State House proposes to slash slavery penal exception clause
Currently, Article I, Section 9 of the Michigan Constitution completely bans slavery in the state of Michigan except as punishment for a crime, which is also known as a penal exception clause. The proposed amendment would remove that exception from the language of the law.
Similar exceptions exist in fifteen states, including Michigan. In the past ten years, a few states, including Alabama, Colorado, and Nebraska, have voted to amend their laws to remove the penal exception clause.
The Thirteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution also has a penal exception clause.
The resolution was referred to the Committee on Government Operations for further review.
If adopted, the amendment would be placed on the ballot in the next general election.
2025-HIJR-IDownload
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Trump weaponization czar teases ‘more' developments with Schiff, warns J6 Committee alums to ‘keep an eye on their mailbox'
President Trump's weaponization czar Ed Martin dropped hints that his team may soon take additional investigative actions against Sen. Adam Schiff and members of the since-defunct House Select Jan. 6 Committee who weren't pardoned by former president Joe Biden. Martin, who helms the Justice Department's Weaponization Working Group, took note of the criminal probe of Schiff (D-Calif.) over allegations of mortgage fraud and strongly implied something else is in the works. 'There's a referral from Bill Pulte about mortgage fraud about Adam Schiff. That's publicly discussed. His own lawyers have been out there,' Martin told Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures.' Advertisement 'Now there's more on Adam Schiff.' Martin did not specify what else could be coming down the pike. 3 Ed Martin teased that his weaponization working group has additional investigations into Adam Schiff and the since-defunct Jan. 6 Committee in the works. AP Advertisement 3 Sen. Adam Schiff was one of President Trump's top Democratic adversaries in the House during his first term. REUTERS Back in May, Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director William Pulte referred Schiff to the Justice Department for 'multiple instances' between 2003 and 2019 when the senator allegedly 'falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms.' This includes accusations that he listed his Maryland home as a primary residence in multiple mortgage refinancing filings despite being an elected member of Congress from California at the time. Some lawmakers have homes in both their states and in the Washington, DC, Maryland and Virginia area during their time in Congress. But Pulte alleged that Schiff also sought a similar exemption on a Burbank, Calif., condo that he also dubbed his primary residence. Advertisement In a separate matter, Schiff recently faced surfaced accusations from a former Democratic House Intelligence Committee aide who alleged the then-congressman approved leaks of classified information to harm President Trump during the height of Russiagate. It is unclear if those allegations are what Martin was referencing. DOJ officials concluded Schiff may have had liability protections for those leaks under the speech and debate clause of the Constitution, according to an FBI memo on the accusations obtained by The Post. 'All we're going to do, again, is get to the facts of this and use all the tools that we have in our system,' Martin stressed. 3 Ed Martin inspected Letita James' Brooklyn home last Friday. New York Post Advertisement Last week, Martin was seen in Brooklyn checking out New York Attorney General Letitia James' multi-family residential property that is subject to a mortgage fraud inquiry. Pulte alleged that the AG may have 'falsified bank documents and property records to acquire government-backed assistance and loans and more favorable loan terms.' Similar to the Schiff accusations, Pulte alleged that James declared a Norfolk, Virginia, property purchased in 2023 her 'principal residence' while calling her Brooklyn brownstone she's owned since 2001 her second residence. Beyond Schiff and James, Martin also teased that he is reviewing members of the since-defunct House Select Jan. 6 Committee, despite Biden's sweeping 11th-hour pardon for the panel. 'We're all in that too,' Martin said. 'A lot of people did not get a pardon that were involved in the select committee, and they ought to be keeping an eye on their mailbox, because there's a lot to be asked about.' Martin didn't specify names, but noted that US Attorney General Pam Bondi 'let us loose on' issues of alleged government weaponization.
New York Post
5 hours ago
- New York Post
Who's REALLY ‘destroying democracy' — after failing to win voters legitimately?
'Destroying democracy' — the latest theme of the left — can be defined in many ways. How about attempting to destroy constitutional, ancient and hallowed institutions simply to suit short-term political gains? So, who in 2020, and now once again, has boasted about packing the 156-year-old, nine-justice Supreme Court? Who talks frequently about destroying the 187-year-old Senate filibuster — though only when they hold a Senate majority? Who wants to bring in an insolvent left-wing Puerto Rico and redefine the 235-year-old District of Columbia — by altering the Constitution — as two new states solely to obtain four additional liberal senators? Who is trying to destroy the constitutionally mandated 235-year Electoral College by circumventing it with the surrogate 'The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact?' Does destroying democracy also entail weaponizing federal bureaucracies, turning them into rogue partisan arms of a president? So who ordered the CIA to concoct bogus charges of 'collusion' to sabotage Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, the 2016-2017 transition, and the first 22 months of Trump's first term? Who prompted a cabal of '51 former intelligence officials' to lie to the American people on the eve of the last debate of the 2020 election that the FBI-authenticated Hunter Biden laptop was instead the work of a 'Russian intelligence operation?' Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social-media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign? Who pulled off the greatest presidential coup in history by using surrogates in the shadows to run the cognitively debilitated Biden presidency, then by fiat canceled his reelection effort and finally anointed as his replacement the new nominee Kamala Harris, who had never won a single primary delegate? Who ordered FBI SWAT teams to invade the home of a former president because of a classification dispute over 102 files out of some 13,000 stored there? Who tried to remove an ex-president and leader of his party from at least 25 state ballots to deprive millions of Americans of the opportunity to vote for or against him? Who coordinated four local, state and federal prosecutors to destroy a former and future president by charging him with fantasy crimes that were never before, and will never again be, lodged against anyone else? Who appointed a federal prosecutor to go after the ex-president, who arranged for a high-ranking Justice Department official to step down to join a New York prosecutor's efforts to destroy an ex-president, and who met in the White House with a Georgia county prosecutor seeking to destroy an ex-president — all on the same day — a mere 72 hours after Trump announced his 2024 reelection bid? Who but the current Democrats ever impeached a president twice? Has any party ever tried an ex-president in the Senate when he was out of office and a mere private citizen? When have there ever been two near-miss assassination attempts on a major party presidential candidate during a single presidential campaign? Who destroyed the southern border and broke federal law to allow in, without criminal or health background audits, some 10 million to 12 million illegal aliens? Who created 600 'sanctuary jurisdictions' for the sole purpose of nullifying federal immigration law, in the eerie spirit of the renegade old Confederacy? Who allowed tens of thousands of rioters, arsonists and violent protesters over four months in 2020 to destroy over $2 billion in property, kill some 35 people, injure 1,500 police officers and torch a federal courthouse, a police precinct and a historic church — all with de facto legal impunity? How do the purported destroyers of democracy find themselves winning 60% to 70% approval on most of the key issues of our times, while the supposed saviors of democracy are on the losing side of popular opinion? How does a president 'destroy democracy' by his party winning the White House by both the popular and Electoral College vote, winning majorities in both the Senate and House by popular votes and enjoying a 6-3 edge in the Supreme Court through judges appointed by popularly elected presidents? So what is behind these absurd charges? Three catalysts: One, the new anguished elitist Democratic Party alienated the middle classes through its Jacobin agenda and therefore lost the Congress, the presidency and the Supreme Court, and now has no federal political power. Two, the Democratic Party is polling at record lows and yet remains hellbent on alienating the traditional sources of its power — minorities, youth and Independents. Three, Democrats cannot find any issues that the people support, nor any leaders to convince the people to embrace them. So it is no surprise that the panicked Democrats bark at the shadows — given that they know their revolutionary, neo-socialist agenda is destroying them. And yet, like all addicts, they choose destruction over abandoning their self-destructive fixations. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.
New York Post
6 hours ago
- New York Post
NY Dems aim to de-mask ICE agents to scare them off their raids — NOT to protect the public
Supporters claim a bill introduced by Democratic state lawmakers last month banning ICE agents and police from wearing masks during raids will ensure safety and prevent authoritarianism. One backer, Sen. Patricia Fahy, fumes that ICE is 'operating like masked militias' and 'paramilitary secret police' and so must be reined in. Nonsense: The awkwardly and misleadingly named Mandating End to Lawless Tactics Act is actually little more than an attempt to thwart immigration enforcement by making ICE agents fear for their personal safety. It joins similar efforts in other states and in Congress to 'unmask ICE.' In the words of GOP Sen. George Borrello, 'This bill is driven by ideology, not a genuine concern for public safety.' The Left's hypocrisy on this issue is staggering. Progressives — including many of the MELT Act's supporters in the Legislature — have opposed mask bans for criminal suspects and rioters, such as Nassau County's common-sense ban, which has exceptions for law enforcement. Yet for all their sympathy for those involved with the criminal-justice system, they have no qualms about painting cops as criminals and subjecting them to mask bans. If these lawmakers truly cared about public safety, they'd go after the rioters and real criminals who've routinely hidden their identities to evade accountability following the 2020 George Floyd unrest and Oct. 7 demonstrations. ICE and other law enforcement don't mask up because they have machinations of becoming a 'paramilitary secret police.' They do so to keep themselves and their families safe from multinational gangs such as Tren de Aragua. Facial-recognition technology, now rapidly improving due to AI, gives anyone — including nefarious actors like Antifa or cartel members — the ability to reverse image search the unmasked face of an ICE agent. They can then obtain and post their names, addresses and information about their relatives to social media. While the Justice Department can prosecute those responsible for such doxxing, it is nonetheless a frequent threat to agents and loved ones. Addresses of hotels where agents stay during operations are routinely spread on social media so that protesters can harass them. Agitators are so well-organized that an app was created to report and rush to ICE raid locations, as seen in Los Angeles riots this year. The Department of Homeland Security has reported an 830% increase in assaults on ICE personnel this year, attributed to an increase in doxxing and rhetoric against agents. Worse still, even if the MELT Act passes, its effects would be largely symbolic. Lawmakers like Fahy clearly don't understand federalism. Because the Constitution gives federal law precedence, any federal regulation would immediately supersede the MELT Act if passed, rendering it largely symbolic. Additionally, federal agents are immune from state criminal prosecution when acting within the scope of their authority. The MELT Act would also require that all law enforcement agents display their names or badge numbers on their uniforms, hamstringing the plainclothes units of local New York police departments, which now must only provide this information verbally. Some of the bill's supporters mention a more realistic point that masking without wearing identification might allow for easier impersonation of ICE officers. They might also argue that a lack of masking deters possible police misconduct, despite the widespread use of body cameras. Those are valid concerns. But there are ways to protect the public even with masked law enforcement. Public-education campaigns should remind residents that ICE agents and other law enforcement are legally required to identify themselves as police as soon as it is practicable and safe to do so. New Yorkers under arrest should keep in mind their constitutional protections, such as the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. Masked or not, imposters can still pose as ICE or any other law-enforcement officers. Requiring names or badge numbers does nothing if there's no reliable way to immediately verify the person's legitimacy. The answer isn't a largely symbolic law to neuter real agents; it's to strengthen identification through local cooperation. The only way to fully reassure New Yorkers is cooperation between local police and ICE, whether via collaborative task forces, such as through the federal 287(g) program already adopted by several counties, or by having nearby officers accompany raids to keep public order, which would help quickly debunk any imposters. This type of public partnership would not be a political statement about immigration, rather a commonsense way to put the public at ease and ensure all involved in raids are safe. The MELT Act is symbolic theater that punishes law enforcement while doing nothing to realistically stop imposters. New Yorkers would be safer if lawmakers scrapped this bill and instead fostered real cooperation between local police and ICE to deter fraud and protect both the public and the agents doing dangerous work. Paul Dreyer is a cities policy analyst at the Manhattan Institute.
