Michigan legal question

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

In Michigan, it is illegal to carry a handgun in K-12 public schools. In addition, it is also illegal to carry one in a "Dormitory or classroom of a college or university". That's the actual wording on the CPL itself. So my question is, is carrying on college property, like in a student center or union, legal, so long as you never enter a dorm or classroom?

I understand many schools have expellable rules regarding firearms outside those of actual state law. That does not pertain to my question.

 

[Trebor]

I'm not an attorney and this is not legal advice, so take that into consideration.

The answer is, "It depends."

The prohibition agains concealed carry in any dorm or classroom applies to all Michigan schools, colleges, and Universities.

Additionally, U of M, MSU, and Wayne State University have the addtional ability to ban firearms over and above that and have it be legally enforceable to ANYONE, not just students and employees.

That is because U of M, MSU, and WSU were created by the Michigan Constitution and were granted broad powers under that Constitution. They have the right to create regulations that are enforceable as law.

And, the Michigan Firearms pre-emption law does NOT apply to those three schools because they are not "local units of government" as defined in the pre-emption law.

I know that MSU has a ban on firearms on campus and I'm 90% sure that U of M does as well. I would expect that WSU does, but have never checked for sure.

Now, there is some dispute as to whether these three schools can ban firearms in vehicles that are on the roadways on their campus, as long as you are driving through and do not park. They can definately ban them in all campus buildings and on the parking lots though.

So, to answer your question specifically: You can not carry on any property owned by MSU or U of M due to their ban, including the student union, etc. I suspect the same applies to WSU, but you'd have to check their rules for yourself.

For other schools, I'm not sure. I think as long as you stay away from dorms and classrooms and auditoriums, you'd be OK. Of course, if you are an employee or student, they can prohibit firearms as a condition of employment or as part of the student code of conduct.

 

[cliffy]

What possible reason?

When do you consider it pertinent to care a firearm into a third grade classroom? Schools with records of extreme violence generally have metal detectors at the entranceways. Sad as it seems, I've worked at such schools, but the kids are greatly responsive to caring teahers. If you're such a teacher, do not live in fear. If you're a teacher who only shows up for a paycheck, fear occaisional reprisal. Love the kids, and they'll LOVE you back. So simple, so commonsensical. Teach them, since they really want to learn. I work in Benton Harbor, Michigan, and I know these kids REALLY want to learn. Befriend your students, and gain their respect, and TEACH them. It ain't that hard. Schools are not really battlegrounds, it's the attitude of the administration that often sucks. cliffy

 

[Trebor]

I don't see where he asked about "third grade classrooms?"

He seemed more interested in knowing about the laws regarding college campuses and just also wanted to know the laws regarding K-12 schools. Also, why do you think he's a teacher? I don't see that in this post?

I'll leave aside the whole question of "why you would want to carry..." except to say, "why would anyone want to carry *anywhere*?"

If we knew, for sure, where the bad guys would strike, we could say that we only need to carry guns in those places. Unfortunately, there are no absolute "safe places", as school shootings have shown.

 

[Thin Black Line]

Additionally, U of M, MSU, and Wayne State University have the addtional ability to ban firearms over and above that and have it be legally enforceable to ANYONE, not just students and employees.

That is because U of M, MSU, and WSU were created by the Michigan Constitution and were granted broad powers under that Constitution. They have the right to create regulations that are enforceable as law.

And, the Michigan Firearms pre-emption law does NOT apply to those three schools because they are not "local units of government" as defined in the pre-emption law.

Interesting, so by that line of reasoning they could just come up with laws
that are in conflict with state law?

BTW, if they're not acting as a local unit of government, then they're
an autonomous zone like the Vatican?

Wow, I guess I need to start a university and get it amended to the State
Constitution so I can start my own Grand Duchy of Thin University.

At GDTU, there will be a Department of Machine Guns where students will...

 

[Trebor]

The special status of MSU, U of M, and WSU is because they were granted the ability to make regs for their campuses under the state constitution.

In that way, they have the powers normally attributed to a "local unit of government."

The loop hole as fire as firearms preemtpion goes is that "local units of government" are spelled out specifically to include, "Cities, townships and counties." Since the universities are not any of those, they don't fall under the firearms pre-emption law.

It's kind of a weird interaction of two different state laws, but the upshot is they can make rules bannign guns on their campus, and those rules have the force of law.

 

[Thin Black Line]

So you're still saying that UM/MSU still has the legal authority to void a MI
CCW holder's permit when they're walking down a sidewalk or sitting on a
parkbench somewhere within campus?

I understand where you're going with it, but I can't see how the U can say
the State permit is trumped by their authority. What has their State
Supreme Court said on it?

A campus reg would apply to someone who is a student or employee. Do
they have their own court systems and jails, too?

 

[spartywrx]

So you're still saying that UM/MSU still has the legal authority to void a MI
CCW holder's permit when they're walking down a sidewalk or sitting on a
parkbench somewhere within campus?

I understand where you're going with it, but I can't see how the U can say
the State permit is trumped by their authority. What has their State
Supreme Court said on it?

A campus reg would apply to someone who is a student or employee. Do
they have their own court systems and jails, too?

Unfortunately everything you said is correct. I did some research on this awhile back and it basically has to be settled via lawsuit or AG opinon. You can (and will) be arrested if you are just walking down the sidewalk.

There are several AG opinions saying that the "constitutional three" must follow state law, but they have leeway in other areas.

When I get home later tonight I'll post my research.

 

[Supertac45]

I'm waiting on this one myself.

 

[spartywrx]

Ok So I finally found this lurking in the depths of my hard drive. Its a long read, I'm not a lawyer, and I'm definitely not good at writing (us med people can't write worth a damn)

-----------------------------------------------------
My sources:
AG - Attorney General Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox’s web site. Click opinions, then search for, then search for Numbers 7075 and 5325.

Biennial Report of the Attorney General, 1955. Opinon No 2227. Good luck finding No 2227 online. Invest in a library card. Can be found in most libraries.

Michigan constitution, article 8 section 5

Anti-Firearms ordinances that I am challenging can be found on:
U-M Board of Regents’ web site
MSU Board of Trustees’ web site
WSU Board of Governors’ web site



So I did some research into the legality of MSU, U-M, and WSU’s (the “constitutional three” or “C3”) anti firearm ordinances. I will address U-M’s (I bleed green) directly but the others have very similar ordinances. U-M’s policy states that no one (not just students, anyone) may possess a firearm on property controlled by the Board of Regents, including anyone with a valid Concealed Pistol License. They are very clear about this. The ordinance can be found on their Board of Regent’s website. So even if you have your CPL, you can’t even walk across campus while carrying. Pretty draconian, eh? So what gives them this power? The Michigan Constitution of 1963. They are set up as a “body corporate” in the state constitution, and the Board of Trustees/Regents/Governors are given controlling power over their respective Universities. This power includes the power to make ordinances/laws/rules, such as the ban on CPL holders. These can be enforced as any other law can. An interesting question to ask though, since the C3 are allowed to make their own ordinances and rules, what is stopping them from making jaywalking punishable by imprisonment and making red lights the signal for proceed and green for stop? Is the ban on CPL holders carrying legal? Basically, can they tell Lansing to shove it?

Through my research on this issue (while I should be studying for my upcoming test) I have found three attorney general opinions on this subject, Nos 2227, 5326, 7075. Each opinion cites lawsuits that also deal with the odd nature of the C3. Not being a lawyer, I did not delve into each lawsuit. Since the AG who wrote each opinion based it off of the lawsuits he/she cited in forming the opinion, I am assuming that the AG got the interpretation of the lawsuit correct. Each of these opinions concerns itself with how laws passed by the state legislature interact with the C3. No 7075 is an opinion regarding whether or not a township may tax one of the C3 for fire protection. Granholm (then AG) states that they may not do this, and dives into some legal mumbo jumbo that is not relevant to my discussion. She does state that “The constitutional autonomy granted to the three named universities in Const 1963, art 8, § 5, primarily concerns educational and financial matters…This autonomy, however, does not exempt these institutions from the realm of state law or allow them to thwart the public policy of the state.” This paragraph would make a compelling argument that the C3 are not exempt from the legislature’s firearm laws, of wherein the CPL statue resides. The C3 could not pass an ordinance saying that you may posses a short-barreled rifle on campus, as this is currently illegal under state law (even with the NFA stamp).

No 5326 states that “A college dormitory is subject to the provisions of the State Housing Law.” It goes on to cite how the universities are indeed subject to state law when state law was “enacted to promote the health, safety and welfare of the people.” This is why MSU/UM/WSU cannot just make up its own laws that contradict the state law. One would assume that all other laws not related to how the university finances or operates would also be in effect. Thus the firearms laws of the state would apply and trump the C3 ordinance.

No 2227 addresses the ultimate issue, of whether or not the C3 are an “island” separate from laws made by the legislature, and may make their own laws. (Sidenote that No 2227 cannot be found online, and must be found in a library. I searched for a while and could not come up with anything before 1963 online. If you’re near a library that has one of those “government depository” signs, it most likely has it. Every year the AG has to publish all of his/her opinions and give a copy to the Legislature. Copies are put in libraries under the name “Biennial Report of the Attorney General.” Ask your friendly pony-tailed librarian for help finding it. They are extremely helpful. I found a copy at the Wayne State Law Library.) No 2227 references the old 1908 constitution, but the language concerning the C3 from that constitution was pretty much preserved in the 1963 constitution, so I’m assuming that this opinion would not be changed. Also, Nos 5326 and 7075 cite 2227, so I’m guessing its still valid. The opinion basically said that when it comes to the operation (granting degrees, granting tenure, organizing departments, hiring professors) and finance (tuition, investments, endowments, etc) of the university, the legislature can not tell the C3 what to do: “Attorney General ruled that a statute requiring the faculty of the Michigan Agricultural College (now MSU) to adopt rules governing the discipline of the college was an unconstitutional invasion by the legislature of the exclusive authority of the governing board over the college.” The AG states that the universities are subject to state law. He also states that state law may not infringe upon their right to self operate and make their own finance rules.

So, from my research, the C3 are free to make rules as to how the university is run and how it handles it money. Concerning all other matters though (health, safety, welfare) the state law is superior. The concealed pistol law, and to a greater degree any law about firearms in the Michigan Compiled Laws, concern the health, safety and welfare of the people, and is not part of the operations or finance of the university. Using this argument, state law trumps the ordinance banning possession of a weapon by a CPL holder, since regulating firearms is not related to the operations or finance of the University.

My personal opinion is that an AG opinion on this specific subject or a lawsuit would be needed to finally resolve this issue and change the laws. I do not carry and do not intend to carry on any campus until this issue is resolved. I do not want to be a defendant and you shouldn’t try to be one either. I strongly encourage you to critique my analysis and go check my sources and see if I know what I’m talking about. Only by knowing the laws will we be able to change these ordinances. I would like to state that I AM NOT A LAWYER and THIS OPINION IS MINE PERSONALLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE. This is a result of my own research and I may have missed out on something important and my argument may be totally incorrect. Also, there may have been developments in the status of the C3 that I may be unaware of. The last AG opinion is dated 2001, so something may have happened between then and now that kills my argument. There are numerous other AG opinions that deal with applying state law to the C3 that I only skimmed through, but it seems that they support my conclusions. My research only pertains to the C3 and not any of the other universities and colleges in Michigan (only the ones mentioned in Article 8 section 5 of the Michigan Constitution of 1963. Article 8 section 6 covers the rest).



----------------------------------------------------------

Since I typed this awhile ago I discovered a state law granting UofM the right to make ordinances. I don't quite know how that affects things, and it shouldn't affect MSU/WSU. Also, speaking to Jim Simmons, the ask a lawyer guy on SAFR's discussion boards, has shed a little light on the topic. Apparently the reason why they are included in the state constitution dates back to the separation between the church and universities in medieval Europe. It allows them independence from the government (which was the church at the time).

Also, I discovered why MSU was created in this process. The state congress ordered UofM to create an angriculture school around 1845-50ish. There was a big bru-ha-ha with doing that, UofM not wanting to do it and the state making them. Anyways, the politics of it were so intense on both sides that the state said screw it, and formed the school itself (and was greatly helped by the Morril Act that created PennSt. and MSU). That school would become MSU. So the rivalry is quite old and has an interesting history.

 

[Thin Black Line]

So in a nutshell it's going to get challenged by someone who gets arrested
by campus PD and taken up MI's legal hierarchy --where the poor guy can
get bankrupted along the way....lovely....

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

When do you consider it pertinent to care a firearm into a third grade classroom? Schools with records of extreme violence generally have metal detectors at the entranceways. Sad as it seems, I've worked at such schools, but the kids are greatly responsive to caring teahers. If you're such a teacher, do not live in fear. If you're a teacher who only shows up for a paycheck, fear occaisional reprisal. Love the kids, and they'll LOVE you back. So simple, so commonsensical. Teach them, since they really want to learn. I work in Benton Harbor, Michigan, and I know these kids REALLY want to learn. Befriend your students, and gain their respect, and TEACH them. It ain't that hard. Schools are not really battlegrounds, it's the attitude of the administration that often sucks. cliffy

First of all, I'm not a teacher, and I didn't say anything about third grade classrooms.

I'm asking about college unions, college-run stores, gyms on college property, and student centers. Specifically at Eastern Michigan University and Washtenaw Community College. Neither of those are part of the "3 schools formed by the MI constitution" as far as I know. I am wondering if I could carry to the gym at WCC or in the student center at EMU without violating actual law. I understand that they can have me charged with trespassing if I were found out and I could also suffer student discipline. But I am wondering if, since the MI CPL specifically says "college dormitories and classrooms", would those places be legal.

 

[Trebor]

I do not know the answer to that specific question and I will not hazard a guess.

Ask Jim Simmons over at www.mgouc.com though in the "Legal Beagle" forum and you should get an answer you can use.

 

[Aquila]

I was of the OPINION that one could carry on campus as long as one did not carry into ANY of the university buildings.

Carrying concealed into college/university buildings seems like a "no no" legally. Carrying while in the classroom seems to fly against the law as well.

Hey, Rob "Trebor" Reed, I'm in Ann Arbor (for a total of three more days) and have a similar background. We also share the same last name.

 

[Bezoar]

Actually dont try to take a gun to any college property. doesnt matter if its a "public" or "private institution". Federal law prohibits possession of weapons on those properties.

It has to do with that since they take federal education money, they are treated like a federal institution. Best way to describe that is, if its NOT allowed in your county COURTHOUSE, its not allowed at your college campus. And campus included any and all property owned by the college, wether it be classroom, parking lot, dormitory, gymnasium, or open field.

Last time i checked, it was normally a 2-5 year federal sentence.

However a person in michigan with a valid CCW permit, maybe able to sit in their car in a k-12 school parking lot to pick up/drop off their own children as long as they stay INSIDE the car. it may vary by jurisdiction so check with the county police.

 

[orionhawk]

"However a person in michigan with a valid CCW permit, maybe able to sit in their car in a k-12 school parking lot to pick up/drop off their own children as long as they stay INSIDE the car. it may vary by jurisdiction so check with the county police."

That's State Law. it certainly shouldn't vary.

And, I had been of the understanding that (in the case of U of M, anyway) you were okay as long as you stay out of University buildings - the "Campus", otherwise, would be very close to half of Ann Arbor). I recall this from looking it up before the Art Fest a couple years ago, but I don't recall the source.

I'm in Howell, now, btw.

 

[Sheldon J]

Actually..

I know of several teacher in the K-12 arena that carry or have guns stashed in school...
And if I remember correctly you can carry in your area in question, but I still would ask Jim

 

[orionhawk]

then those teachers are violating MI law. there are no exceptions to the K-12 prohibition, except for LEO's on duty.


not that I mightn't at some point (purely inadvertently, of course) have carried somewhere I wasn't allowed to, but it is NOT legal.

 

[Chuckulator]

My opinion is that Michigan Universities may ban guns from their campuses. As Trebor has stated, the preemption law applies to "local units of government" and does not include universities. There are other places in Michigan's Codified Law that do include universities in the definition of local units of government.

The presumption is that the legislature does what it does with full knowledge of all the other laws then in existence. It could have included universities, but did not. The AG opinions cited earlier support the proposition that if the legislature had included universities, then it would have had legal effect. Without those opinions, then the universities might be able to "ignore" the legislature.

As far as limiting a university's power to educational functions, findings stating that the university is promoting a "safe environment for education" or some such statement is probably adequate to ban guns from campus.

There is no binding case on point, to my knowledge, and so one who does carry on a campus is putting himself or herself at some risk.