The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.

HB 4045MICHIGANSession 2025-2026State BillSigned into law

Enacted

Michigan enacts the uniform public expression protection act to shield citizens from retaliatory lawsuits

Original title: Civil procedure: civil actions; lawsuits for exercising rights to free expression; provide protections against.

Last action · December 31, 2025: assigned PA 52'25Sponsors: Kara Hope and 11 others

Bill progressHistory & official text ↓

Introduced

Committee

Floor Vote

Passed

Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Does

Michigan establishes expedited dismissal procedures and mandatory fee-shifting for , protecting individuals sued for exercising free speech, petition, and assembly rights. The law permits defendants to file a special motion for expedited relief within 60 days of being served and automatically stays most discovery proceedings.

Why it matters

Defendants targeted by lawsuits for speaking out on public issues gain the right to halt costly discovery and potentially recover attorney fees and litigation expenses if the court dismisses the case.

Background

Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP suits) are civil lawsuits filed against individuals and organizations to discourage or penalize exercise of constitutional rights such as speech, petition, and assembly. context

Who It Affects

Groups the bill's text affects, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

Defendants in Public Expression Lawsuits

Individuals and entities sued for exercising constitutional expression rights gain access to expedited dismissal motions, mandatory discovery stays, and potential recovery of attorney fees and court costs.

Directly affected

Plaintiffs Bringing Civil Actions

Parties filing civil complaints face mandatory litigation burdens, automatic discovery pauses if a special motion is filed, mandatory dismissal if they fail to establish a prima facie case, and potential cost liability if their motion is ruled frivolous.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Frequently Asked Questions

What deadline do I have to file a special motion for expedited relief under this act?

A party may file a special motion for expedited relief to dismiss the action not later than 60 days after being served with a complaint, cross-claim, counterclaim, third-party claim, or other pleading asserting an eligible cause of action, or later upon a showing of good cause.

Does filing an expedited dismissal motion stop ongoing discovery?

Yes. Upon the filing of a motion under section 3, all other proceedings between the moving party and responding party, including discovery and pending hearings or motions, are automatically stayed until the court enters an order ruling on the motion and the appeal period expires.

Are standard consumer complaints or employment discrimination claims covered by these protections?

No. The act explicitly excludes causes of action against persons primarily engaged in selling goods or services arising from commercial communications, as well as claims brought under major civil rights, whistleblower, labor, and freedom of information acts.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Follow the record

Votes, people, money & the original source

Where This Stands

Current status: Signed into law.

Procedural history

26 actions

Dec 31, 2025House
assigned PA 52'25
Dec 31, 2025House
filed with Secretary of State 12/23/2025 11:56 AM
Dec 31, 2025HouseEnrolled
approved by the Governor 12/23/2025 10:26 AM
Dec 23, 2025HouseEnrolled
presented to the Governor 12/22/2025 01:40 PM
Dec 18, 2025House
bill ordered enrolled
Dec 18, 2025House
returned from Senate without amendment

Show 20 earlier actions

Dec 18, 2025Senate
RETURNED TO HOUSE
Dec 18, 2025SenateFloor
PASSED ROLL CALL # 347 YEAS 36 NAYS 0 EXCUSED 1 NOT VOTING 0
Dec 16, 2025Senate
PLACED ON ORDER OF THIRD READING
Dec 16, 2025Senate
REPORTED BY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FAVORABLY WITHOUT AMENDMENT(S)
Dec 11, 2025SenateCommittee
REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Dec 11, 2025SenateCommittee
REPORTED FAVORABLY WITHOUT AMENDMENT 12/10/2025
Oct 28, 2025SenateCommittee
REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON CIVIL RIGHTS, JUDICIARY, AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Oct 28, 2025SenateFloor
PASSED BY HOUSE WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT
Oct 22, 2025House
transmitted
Oct 22, 2025HouseFloor
passed; given immediate effect Roll Call #262 Yeas 103 Nays 0 Excused 0 Not Voting 7
Oct 22, 2025HouseFloor
read a third time
Oct 21, 2025House
placed on third reading
Oct 21, 2025HouseFloor
substitute (H-1) adopted
Oct 21, 2025HouseFloor
read a second time
Apr 16, 2025House
referred to second reading
Apr 16, 2025HouseCommittee
reported with recommendation with substitute (H-1)
Feb 4, 2025House
bill electronically reproduced 01/30/2025
Jan 30, 2025HouseCommittee
referred to Committee on Judiciary
Jan 30, 2025HouseIntroduced
read a first time
Jan 30, 2025HouseIntroduced
introduced by Representative Rep. Kara Hope

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Related Legislation

hearing transcript

Congressional Hearing on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

The House Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties held an oversight hearing on October 20, 2021, to evaluate the current s

Discoveries

1 pattern noticed across the record

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift99% confidence

Introduction of Uniform Public Expression Protection Act

Michigan enacts a structured statutory framework to curb strategic lawsuits against public participation by combining expedited judicial reviews, mandatory discovery stays, and fee-shifting.

Connected Entities

age discrimination in employment act of 1967, worker's disability compensation act of 1969, Americans with disabilities act of 1990 and 8 more

otherage discrimination in employment act of 1967“exemption category for age discrimination claims”Map →

otherworker's disability compensation act of 1969“exemption category for worker compensation claims”Map →

otherAmericans with disabilities act of 1990“exemption category for federal disability rights claims”Map →

otherwhistleblowers' protection act“exemption category for whistleblower protection claims”Map →

otherTitle VII of the civil rights act of 1964“exemption category for federal employment discrimination claims”Map →

otherfamily and medical leave act of 1993“exemption category for family leave claims”Map →

otherElliott-Larsen civil rights act“exemption category for civil rights claims”Map →

otherpersons with disabilities civil rights act“exemption category for disability civil rights claims”Map →

otherfair labor standards act of 1938“exemption category for wage and hour claims”Map →

otherTitle IX of the education amendments of 1972“exemption category for education equity claims”Map →

otherfreedom of information act“exemption category for public records claims”Map →

Sources

Open source document

legislature.mi.gov

Analysis Score

0–100

Significance85
How much this matters to a regular citizen
Controversy45
Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
Entertainment10
Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
Buzz50
Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools