WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 961

Elections: voters; state voting rights act; create. Creates new act & repeals 1969 PA 161 (MCL 691.1031). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0962'26, SB 0963'26, SB 0964'26

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Sarah Anthony and 18 co-sponsors

Creates a Michigan-wide framework to protect voting rights, prohibit discriminatory election practices, and empower courts and monitors to ensure equal access.

referred to Committee on Election Integrity
#civilprocedure:classactions #civilrights:other #elections:electionofficials #elections:voters #elections:votingprocedures #localgovernment:other #stateagencies(existing):attorneygeneral #stateagencies(existing):civilrights
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 961

Overview

SB 961 (Session 2025-2026, Michigan) proposes to create a State Voting Rights Act. It establishes a framework to protect voting rights, prohibit discriminatory election administration, provide remedies (including court-ordered remedies and monitors), create a Michigan Voting Rights Assistance Fund, and authorize enforcement through civil action. The bill repeals 1969 PA 161 (MCL 691.1031) and ties into a package with SB 962–964.

Main purpose and intent

  • Establish a comprehensive state-level voting rights protection regime modeled to address discrimination in voting access and election administration.
  • Ensure equal opportunity for protected class members (racial, color, or language minority groups) to vote and participate in political processes.
  • Provide mechanisms for prevention, remedy, and accountability, including court-ordered remedies and potential monitoring.

Key provisions and changes

  • Definitions and scope (Sec. 3)
    • Introduces terms such as alternative methods of election, at-large vs district-based systems, racially polarized voting, protected class, and voting-eligible population.
    • Defines local government actors, and broad categories of entities covered (counties, cities, townships, villages, schools, community colleges, libraries, etc.).
  • Prohibited practices and disparities (Sec. 7, 9)
    • Prohibits actions by local/state actors that create disparities in voting participation or impair equal opportunity based on protected class status.
    • Enumerates circumstances that would be considered impairments, including closing/moving polling places, changing election times without proper notice, and language accessibility failures.
    • Addresses issues with districting, method of election, and dilution of protected-class votes.
    • Sets guidelines for evaluating racially polarized voting and remedies, including how to evaluate evidence and avoid improper considerations.
  • Remedies and court authority (Sec. 11, 13, 23, 27)
    • Courts may order comprehensive remedies to mitigate violations (e.g., new district maps, different voting methods, expanded polling hours/locations, restoring/increasing registration opportunities).
    • Provides pre-litigation notification requirements (Sec. 13) for alleged violations; facilitates negotiated remediation plans; permits action if no plan is agreed.
    • Expedited and pretrial procedures for voting-rights related actions (Sec. 27) with calendar priority and a provision for preliminary relief before upcoming elections if warranted.
  • Civil actions and enforcement (Sec. 21, 23, 26)
    • Authorized actions in circuit court or court of claims to compel compliance and obtain remedies.
    • Allows for standing to challenge districting plans and other voting-related schemes.
    • Courts may retain jurisdiction up to 10 years to pre-approve certain voting-related policies to prevent recurrence.
    • Authorizes punitive damages and other relief, with criteria for when punitive damages may be imposed.
  • Monitoring and remedies for disabled electors (Sec. 24, 25)
    • Creates mechanisms for monitors to oversee compliance with rights of disabled electors.
    • Allows appointment of a monitor for up to 10 years if violations are found or likely and requires monitoring duties (investigations, reporting, emergency measures, etc.).
    • Defines “disabled elector” and relevant laws included (e.g., ADA, Help America Vote Act, National Voter Registration Act).
  • Funding and reimbursement (Sec. 15, 17)
    • Establishes the Michigan Voting Rights Assistance Fund in the state treasury.
    • Reimburses eligible plaintiffs and local governments for reasonable costs incurred in pursuing remedies or evaluating remedies, with a cap (initially $50,000, adjusted annually for CPI).
    • Reimbursements may also cover costs related to notifying and remedying issues involving disabled electors.
  • Guidance and administration (Sec. 28)
    • Secretary of State must provide guidance to election officials and update guidance as laws and technology change.
    • Guides posting and accessibility of guidance on the secretary of state’s website.
  • Legislative conditions
    • Enacting section 1 repeals 1969 PA 161.
    • Enacting section 2 makes SB 961 contingent on enactment of SB 962, SB 963, and SB 964 (a tie-bar).

Who/what would be affected

  • State and local government officials responsible for administering elections (including counties, cities, townships, villages, schools, libraries, and related public bodies).
  • Electors, particularly those in protected class groups (racial, color, language minority groups), and disabled electors.
  • Prospective plaintiffs, advocacy groups, and disabled-elector organizations that can bring actions or seek monitoring/remedies.
  • Local governments facing disclosed or anticipated voting-rights violations could incur monitoring, remedial orders, and potential penalties.
  • Funding entities (Michigan Voting Rights Assistance Fund) and local governments seeking reimbursements for remedy-related costs.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Notification and negotiation process precedes litigation (Sec. 13; Sec. 24 for disabled elector provisions).
  • Courts can order a wide range of remedies with tailoring to avoid disruption to local governance (Sec. 23).
  • Pre-approval authority for voting-related policies can extend up to 10 years (Sec. 23(6)).
  • Expedited proceedings and relief available for ongoing/upcoming elections (Sec. 27).
  • Funding reimbursements have a cap ($50,000 adjusted for CPI) and time limits for seeking reimbursement (Sec. 15, 17, 20-something specifics in Sec. 15 and 17; Sec. 26 covers attorney fees).
  • Requires tie-bar with SB 962–964; effectiveness contingent on those bills passing.

Potential impact

  • Creates a robust framework for protecting and enforcing voting rights in Michigan, with broad authority for courts and a dedicated funding mechanism to support remedies and advocacy.
  • Could lead to changes in how local governments administer elections (e.g., placement of polling places, voting hours, language access, and districting practices) to avoid discriminatory disparities.
  • Establishes ongoing monitoring to ensure compliance, particularly for accessibility for disabled voters and for protected-class communities.
  • Encourages early, collaborative remediation efforts and potentially reduces delay in implementing fixes through negotiated plans.
  • Financial support mechanisms help plaintiffs and local governments pursue or implement remedies without prohibitive costs, though reimbursements are capped and subject to approval.

Note: SB 961 is part of a broader package and is contingent on passage of SB 962–964.

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

Sign in to ask a question.