing 80% health insurance contribution rule from a maximum ceiling to a minimum floor starting January 1, 2025, meaning public employers would be required to contribute at least 80% of health care costs. The requirement would have applied to Troy School District employees, Troy Public Library staff, city employees, and all other public sector workers whose employers currently contribute less than 80% toward medical benefit plans.

House Bills 4900 and 4901 would have shielded means-tested public assistance benefits, unemployment compensation, Earned Income Tax Credits, and certain property from debt collection and garnishment for Troy residents and others receiving public assistance.

House Bills 4665 and 4666 would have moved eligible state corrections officers into the Michigan State Police Retirement System hybrid pension plan.

The bills were intended to have an effective date of April 2, 2025, more than 15 months before Whitmer received them in July 2026. Whitmer's veto message stated that retroactive implementation would trigger endless litigation, miss statutory deadlines contained in several bills, and create fiscal obligations spanning three budget years that were never incorporated into the newly enacted Fiscal Year 2027 budget.

"Implementing these bills retroactively would impose an insurmountable administrative burden on the state and all Michiganders affected," Gretchen Whitmer, Governor of Michigan, said.

"Had the House presented these bills to me in a timely manner, as the Constitution requires, today would have looked much different," Gretchen Whitmer, Governor of Michigan, said. "House Republicans spent the last 18 months sitting on these bills, spending taxpayer dollars on costly lawsuits, and creating unnecessary uncertainty and preventing action on issues that matter to Michigan families," Gretchen Whitmer, Governor of Michigan, said.

The Michigan AFL-CIO, UAW, and MEA issued a joint statement on July 10, 2026, condemning Whitmer's veto and calling it a betrayal of democratic values and Michigan workers.

"Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's veto of these nine bills, following a long legal battle waged by leaders in her own party, betrays democratic values and abandons the very people who have supported her in office," the joint statement from Michigan AFL-CIO, UAW, and Michigan Education Association said. "This veto is an insult to every hard-working Michigander fighting for economic justice. We condemn her betrayal of Michigan workers, and call on political leaders who value our state's working families to do the same."

Because the legislative session during which the bills passed has adjourned, the bills will not become law, and Troy's public employees will not receive the increased health insurance contributions or debt protections the measures would have provided.