Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s appointment of Court of Appeals Judge Noah Hood last month to the Michigan Supreme Court solidified the Democratic Party’s near-total majority of nominees to the state’s highest court.

In the next few months, the court is expected to consider a docket that is heavy on criminal justice, with cases that could impact sentencing guidelines, double jeopardy, search warrants and more.

Among other things, the court may soon decide whether to end mandatory life sentences for some convicted of felony murder and limit the police’s use of search warrants when it comes to cell phones.

Wayne State University Law School Associate Professor Justin Long predicted the courts will continue to “very incrementally” make big strides in criminal law, an area that’s less likely to be impacted by federal precedent.

“They’re going to decide over time how much imprisonment really makes sense to protect the people of Michigan,” Long said.

The decisions in those cases and others may not sit well with conservatives in a politically divided state, where President Donald Trump won in 2024 and where Republicans hold a majority in the state House.

A recent 5-2 decision that declared mandatory life in prison without parole for offenders under 21 is an “unconstitutionally cruel punishment” is already making waves.

County prosecutors have raised concerns and one Republican state lawmaker is threatening to cut funding from state court budgets to offset potential costs for local law enforcement, including any hiring needs, evidence gathering and other preparation for resentencing hearings.

“This is something that courts have basically dictated to the Legislature that they will have to fund,” Rep. Ann Bollin, R-Brighton Township, told Bridge Michigan, calling the decision “rogue and reckless” and voicing concern that more is coming.

“Elections have consequences.”

Justice Megan Cavanagh, who replaced outgoing Justice Elizabeth Clement as chief justice, said it’s not the court’s job to make decisions based on their public opinion.

“We are an independent, third branch of government,” she said. “I think it’s a very dangerous thing for anyone in the judicial branch to start making decisions about anything based on whether or not it’s going to be well-recieved.”

Criminal justice at the forefront 

While Supreme Court races are listed on the nonpartisan portion of the Michigan ballot, candidates and appointees are nominated by either political parties or the governor.

The makeup of the bench has partisan significance because justices are frequently asked to decide politically charged debates.

In recent years, Michigan’s highest court has issued rulings that cemented state law on divisive issues including LGBTQ rights, the state’s minimum wage, the governor’s emergency powers and the state’s authority to regulate pollution.

Several cases pending before the court could have major implications for the state’s criminal justice system, including a case questioning the constitutionality of mandatory lifetime sex offender registration and monitoring and another considering whether the state’s double jeopardy rules should go further than federal standards in protecting defendants from being tried for the same crime twice.

The court also recently heard oral arguments in a case questioning whether a safecracker’s convictions on multiple felony counts should stand due to concerns the cell phone search warrant that yielded the incriminating text messages used to convict him violated the Fourth Amendment.