House Bill 5963 amends section 1821 of Michigan’s Revised Judicature Act, which governs exemptions from arrest on civil process. The bill modernizes the statute’s language by replacing outdated and gendered terms with gender-neutral references such as “individual,” “party,” and “witness,” while preserving the underlying legal protections. It continues to bar civil arrest for certain protected categories of people, including legislators attending official duties, minors under 16, parties, attorneys, subpoenaed witnesses traveling to or from required appearances, individuals in Michigan under criminal-process subpoenas from other states, travelers passing through the state under out-of-state criminal summonses, and court officers and jurors attending court.
The bill also keeps in place the existing rule that a civil arrest made in violation of these exemptions is void and constitutes contempt of court. It maintains remedies against anyone who makes or procures an unlawful civil arrest, including liability for double damages and other losses suffered by the arrested person. At the same time, it preserves the current exception that the arresting officer or other person is not liable if the exempt person failed to disclose the exemption or refused to sign an affidavit confirming it.
In practical terms, the bill updates statutory wording without materially changing the scope of the civil-arrest exemptions. It affects Michigan civil procedure and the Revised Judicature Act, and it would apply to officers, legislators, minors, attorneys, witnesses, jurors, and others covered by the exemption rules. The measure appears to be a technical and conforming update rather than a substantive policy change.
The general sentiment around the bill appears neutral to favorable, based on the absence of recorded opposition, committee debate, or roll-call votes in the provided materials. Because the bill primarily updates archaic language and clarifies the statute in modern terms, it is likely to be viewed as housekeeping legislation. Any contention would likely be limited to whether the bill should merely restyle the statute or also revisit the underlying civil-arrest exemptions, but no such dispute is reflected in the available record.
HB5963 would amend MCL 600.1821 in the Revised Judicature Act to replace outdated and gender-specific terminology with modern, gender-neutral language while retaining the same civil-arrest exemptions and enforcement provisions. The bill preserves existing protections from civil arrest for legislators, minors under 16, parties, attorneys, subpoenaed witnesses, certain out-of-state criminal witnesses, and court officers/jurors, and it continues to make unlawful civil arrests void and contemptuous, with damages available to the injured person.
The available record suggests the bill was treated as a noncontroversial technical update. There are no committee transcripts, recorded votes, or documented objections in the provided materials, and the changes are largely stylistic and conforming rather than substantive. Overall sentiment appears neutral to favorable, with the bill likely viewed as modernizing outdated statutory language without altering policy outcomes.
No specific contention is documented in the provided record. If any issue were to arise, it would likely concern the continued existence of civil-arrest exemptions themselves or whether the statute should be substantively revised rather than simply updated for modern language. However, the bill text indicates that the Legislature is preserving the current legal framework, and there is no evidence of opposition from any named stakeholder or committee in the materials provided.