Katherine Dailey, Michigan Advance

Businessman Perry Johnson, Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt (R-Porter Township), former Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox and pastor Ralph Rebandt took the stage in Auburn Hills for a gubernatorial debate, where President Donald Trump’s role in Michigan was central, even as candidates took aim at each other.

Hosted by the Oakland County Republican Party, the forum was held at Visioneering, an aerospace design firm in Auburn Hills. It was broadcast on CBS Detroit and on WWJ Newsradio 950.

Infighting among the candidates

Though the four candidates tended to agree on the policy outcomes they promote, an “open forum” portion of the debate devolved into the candidates repeatedly shouting over each other, to the point that candidates’ microphones had to be cut multiple times.

Nowhere was this more obvious than in response to a question about utility costs and how to hold utility companies accountable in the face of rate hikes.

“Are there any rules in this debate whatsoever?” Johnson at one point asked.

Solutions posed by the candidates included appointing new members to the Michigan Public Service Commission, which both Cox and Rebandt suggested, and preventing tax breaks for data center developers, put forward by Johnson.

Rebandt also attacked Nesbitt for taking money from DTE.

Candidates traded blows in response to questions about eliminating the state income tax, as many of the candidates in the race have proposed, and how to replace the revenue currently generated by income tax, as candidates jostled to be the one to speak on their respective plans.

Johnson emphasized his own experience as the self-described “Quality Guru” as making him the best candidate to make Michigan more efficient. He posed his plan for a “mega audit” as comparable to DOGE under Trump, adding that it is “the only way that we’re going to be able to eliminate the state income tax without having additional tax.”

“This is my business,” he said. “This is what I do for a living. I’m going to do it for the state of Michigan.”

But Cox criticized Johnson’s positioning that way.

“You can talk about reducing the size of government, but who’s actually done it? No one has on this stage, except for me. I’ve been in private business. It’s a lot easier to cut,” he said. “You’re talking about cutting jobs and sending them overseas.”

Rebandt also positioned himself as the outsider in the race, arguing that the rest of the field, coming from business and politics, had already failed to fix the issues in Michigan.

“If you look at the stage, the reason why I’m running is because we have career politicians. We have millionaires and billionaires who represent various stages of the economy. None of them listen. None of them have fixed Michigan,” he said. “I’m not one of them.”

Trump as a talking point in the debate

Asked if he believed his short-lived 2024 presidential bid would disqualify him from Trump’s eventual endorsement in the race, Johnson said, “I never expected to win. I went up there because I believed we needed to become more efficient. And by the way, President Trump obviously thought the same thing.”

Rebandt asked in response to Johnson’s statement, “It makes me wonder: Is he running for governor and not really expecting to win?”

Nesbitt, when asked if there were any lines that Trump could cross that he would disagree with, did not directly answer the question, but said that the governor should be “somebody that can join with President Trump.”

Cox, who was granted a rebuttal on that question, said that if Trump put troops on the ground in Iran, he would be “extremely disturbed” as the father of a Marine and a naval officer.

All eyes on an empty podium

Notably absent from the debate stage was U.S. Rep. John James (R-Shelby Twp.), who has declined to attend multiple forums and debates, much to the criticism of his fellow candidates, as well as party leadership in Oakland County.

James announced on Wednesday that he would attend two televised debates in July. A press release from his campaign stated, “Throughout this campaign, John James has been consistent: he would debate when the field was set,” a message that James has made throughout the campaign in response to criticisms about his absence at early debates.

This is the first debate held after the filing and withdrawal deadlines for the August primary, which saw former Michigan House speaker Tom Leonard withdraw from the race.

Three of the four candidates present — all but Johnson — attacked James for his absence in their opening statements.

“I’m running for governor so that everybody can make it in Michigan,” Nesbitt said. “John James can’t even make it to Michigan.”

The Michigan Supreme Court adopted a rule on Wednesday to prohibit civil arrests, including the civil immigration warrants commonly used by ICE, which are administrative warrants, not judicial warrants.

Specifically, the new rule, which will go into effect on May 1, states that “Parties, attorneys, and subpoenaed witnesses are not subject to civil arrest while going to, attending, and returning from the places they are required to attend.”

That is defined in the rule as applying in any location that a person is legally obligated to appear at for judicial proceedings or related functions, as well as “the reasonable and direct travel necessary” to arrive and return from those proceedings.

The rule, first proposed in late November, garnered significant public attention, with over 2,500 comments posted to the court’s website over the course of just over a month. Those comments included support from Attorney General Dana Nessel, as well as a number of state legislators and organizations like the State Bar of Michigan Executive Committee.

“The existence of, and ICE’s compliance with, its own prior policies shows that ICE can carry out its operations without making civil arrests in a courthouse. And there is nothing in the proposed amendment to suggest otherwise,” Nessel wrote. “All told, the impact of the proposed amendment on ICE’s operations will be minimal, and any impact is far outweighed by the need to protect and preserve the people’s fundamental right to participation and accountability in the fair administration of justice.”

This rule now largely aligns Michigan with a number of other states that have enacted policies to limit ICE actions at courthouses, including New York, Connecticut and Illinois.

Judge Noah Hood added a concurring opinion in the order issuing the rule, which he said was to “emphasize that this amendment falls squarely within this Court’s rulemaking function and does not exceed it.”

He noted that the rule “functions to maintain order in courthouses and courtrooms so that litigants, witnesses, and members of the public may conduct their business without unnecessary interference, including when they are en route to and from the same,” and that it does not impair federal or state executives, nor the state Legislature, from executing or making laws related to civil arrests or immigration enforcement.

Justice Brian K. Zahra, the sole Republican on the court, wrote a dissenting opinion in opposition to the new rule, calling it “at best a political statement framed as a solution in search of a problem.” Zahra, who also stated when the rule was first proposed that he would have declined to publish the proposal for comment, wrote that the question of immigration detention at courthouses was not a problem in Michigan.

He also raised concerns about the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which is often cited as a reason why state and local jurisdictions have limited ability to limit ICE actions, including the development of detention centers.

“State courts have no authority to void a federal arrest,” Zahra wrote. “The proposed amendment offers only false assurance that parties, attorneys, subpoenaed witnesses, and officers while going to, attending, and returning from court may not be arrested by the federal government. Moreover, as a practical matter, the prospect of having an arrest ‘voided’ by a state court offers false comfort to someone being held in federal custody.”

The rule’s adoption comes as a set of bills to limit ICE actions in multiple jurisdictions — including courts — has advanced to the full Senate. The bills would also limit the use of masks by federal law enforcement officers. While likely to pass the Democratic-controlled upper chamber, Michigan House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) has refused to take up similar legislation in the GOP-led House.

The Michigan Senate Housing and Human Services Committee on Tuesday advanced a bill proposed by state Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D-Royal Oak) that would require hotels and motels to post information with the human trafficking hotline.

The committee reported the bill to the full House for a floor vote. All six of the committee’s Democrats present, along with Sen. John Damoose (R-Harbor Springs), voted in favor to advance the bill, while Sens. Jonathan Lindsey (R-Coldwater) and Michele Hoitenga (R-Manton) passed.

Testimony on the bill was heard by the committee in March. McMorrow emphasized then that the bill took its cues from the Detroit Human Trafficking Task Force. In May 2024, the Detroit City Council voted unanimously to adopt similar policies at the local level.

“Michigan is a unique target. We sit at the intersection of major highway corridors and international crossing points, and traffickers know it,” McMorrow said. “They also know that the high profile events that we host, such as the Auto Show and the Woodward Dream Cruise, create cover for more people moving through and more opportunities to exploit. And where do traffickers often operate? Hotels and motels.”

McMorrow said the state requires hotline numbers to be posted at rest areas, airports, adult entertainment venues and locations with a known trafficking history.

“It’s a good start, but it doesn’t go far enough,” she said.

Jack Trebtoske, director of Government Affairs for the Michigan Restaurant Lodging Association, testified prior to the vote. He said that although the organization is in favor of the legislation, they would hope to see a loophole in the legislation: that short-term rentals are not included in the text.

“Michigan hosts tens of thousands of short term rentals listings across platforms like Airbnb and VRBO,” Trebtoske said. “These properties offer the same, and in many cases greater, opportunity for trafficking to occur. Private settings, minimal oversight, cash or platform mediated transactions, and no trained staff on premises.”

“We simply ask that the net be cast wide enough to matter,” he added.

Trebtoske urged an amendment to the bill to include these types of rentals, which committee chair Sen. Jeff Irwin (D-Ann Arbor) said was in the works, but not yet ready to add to the legislation. Lindsey had raised similar questions during testimony on the bill in March.

Amy Smith, the director of healing services with Avalon Healing Center in Detroit and a member of the Detroit Human Trafficking Task Force, told the committee in March that the postings “provides a lifeline for victims, and then it increases public awareness and accountability within these environments.”

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel sent a letter on Friday to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement asking the agency to halt its development of a new detention center in Romulus, citing concerns about the location’s proximity to schools, its placement on a floodplain and protected wetland, and the limited time frame in which ICE gave the public to respond to concerns.

“ICE, in its zeal to purchase and convert the Romulus Warehouse into a mass detention facility, appears prepared to run roughshod over Michigan’s sovereign interests and federal and state law,” Nessel wrote in the letter.

The public comment period for the placement of the detention facility on a floodplain closes on Friday, though it is not clear when that period began.

“Our system of government and the law demand transparency and partnership with state and local governments,” Nessel wrote. “But ICE seems determined not just to ignore the need for such cooperation, but to frustrate it. Through its conduct, ICE appears intent to operate a mass detention facility a stone’s throw from a middle school, an elementary school, and a protected wetland. What’s more, ICE purchased the warehouse before any attempt to communicate with the State of Michigan, its agencies, or any local governing body about it.”

Nessel is not the only official to come out in opposition to the facility this week, as the local community has come out strongly against its development — U.S. Sens. Elissa Slotkin and Gary Peters also sent a letter this week to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem urging a stop to the Romulus facility.

“This warehouse facility is not zoned for or developed to house individuals,” the senators wrote in their letter. “We are concerned about the safety of detainees and employees, especially at a time when ICE is struggling to provide adequate conditions at its existing facilities.”

GOP gubernatorial candidate repeatedly threatens to hang elected officials for ‘treason’

by Katherine Dailey, Michigan Advance
February 16, 2026

Anthony Hudson, a Genesee County truck driver running for the Republican nomination for governor, has made a habit of threatening elected officials with hanging for “treason,” making such threats at least twice since the start of 2026.

On Jan. 4, in a video posted to Hudson’s social media, he says, “It’s time to get the rope” — while holding a large loop of rope around his arm — as a call to action to “Michiganians and patriots” against politicians who he alleges received kickbacks from former Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, including Michigan’s U.S. Sens. Elissa Slotkin and Gary Peters, both Democrats.

“My hope is that every one of them will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and may their names forever live in shame for their treason,” he says in the video.

Less than a month later, on Feb. 1, in a Mason City Council meeting, speaking in opposition to data center development, Hudson again threatened elected officials — this time local government officials — with hanging.

“You guys never listen, and that’s the problem. These people voted you into office so that you could be their voice in government,” he said. “When you go against that voice, you commit what we call treason. The punishment for treason is public hanging. So, I suggest you start listening.”

Hudson’s statements were strongly condemned by the state Democratic party, who also urged the Michigan Republican Party and the other Republican candidates for governor to similarly condemn the threats.

“Political violence is completely unacceptable, and this kind of dangerous, hateful extremism has no place in our state and country. Anthony Hudson must immediately retract these comments and issue an apology,” Michigan Democratic Party spokesperson Derrick Honeyman wrote in a statement.

The Michigan Republican Party did not respond to a request for a response.

But Hudson doubled down when asked to comment on his statements.

“Know the law and the consequences! I didn’t write the law, as governor I will enforce the law. Educating someone about the law and what the consequences are is not threatening anyone,” he wrote in an email to the Michigan Advance. “Don’t come at me for holding them accountable and saying the worst part out loud.”

Hudson’s comments are similar to those of President Donald Trump, who has accused six elected Democrats, including Slotkin, of committing treason after they recorded a video reminding military members that they did not have to follow illegal orders.

In reaction to the video, Trump called it “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS” later saying it was “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jon King for questions: info@michiganadvance.com.

Huizenga calls for congressional hearings on ICE action in Minnesota

by Katherine Dailey, Michigan Advance
January 26, 2026

U.S. Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-Holland Township) took to social media on Sunday night to call on Congress to conduct hearings on federal law enforcement, specifically ICE, in Minnesota, as well as on the “organized opposition to federal law enforcement.”

“While emotions are no doubt high, a congressional hearing is a place where federal, state, and local community leaders can be heard. I believe Congress can conduct oversight and lead a facts based discussion,” he wrote in a post on X.

Huizenga’s call came just a day after federal agents shot and killed a man, Alex Pretti, in Minneapolis, the second killing by federal immigration agents since the start of 2026.

Huizenga has now joined a small group of Republicans calling for increased oversight of ICE actions, including GOP Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who have all called for independent probes into Pretti’s killing.

Murkowski said on Sunday, POLITICO reported, “ICE agents do not have carte blanche in carrying out their duties.”

Republicans on the House Homeland Security Committee have also called for testimony from leaders at ICE, along with Customs and Border Patrol and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services leadership. While Huizenga does not sit on that committee, he reposted the GOP caucus’s announcement of that request.

Huizenga’s post comes as Michigan’s Democratic U.S. Senators Elissa Slotkin and Gary Peters have both said they will not vote to renew funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees both ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, following Saturday’s fatal shooting.

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jon King for questions: info@michiganadvance.com.

Barrett staffer claims Capitol Police instructed against town halls, no evidence of such guidance

by Katherine Dailey, Michigan Advance
November 17, 2025

U.S. Rep. Tom Barrett (R-Charlotte) has been repeatedly criticized for having never hosted an in-person town hall since being elected to Congress in Michigan’s 7th Congressional District last year.

That has drawn additional scrutiny after Barrett’s district director, Keith Lane, said that the U.S. Capitol Police instructed members of Congress not to host those events due to safety concerns, although there is no evidence of such guidance.

In a video posted by Distill Social, Lane says, “Capitol Police, who are in charge of protecting all the members, are advising not to have in-person town halls due to almost double threats against congressional members,” noting that the guidance was given to lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

Barrett’s office did not respond to requests for comment on the nature of this guidance from the Capitol Police, including when the guidance was given and what exactly it entails.

A spokesperson for U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin, who previously held Barrett’s seat before being elected to the Senate, said that her office was unaware of any new guidelines from the Capitol Police regarding safety at town halls.

U.S. Capitol Police did not respond to questions about whether or not such guidance had been issued, though they were closed for routine business during the federal government shutdown that ended on Wednesday.

Distill Social’s video was posted two days after a surprise appearance from Barrett at the Michigan March for Life rally outside the state Capitol building on Nov. 6, which gathered thousands of people — and had no formal security.

Congressional representatives from Michigan on both sides of the aisle have held in-person town halls this year — in August, Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Tipton) hosted one in Dowagiac, while Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Detroit) hosted one in Livonia.

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jon King for questions: info@michiganadvance.com.

League of Women Voters of Michigan files motion to intervene in DOJ lawsuit for voter rolls

by Katherine Dailey, Michigan Advance
November 3, 2025

The League of Women Voters of Michigan has filed a motion to intervene on behalf of voters in the federal court case in which the U.S. Department of Justice is suing Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and the state of Michigan for access to voter registration data.

“We will not stand by while a federal fishing expedition puts the information of millions of Michiganders at risk and encourages voter intimidation,” said Lynne Kochmanski, co-president of the League of Women Voters of Michigan, in a press release from the organization.

The case, currently in district court in the Western District of Michigan, argues that Michigan has violated the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act by refusing to turn over detailed information about all registered voters in Michigan, including their driver’s license number, dates of birth, and the last four digits of their Social Security number.

The motion to intervene argues that, unlike the State of Michigan and Benson, the League of Women Voters of Michigan “is comprised of individuals who personally fear USDOJ accessing their data unlawfully,” giving them an important stake in the case.

Additionally, the motion states, the work of the League of Women Voters to encourage voter registration and education will be harmed if private voter registration information is given to the Department of Justice.

“[League of Women Voters of Michigan’s] interest in civic participation will be impaired if USDOJ can use this Court to compel Michigan to produce protected, sensitive voter data,” the organization wrote in their motion. “Michigan citizens may be more hesitant to register to vote for fear that their data will be released or used inappropriately.”

The League of Women Voters argues that the Justice Department has not sufficiently justified why they need access to this personally identifiable information, as opposed to the publicly available versions of the voter rolls, which have been sent.

“There is no reason for the federal government to seize control of voter data that they do not need and have no right to possess,” Kochmanski continued in the press release. “We are seeking to intervene to send a clear message to the administration and voters: we will fight to protect our members’ and voters’ data from unlawful seizure.”

“I’m required to follow the law. State and federal law include strict privacy protections that keep people’s personal data confidential and keep everyone safe from identity theft,” Benson wrote in a statement on the lawsuit in September. “States can and must hold the line. Only state and local election officials – not the president, the DOJ, or any other federal agency – have the right to people’s private voter information. The people of Michigan have entrusted this department with their personal data, and I will stand up to this illegal and unconstitutional power grab.”

Brent Ferguson, director of strategic litigation of the Campaign Legal Center — who are among those representing the League of Women Voters — called the case by the Department of Justice “an act of federal overreach that risks violating voters’ privacy and potentially disincentivizing people from casting ballots.”

Eileen O’Connor, senior counsel of the Brennan Center for Justice, another part of the league’s representation, added in the press release, “This push is part of the administration’s campaign to undermine our elections. The department may manipulate the data in service of false claims about our elections or to pressure states to remove eligible voters from the rolls.”

Other statewide League of Women Voters organizations in Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and California have filed motions in similar cases brought against their respective states by the Department of Justice.

Michigan Advance is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jon King for questions: info@michiganadvance.com.