Script-free record · Release 2026-07-28.3
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
Core facts and links below come from the same immutable public release as the enhanced record page.
vote
Recorded floor vote
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
- Vote date
- 2026-02-19
- Chamber
- senate
- Result
- passed
- Yeas
- 32
- Nays
- 2
- Excused
- 3
- Not voting
- 0
- Related measure
- measure-2806
- Related sitting
- sitting-261
Official totals and named choices remain separate evidence. A named choice supports that vote only and does not establish continuous presence.
Inspect all published fields
- Chamber
- senate
- Context text
- Senator Runestad asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal. The motion prevailed. Senator Runestad’s statement is as follows: I believe Senate Bill No. 591 is good legislation. I supported it in committee and will continue to support it again today. However, we have an opportunity to strengthen it through my amendment. My amendment tie-bars Senate Bill No. 591 to Senate Bill No. 500 which I introduced more than six months ago. Senate Bill No. 500 is straightforward. If a law-abiding Michigander is forced to defend themselves during a violent riot and a court determines that they had acted lawfully, then they should not face financial ruin from civil lawsuits over that same incident. Right now, someone can be cleared criminally and still spend years and their life savings fighting these kinds of lawsuits. Most people can’t afford that. They are financially crushed despite having done nothing wrong. We have all seen the damage that riots can cause—streets blocked, cars surrounded, businesses destroyed. In those moments, ordinary citizens trying to get home or to work can become victims. Too often they are the ones who get forgotten. Senate Bill No. 500 says that Michigan stands with law-abiding citizens, not with violent mobs. If members disagree, then let the bill be debated openly; it deserves a hearing. Since Senate Bill No. 500 has not received one, I ask for your support of this amendment to ensure its consideration alongside Senate Bill No. 591. I would refer to this amendment as the Denny Amendment. During the 1992 Los Angeles riots, Reginald Denny was pulled from his cement truck at an intersection, beaten, kicked in the head, repeatedly struck in the head with a brick, and finally, they pulled a fire extinguisher from his truck and smashed it into his skull, fracturing his skull and creating permanent brain damage. Had he defended himself and one of his attackers was injured, then should he be sued civilly? This is not an abstract or rhetorical argument. I have personally been surrounded in both New Orleans and Detroit by a raging, hostile, intoxicated crowd with my young children in the back seat. The mob would sit on each vehicle one by one, staring into the driver’s eyes, waiting for a reaction. If there was no response, they would allow you to go five or ten feet, and then repeat the same conduct over and over, sometimes for a mile, until you got through the crowd. This is an absolutely terrifying experience if you have not experienced it. Those who engage in this kind of conduct should not be allowed to operate with impunity while victims are left facing possible death or injury with no meaningful protection from financial ruin from defending themselves. Thank you, Mr. President, and I respectfully ask for a “yes” vote on my amendment. The following bill was read a third time: Senate Bill No. 583, entitled A bill to amend 1941 PA 122, entitled “An act to establish the revenue collection duties of the department of treasury; to prescribe its powers and duties as the revenue collection agency of this state; to prescribe certain powers and duties of the state treasurer; to establish the collection duties of certain other state departments for money or accounts owed to this state; to regulate the importation, stamping, and disposition of certain tobacco products; to provide for the transfer of powers and duties now vested in certain other state boards, commissions, departments, and offices; to prescribe certain duties of and require certain reports from the department of treasury; to provide procedures for the payment, administration, audit, assessment, levy of interests or penalties on, and appeals of taxes and tax liability; to prescribe its powers and duties if an agreement to act as agent for a city to administer, collect, and enforce the city income tax act on behalf of a city is entered into with any city; to provide an appropriation; to abolish the state board of tax administration; to prescribe penalties and provide remedies; and to declare the effect of this act,” by amending section 28 (MCL 205.28), as amended by 2023 PA 102, and by adding section 28a. The question being on the passage of the bill, The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
- Excused
- 3
- Measure id
- measure-2806
- Motion text
- The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:
- Nays
- 2
- Not voting
- 0
- Result
- passed
- Sitting id
- sitting-261
- Vote date
- 2026-02-19
- Vote id
- vote-2412
- Vote number
- 16
- Yeas
- 32
Follow the evidence
Cite this record
Michigan Legislative Activity and Evidence Dataset, release 2026-07-28.3, “The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:,” /votes/vote-2412.
/api/v1/votes/vote-2412