• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Campus Carry at U-of-M....What Would It Take?

The Expert

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
118
Location
Taylor, Michigan, USA
I've been educated about the fact that the preemption statute does not apply to the University Of Michigan because the Regents Rules are really laws and that the entire shindig is pretty much out there on their own when they want to be.

What would it take to get Universities brought back under the authority of the state? Is there no campus carry because nobody has bothered to files a lawsuit? Is filing and subsequently winning a lawsuit force the schools to fall in line with the rest of the state?

I really hate having to completely disarm when I leave for school (which is most days) as I can't even leave my gun in the car in the parking lot. I'd love to see this nonsense come tumbling down.
 

TheQ

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
3,379
Location
Lansing, Michigan
What would it take to get Universities brought back under the authority of the state? Is there no campus carry because nobody has bothered to files a lawsuit? Is filing and subsequently winning a lawsuit force the schools to fall in line with the rest of the state?

MCL 123.1102 would have to be modified to include a Campus or College as a unit of "Local Government".
 

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,462
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
MCL 123.1102 would have to be modified to include a Campus or College as a unit of "Local Government".

In fact such a law has been written and in committee. The language would include colleges/universities under preemption. But no movement on this law has taken place.
 

Sefner

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
54
Location
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
If they aren't getting rid of PFZ's, and Royal Joke can't get them to change 1102, then its not likely that the colleges will be stopped from subverting Michigan law, and the constitution either.

Technically they are not subverting the Constitution. At least not the MI Constitution. But only technically.

OP, do you go to U of M? I do and have had to deal with this for some time now.

We would need a lawsuit or Constitutional Amendment at this point. It would be "easier" to get the Regents to change their laws but fat chance with that.

A simple statute would not do because the University would simply keep enforcing the ordinance, arrest the first carrier they found, and head for a test case while a poor chap loses his guns and right to carry and has to deal with the legal fees of the process. There is already case law that makes UM a special entity. Then the University might win their suit and it would all be for naught. Remember, this is a Constitutional issue. A simple lawsuit just has too much case law against us that grants UM special consideration. Would be too high a risk. I would rather pick at the low hanging fruits such as the fact that the ordinance is way too broad (can't drive through Ann Arbor without being on UM property and thus being illegal, this is not the most narrow regulation possible, etc etc) and start from there. First, not directly on campus. Then allow it on campus but not in classrooms, dorms, etc. Then allow in classrooms but not in dorms (not like anyone who lives in dorms can carry anyways). Etc etc.

Just bringing universities under pre-emption wouldn't do because there are tons of universities in MI and as I hinted at earlier, UM is one of the few special ones (I think there are five) given special consideration. UM would just argue they aren't covered under the new legislation and point to the previous case law saying they have already been pointed out to be special and thus immune from the legislation.

If the Constitution were amended to explicitly disallow UM from getting around pre-emption the possibility of UM resisting would be much much less given the case law around pre-emption.

I have toyed with the idea of a broader suit. The University receives federal funding, yet it infringes on what is now a fundamental right. Alas, this is a pipe dream. The issue must be decided at the State level.

But before all of that we need a much different kind of change, a cultural one. Politicians must get elected again, as must Supreme Court justices and District Attorneys. All of them would be willing to "fight for the safety of the people of Ann Arbor and the students at UM from the threat of violence blablabla".

It's a tough one
 
Last edited:

TheQ

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
3,379
Location
Lansing, Michigan
A simple statute would not do because the University would simply keep enforcing the ordinance, arrest the first carrier they found, and head for a test case while a poor chap loses his guns and right to carry and has to deal with the legal fees of the process.

If preemption was modified to specifically include Universities, I don't think such a case would make it past the preliminary hearing w/o getting booted.

...then again, if you get a Liberal Judge who sees the law and the Constitution as "living documents" which are open for judicial reinterpretation (read: re-writing) then you could be screwed.
 

Sefner

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
54
Location
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
If preemption was modified to specifically include Universities, I don't think such a case would make it past the preliminary hearing w/o getting booted.

...then again, if you get a Liberal Judge who sees the law and the Constitution as "living documents" which are open for judicial reinterpretation (read: re-writing) then you could be screwed.

I wish I could say you're right, but the University would muster all the legal resources it has in order to fight something like this. Anything they would think of would get used. It would be a huge mess. Ann Arbor is a backwards, crazy town and its heart and soul is UM.

I think in the end the University would lose, but where would the end be? Six months when the AG steps in? 2 years for State SC? 5 years for SCOTUS?
 
Last edited:

TheQ

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
3,379
Location
Lansing, Michigan
I wish I could say you're right, but the University would muster all the legal resources it has in order to fight something like this. Anything they would think of would get used. It would be a huge mess. Ann Arbor is a backwards, crazy town and its heart and soul is UM.

I think in the end the University would lose, but where would the end be? Six months when the AG steps in? 2 years for State SC? 5 years for SCOTUS?

U of M DOES have a law school -- lots of free legal research labor.
 

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,272
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
Name a K-12 school that has the power to create & enforce penal code.

Some schools have established Law Enforcement Agencies, so they would be examples regarding enforcement. Also, most school districts relate/connect/base their "policies"/"rules" on MCLs... so although the power to create is absent, enforcement is possible either outright or by reference.
 
Last edited:

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,272
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
Does anyone know if UofM's Weapon's Ordinance has been successfully or unsuccessfully applied to... ie someone charged with... possessing a pistol on campus since Michigan became a "shall issue" state?

If it has been enforced, does anyone know if any of the Article X, sec 4 Weapon's Ordinance exceptions were attempted as a defense to the charges?
 
Last edited:

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,272
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
Exactly.

Fighting the war on drugs is like a baby fighting its sleep.

As a baby, my daughter slept maybe 2 hours a night... in 10-15 minute increments interspersed with hours where she would be wide awake, happy, and wondering why I didn't want to stay up with her from 12 midnight until 6am. So, some babies can fight the urge just as I think sometimes people can win a battle that is considered un-winnable by most.
 

Bronson

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
2,126
Location
Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
I was looking around on the Hillsdale College website because I know they don't accept any fed. or state subsidized student loans and I found this:


    • Q: Why doesn’t Hillsdale accept any federal or state taxpayer subsidies?
    • A: In 1975, the federal government said that Hillsdale had to sign a form stating that we did not discriminate on the basis of sex. Hillsdale College had never discriminated on any basis, and had never accepted federal taxpayer subsidies of any sort, so the College felt no obligation to comply, fearing that doing so would open the door to additional federal mandates and control. Our trustees pledged two things: first, that the College would continue its long-standing policy of non-discrimination, and second, that it would not accept any encroachments on its independence. The case went to court, and Hillsdale College won a partial victory, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals did rule that Hillsdale College was an “indirect recipient” of federal funding because of participation in federal grant and loan programs. In 1984, Grove City College in Pennsylvania fought and lost a similar legal battle. The case then went to the Supreme Court, and in Grove City v. Bell, it was determined that if even one student received a federal grant or loan, it made that institution a direct recipient of federal funds. To avoid the hassles of government control, Hillsdale College announced its decision to end participation in all federal financial aid programs in 1985. In 2007, Hillsdale announced that it would no longer accept State of Michigan taxpayer subsidies earmarked for student financial aid, thereby making the College completely independent of taxpayer support.
In the wake of Heller and McDonald I wonder if the Grove City v. Bell decision could be used to our advantage.

Bronson
 
Last edited:
Top