Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · Michigan · Chapter 3 — Federal and Interstate Relations

3.55 “Block” and “tract” defined.

275 words·~1 min read·/mi/chapter-3/3-55

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

3.55 “Block” and “tract” defined.
Sec. 5.
As used in this act:
(a)"Block" means block as that term is used by the United States department of commerce, bureau of the census in conducting the 2010 decennial census.
(b)"Tract" means tract as that term is used by the United States department of commerce, bureau of the census in conducting the 2010 decennial census.
History: Add. 2001, Act 115 , Eff. Mar. 22, 2002 ;-- Am. 2011, Act 128 , Eff. Mar. 28, 2012
Constitutionality: In an original action, plaintiffs challenged the plan for redistricting Michigan's fifteen seats in the U.S. House of Representatives adopted by 2001 PA 115. Plaintiffs claimed that the statute was not validly enacted because the bill passed by the Legislature was changed by the Secretary of the Senate before presentation to the Governor for his approval. Second, they contended that the redistricting plan failed to comply with Michigan statutory requirements for congressional redistricting established by 1999 PA 221.The Michigan Supreme Court concluded:
(1)2001 PA 115 was validly enacted because the changes made before submission to the Governor were technical corrections that did not violate the provisions of the Michigan Constitution regarding enactment of legislation;
(2)the redistricting guidelines of MCL 3.63 (c), as enacted by 1999 PA 211, were not binding on the Legislature's redistricting of Michigan's congressional seats in 2001; and
(3)the reference to the 1999 guidelines in the 2001 redistricting act did not indicate legislative intent to make the redistricting plan reviewable using those guidelines. The Court denied plaintiff's application for review of the congressional redistricting plan. LeRoux v Secretary of State, 465 Mich 594 (2002).
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.