WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 726

Criminal procedure: sentencing guidelines; sentencing guidelines for crimes involving the provision of adulterated or raw human milk for human consumption; provide for. Amends sec. 12m, ch. XVII of 1927 PA 175 (MCL 777.12m). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0724'25

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Rosemary Bayer and 2 co-sponsors

Establishes state standards and penalties to regulate donor human milk for infant consumption, ensuring safety, labeling, enforcement, and penalties for adulterated or raw milk.

REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND HUMAN SERVICES
#criminalprocedure:sentencingguidelines #health:other #women:other
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 726

Summary of Senate Bill 726 (2025-2026) – Michigan

This bill pair (SB 724–SB 726) focuses on regulating the donation, processing, distribution, and safety of donor human milk for infant consumption, with SB 726 adding sentencing guidelines for violations under SB 724. SB 726 is tied to SB 724 and would take effect only if SB 724 is enacted. The measures are sponsored by Senators Geiss, with cosponsors Chang and Bayer, and referred to the Housing and Human Services Committee.

Main purpose and intent

  • Establish comprehensive governance for donated human milk used for infant consumption, including standards for hospitals, human milk banks, and human milk banking companies.
  • Prohibit adulterated or raw human milk from being provided for infant consumption.
  • Create civil and criminal penalties for violations.
  • Provide for state regulation, record disclosure, sampling, and enforcement, including seizure and court actions.
  • Tie the sentencing framework in SB 726 to violations of SB 724, creating specified penalties based on the severity of harm.

Key provisions and changes (substantive content)

  • Definitions and scope (SB 724, referenced by SB 726):
    • Donating human milk is treated as a service, not a for-profit sale.
    • “Adulterated” milk includes improperly processed, contaminated, or other unsafe conditions per Milk Banking standards.
    • “Raw” milk is prohibited for infant consumption.
    • Hospitals, milk banks, and milk banking companies must adhere to standards set by FDA, CDC, and the Human Milk Banking Association of North America (HMBANA).
    • Donor screening is required for drugs and certain diseases (not required for milk donated solely for the donor’s own child).
  • Prohibition and penalties:
    • Adulterated milk: civil infraction (up to $5,000) if no injury; felony with injury (up to 5 years’ imprisonment or up to $10,000 plus twice the economic benefit, or both); felony with death (up to 15 years’ imprisonment or up to $15,000 plus twice the economic benefit, or both).
    • Raw milk: similar civil/criminal penalties as adulterated milk (civil infraction up to $5,000; felony penalties up to 5 or 15 years with fines and economic-benefit multipliers).
  • Disclosure and data sharing:
    • Milk banks must disclose how procured milk is used; DHHS and LARA may request annual quantities accepted/rejected.
  • DHHS enforcement and sampling:
    • Director of DHHS may access hospitals and milk banks for rule enforcement, collect samples, and examine records while protecting confidentiality (FOIA exemptions for trade secrets).
  • Seizure and condemnation:
    • Director can seize adulterated/misbranded milk; court condemnation proceedings can order destruction or processing/labeling under supervision; costs may be allocated to the claimant.
  • Financial implications for loss:
    • If seized milk is later found unadulterated, State may owe the commercial value to the claimant.
  • Administrative rules:
    • DHHS authorized to promulgate rules implementing SB 724–726.

Who would be affected

  • Hospitals, human milk banks, and human milk banking companies operating in Michigan.
  • Donors of human milk (screening requirements apply when the donor is not donating for their own child).
  • Infants and families receiving donor milk (protections aimed at ensuring safety and quality).
  • Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and, to a lesser extent, the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) for regulatory oversight, enforcement, and record-keeping.
  • Courts and enforcement agencies involved in seizure, condemnation, and penalties.
  • State taxpayers and budgetary resources, due to potential civil penalties, enforcement costs, and possible impacts on Medicaid (see fiscal note).

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Tie-bar: SB 726 is tied to SB 724; SB 726 would take effect only if SB 724 becomes law.
  • SB 724 and SB 726 introduced and referred in December 2025; committee action completed for SB 724 in June 2026 (SB 724–726 package analyzed for fiscal impact and regulatory framework).
  • SB 725 (not the focus of this summary) would establish Medicaid coverage for donor milk under certain conditions, with effective date January 1, 2026.

Fiscal considerations (as summarized in supporting materials)

  • Indeterminate to potentially substantial impact on DHHS and the MDOC, depending on enforcement and rulemaking activity.
  • Medicaid costs could be significant under SB 725; SB 726’s fiscal impact depends on judicial outcomes and enforcement activities related to SB 724.
  • Local government impact is indeterminate.

What to watch

  • Whether SB 724 is enacted (triggering SB 726’s effectiveness).
  • Administrative rulemaking by DHHS and potential costs for sampling, storage, and enforcement.
  • Implementation challenges for milk banks, including compliance with multi-agency standards (FDA, CDC, HMBANA) and disclosure requirements.
  • Judicial interpretation of the new sentencing guidelines tied to adulterated or raw donor milk violations.

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

Sign in to ask a question.