WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 500

Torts: defenses; immunity; provide for individual reacting to a riot. Amends 1961 PA 236 (MCL 600.101 - 600.9947) by adding sec. 2922d.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Jim Runestad

Michigan bill creating civil liability immunity for individuals defending themselves or property during riots; currently lacks specific definitions of qualifying circumstances.

REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON CIVIL RIGHTS, JUDICIARY, AND PUBLIC SAFETY
#torts:defenses #torts:intentional
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 500

Legislative bill overview

SB 500 proposes to add a new legal section (2922d) to Michigan's tort law that would provide civil liability protections for individuals who take defensive actions during riots. The bill creates an immunity defense for people reacting to riot situations, shielding them from certain lawsuits that might otherwise result from their conduct during civil disturbances.

Why is this important

This bill addresses a gap some lawmakers perceive in legal protections for civilians defending themselves or their property during civil unrest. It could significantly alter liability exposure for individuals involved in riot-related incidents, potentially reducing barriers to self-defensive action but also potentially affecting how riot-related injuries or property damage claims are adjudicated.

Potential points of contention

  • Defining "riot" and "reacting": The bill text is minimal and doesn't specify what constitutes a qualifying riot or what types of reactions receive immunity, leaving crucial definitional questions unanswered that could create legal uncertainty or broad loopholes.
  • Proportionality and accountability: Broad immunity provisions may shield individuals who use excessive force, making it harder for injured parties to seek damages and potentially reducing incentives for measured responses.
  • Intersection with existing law: The interaction between this immunity and current Michigan self-defense laws (which already provide substantial protections) is unclear, raising questions about whether this creates redundancy or expands protections beyond existing standards.

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

Sign in to ask a question.