WeVote
Log In

Bill

NA

Bill

HB 6110

Civil procedure: civil actions; violation of constitutionally or legally provided civil rights; provide a cause of action for. Creates new act.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Noah Arbit and 31 co-sponsors

Michigan’s Universal Constitutional Remedies Act lets people sue for rights violations under color of law, with immunity defenses, fees, and a 2-year limit.

bill electronically reproduced 06/18/2026
#civilprocedure:civilactions #civilrights:other
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 6110

Summary of HB 6110 (2025-2026) – Michigan

Purpose and intent

  • Establishes the “Universal Constitutional Remedies Act.”
  • Creates a civil action framework to address violations of constitutional and other legal rights by acts or omissions carried out under color of law.

Key provisions and changes

  • Definitions
    • Color of law: actions taking place under color of a law, including statutes, ordinances, regulations, customs, or usages, of the United States.
    • Person: broad definition including individuals, partnerships, corporations, LLCs, associations, governmental entities, or other legal entities.
  • Civil liability (Sec. 3)
    • A person subjected to deprivation of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the U.S. Constitution by someone acting under color of law may bring a civil action for redress.
    • Exception for judges (Sec. 3(2)): In actions against a judicial officer for acts or omissions in the officer’s judicial capacity, courts may not grant injunctive relief unless a declaratory judgment was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.
  • Immunity defenses (Sec. 4)
    • Defendants may raise absolute or qualified immunity defenses comparable to those available under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
    • The act does not waive or abrogate sovereign immunity defenses otherwise available.
  • Attorney fees and costs (Sec. 5)
    • Courts may award prevailing plaintiffs reasonable attorney fees as part of costs, at the court’s discretion.
    • For actions against a judicial officer for acts in the officer’s judicial capacity, the officer cannot be held liable for costs or attorney fees unless conduct clearly exceeded the officer’s jurisdiction.
    • Courts may include expert fees in attorney fees awarded.
  • Statute of limitations (Sec. 6)
    • A civil action under this act must be commenced within 2 years after the cause of action accrues.
  • Applicability (Sec. 7)
    • The act applies to actions or proceedings pending on or filed on or after the act’s effective date.

Who and what is affected

  • Potential plaintiffs: individuals or entities whose constitutional or federally protected rights are deprived under color of law in Michigan.
  • Potential defendants: public officials, government entities, or entities acting under color of law, including those asserting immunity defenses.
  • Judicial officers: special limitations on relief and costs when the action concerns acts in a judicial capacity.
  • The act provides a framework similar to, but distinct from, federal § 1983 remedies, including immunity considerations and potential attorney-fee shifting.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Filing window: 2-year statute of limitations from accrual.
  • Effective date: Applies to actions pending on or filed after the act’s effective date.
  • Remedies and costs: Courts have discretion to award attorney fees and may include expert fees; special provisions govern cost-shifting for actions against judges.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Expands state-law avenues to pursue civil rights violations under color of law in Michigan.
  • Introduces Michigan-specific remedies that align with federal civil rights concepts (e.g., immunity defenses, potential attorney fees for prevailing plaintiffs).
  • May influence behavior of public officials and institutions by clarifying litigation pathways and potential cost consequences.
  • The delineated exception for judicial officers and injunctive relief suggests heightened scrutiny of court-ordered remedies in judicial capacity cases.

If you’d like, I can highlight potential practical examples or compare this to federal 42 U.S.C. § 1983 outcomes to help illustrate how the act might function in practice.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.