The Michigan Supreme Court Wednesday shot down the state attorney general’s high-profile effort to criminally prosecute seven former public officials for their role in the Flint water crisis.
In a series of orders, the court left in place lower court dismissals of the charges, which were thrown out after an earlier Supreme Court ruling found that a prosecution team appointed by Attorney General Dana Nessel had improperly relied on a one-person grand jury to bring charges in 2021.
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy, appointed by Nessel as co-lead of the state’s prosecution team along with Solicitor General Fadwa Hammoud, had used the unusual tactic, in which prosecutors presented evidence in secret to a single judge to secure charges against multiple former public officials.
Flint Water Crisis Summary
The Flint Water Crisis was a public health crisis that started in 2014 after the drinking water for the city of Flint, Michigan was contaminated with lead and possibly Legionella bacteria. In April 2014, during a financial crisis, state-appointed emergency manager Darnell Earley changed Flint’s water source from the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (sourced from Lake Huron and the Detroit River) to the Flint River. Residents complained about the taste, smell, and appearance of the water, and many raised concerns about its safety.
However, state and local officials repeatedly assured residents that the water was safe to drink. It was not until 2015, after months of protests and pressure from activists and public health experts, that the state finally admitted that the water was contaminated with lead.
The Flint Water Crisis had a devastating impact on the city’s residents, particularly children. Lead poisoning is especially harmful to children, and can cause a range of health problems, including learning disabilities, behavioral problems, and reduced IQ. An estimated 6,000 to 12,000 children were exposed to lead-contaminated water during the crisis.
The Flint Water Crisis is a story of government negligence and environmental injustice. The city’s decision to switch to the Flint River was made in an effort to save money, but it came at a great cost to the city’s residents. The crisis also exposed the deep racial and economic inequality in Flint, as the city’s predominantly Black and low-income residents were disproportionately affected by the contamination.
Flint Water Crisis FAQs
What caused the Flint Water Crisis?
The Flint Water Crisis was caused by a combination of factors, including:
- The city’s decision to switch to the Flint River as its water source. The Flint River is more corrosive than the Detroit water system, and this caused the city’s lead pipes to corrode and leach lead into the water.
- The state’s failure to properly treat the Flint River water. The Flint River water is more acidic than the Detroit water system, and this required the state to add corrosion inhibitors to the water to prevent lead from leaching into the pipes. However, the state failed to add enough corrosion inhibitors, which allowed the lead to leach into the water.
- The state’s failure to listen to residents’ concerns about the water quality. Residents complained about the taste, smell, and appearance of the water from the beginning, but the state repeatedly assured them that the water was safe to drink.
Who was affected by the Flint Water Crisis?
The Flint Water Crisis affected all residents of Flint, but it was particularly harmful to children. Lead poisoning is especially harmful to children, and can cause a range of health problems, including learning disabilities, behavioral problems, and reduced IQ. An estimated 6,000 to 12,000 children were exposed to lead-contaminated water during the crisis.
- What has been done to address the Flint Water Crisis?
- The state has taken a number of steps to address the Flint Water Crisis, including:
- Switching Flint back to the Detroit water system.
- Replacing lead pipes in Flint homes.
- Providing bottled water and water filters to residents.
- Providing medical care and educational support to children who were exposed to lead-contaminated water.
More Posts
What is a Preliminary Exam?
Michigan Preliminary Examinations The Strategic Gatekeeper in Felony Defense The Preliminary Examination as the First Line of Defense In Michigan felony cases, the preliminary examination (PE) is the first—and often most decisive—opportunity to challenge the...
What does Nolle Prosequi mean?
What does Nolle Prosequi mean? Fatal Flaw In criminal cases, nolle prosequi may be employed when there is a significant weakness in the prosecution's case, when the prosecutor acknowledges an inability to prove the charges, or even when the prosecutor has lost...
People v. Lukity, 460 Mich 484 (1999)
Case Summary The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the defendant’s conviction for first-degree criminal sexual conduct against his fourteen‑year‑old daughter. The Court held that although one evidentiary error occurred, it was...
Motion in Limine vs Motion to Suppress
Defininition and Explaination - Motion in LimineOverview Although both a motion in limine and a motion to suppress deal with evidence, they serve very different purposes in Michigan criminal cases. Understanding the distinction is critical because each motion affects...
A Motion in Limine – What does it Mean?
Defininition and Explaination - Motion in LimineA motion in limine is a pretrial request asking the judge to exclude (or sometimes allow) specific evidence before the jury ever hears it. It’s one of the most important evidentiary tools in both criminal and civil...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Threat of Terrorism
Case Summary In People v Kvasnicka, the defendant sent a message to a young girl stating she “would not be laughing” when he came to her school to “shoot it up or blow it up like Columbine.” Charged under Michigan’s threat‑of‑terrorism statute, he argued the law was...
What is a Franks Hearing?
What is a Frank's Hearing?A Franks hearing is a critical legal tool used when a defendant claims that police lied, exaggerated, or recklessly disregarded the truth in a search warrant affidavit. When law enforcement places its hand on the Constitution, the law...
Michigan House Bill Proposes 32% Tax on Internet Devices for Kids
Taxed Again..? They're working on it.A newly introduced Michigan House bill would impose a 32% excise tax on smartphones, tablets, gaming systems, and other internet‑connected devices marketed to or primarily used by minors. Lawmakers backing the proposal argue the...
Shadow cash is corrupting Michigan courtrooms
The Shadow Cash Threat: Protecting the Integrity of Michigan Courtrooms In recent months, a spotlight has been cast on a hidden influence within the Michigan legal system: "shadow cash." This term refers to third-party litigation funding (TPLF), where outside...
Michigan judge charged in stealing from incapacitated adults
No Good Headline to Lead with HereSummary Federal prosecutors have charged a 36th District Court judge and three associates with orchestrating a long‑running financial scheme that diverted funds from incapacitated adults under court‑appointed guardianship. The...










