Michigan Open Carry Inc v. Clio Area School District
329418
| Mich. Ct. App. | Dec 15, 2016Background
- Clio Area School District (CASD) adopted a policy banning visitors from possessing, storing, making, or using weapons on school property or at school-sponsored events, with limited exceptions (e.g., law enforcement, theatrical props, certain retirees, parents in vehicles while dropping off/picking up).
- Kenneth Herman (licensed to carry a concealed pistol) and Michigan Open Carry, Inc. were denied school access for openly carrying a pistol and sued, alleging state law preempts local firearm regulations and that CASD is a “local unit of government.”
- The circuit court granted plaintiffs’ summary judgment, relying on this Court’s decision in Capital Area Dist Library v Michigan Open Carry, Inc. (CADL), holding state law preempts quasi-municipal firearm regulation and declaring CASD’s ban invalid.
- CASD appealed, arguing school districts have broad statutory authority to protect student safety and regulate school property, distinguishing school districts from the quasi-municipal library in CADL.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed preemption under the Llewellyn framework, analyzed relevant firearms statutes (including MCL 28.425o and weapon-free school zone laws), and considered whether the Legislature intended exclusive state regulation of firearms in schools.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether state law (MCL 123.1102/MCL 28.425o) preempts CASD policy banning weapons on school property | State firearm statutes occupy the field and prohibit local regulation; CASD is a local unit/quasi-municipal actor so its policy is preempted | School districts are distinct from the local units listed in the statute and have express statutory powers to ensure pupil safety, so they may regulate weapons on school property | No preemption: CASD policy is not preempted; circuit court reversed |
| Whether MCL 28.425o(1)(a) (concealed-carry prohibition on schools) is inconsistent with CASD’s broader weapon ban | MCL 28.425o’s regulation of concealed carry on school property displaces district rules that ban possession generally | The statute prohibits concealed carry but does not forbid additional school policies; CASD policy contains exceptions consistent with statute | Statute and district policy are not in express conflict; no express preemption found |
| Whether CADL controls because it characterized a district library as a local unit of government | CADL controls and supports preemption of local firearm rules by state law | CADL is distinguishable: district libraries are created by cities/counties and are quasi-municipal; school districts are independent entities with distinct legislative powers | CADL is distinguishable and does not require preemption here |
Key Cases Cited
- Capital Area Dist Library v. Michigan Open Carry, Inc., 298 Mich. App. 220 (2012) (held a district library was a quasi-municipal entity and that state firearm law preempted its firearm regulation)
- Davis v. Hillsdale Cmty. Sch. Dist., 226 Mich. App. 375 (1997) (school boards have inherent authority to set student discipline; not controlling for nonstudent possession rules)
- People v. Llewellyn, 401 Mich. 314 (1977) (sets framework for inferring field preemption, including factors courts should assess)
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (recognized individual right to possess firearms subject to longstanding prohibitions, including in sensitive places such as schools)
- Widdoes v. Detroit Pub. Schs., 218 Mich. App. 282 (1996) (discusses school boards’ authority to define disciplinable acts)