Even if we accept for the sake of argument the Republican leadership's position that the state of emergency declared in EO 2020-33 relates back to the original state of emergency declared on 3/10 in EO 2020-4, the disaster declaration is without question a distinct legal act. 1/8 https://twitter.com/MichiganAdvance/status/1246018968130859010

"Emergency" and "disaster" are legal terms of art defined by the Emergency Management Act, 1976 PA 390. See MCL 30.402(h); MCL 30.302(e). They are not synonymous. 2/8

The Governor's authority to declare a state of emergency and a state of disaster is also set forth separately in the statute. See MCL 30.403(4); MCL 30.403(3). Again, these legal acts are not interchangeable or coextensive. The distinction is both relevant and important. 3/8

While all of the powers of the Governor under a state of emergency are also available under a state of disaster, a state of disaster provides the Governor with additional tools to respond to a crisis. See MCL 30.411. 4/8

Each and every one of Governor Whitmer's #COVID19 EOs, to the extent they rely on the EMA, can rest on the authority of the EO 2020-33 disaster declaration, which may remain in effect without the requirement of legislative approval for 28 days (until April 29). 5/8

Also, this thread assumes the Emergency Management Act is the only relevant consideration. It's not. Governor Whitmer's #COVID19 EOs have been issued under several independent sources of legal authority. Only the EMA is time limited. 6/8

Additionally, neither the plain language of the EMA nor historical precedents support the proposition that the Legislature has the latitude to select a number of days that is different from the request made by the Governor during a state of disaster and/or emergency. 7/8

Instead, both the EMA text and past precedent indicate that the Legislature is to approve or disapprove the extension for a specific number of days requested by the Governor. 8/8