Michigan House Bill 5105 proposes new marijuana penalties and possession limits to combat illicit cannabis operations.

Michigan’s Cannabis Regulation Challenges

Since Michigan legalized recreational marijuana in 2018 under the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MRTMA), the state has faced ongoing challenges with illegal grow operations and unlicensed distribution. The Cannabis Regulatory Agency (CRA) has struggled to enforce limits on personal possession and cultivation, especially when large-scale operations disguise themselves as personal use.

To address these concerns, lawmakers introduced House Bill 5107 on October 22, 2025, sponsored by Rep. Mike Hoadley and co-sponsored by several others. The bill aims to amend Sections 5 and 15 of MRTMA (MCL 333.27955 and MCL 333.27965) to redefine the allowable amounts of marijuana for personal use and possession

What HB 5107 Proposes

HB 5107 modifies the legal thresholds for marijuana possession and cultivation. The bill proposes reducing the number of plants and the amount of usable marijuana individuals can possess without triggering criminal penalties. It also clarifies the distinction between personal use and commercial-scale activity.

The bill is tie-barred to HB 5105, meaning both must be passed together. HB 5105 updates the penalties for marijuana-related offenses, while HB 5107 sets the legal possession limits. This ensures that enforcement is consistent and that penalties are applied fairly based on updated thresholds.

Don’t worry the bill is tie-barred to House Bill 5105

How HB 5105 and HB 5107 Work Together

• HB 5105 amends the Michigan Public Health Code (MCL 333.7401) to redefine criminal penalties for marijuana-related offenses. It introduces tiered penalties based on the amount of marijuana or concentrate possessed or manufactured.
• HB 5107 amends the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MCL 333.27955 and MCL 333.27965) to modify the allowable amounts of marijuana for personal use and possession.

Because HB 5105 sets penalties and HB 5107 sets the legal possession limits, the two bills are interdependent. For example, if HB 5107 changes the legal threshold for personal possession, HB 5105 must reflect those changes in its penalty structure. The tie-bar ensures that enforcement and legal standards remain aligned.

Read the HB5105 article HERE (But finish this article first)

You can read the full bill texts here:

• Read and Follow HB5105
• Read and Follow HB51057

What Does “Tie-Barred” Mean?

In Michigan legislative terms, a tie-bar means that one bill is legally connected to another. If two bills are tie-barred, they must both be passed for either to take effect. This ensures that related legal changes are implemented together, maintaining consistency across statutes.

Key Details of HB 5107

• Introduced: October 22, 2025

• Sponsors: Rep. Mike Hoadley (R-99), Joseph Aragona, Ken Borton, Parker Fairbairn, Douglas Wozniak, Jerry Neyer

• Committee: House Regulatory Reform

• Purpose: Modify allowable marijuana possession and cultivation limits

• Tie-Barred: Must be passed alongside HB 5105

Proposed Possession Limits

• Usable Marijuana:

  • Reduced personal possession limits for flower and concentrate

  • Clarifies what constitutes “personal use” vs. trafficking

• Cultivation:

  • Limits the number of plants individuals can grow at home

  • Sets thresholds that trigger misdemeanor or felony charges under HB 5105

You can read the full bill texts here:

• • Read and Follow HB5105
  • Read and Follow HB51057

View the relevant law at [MCL 333.7401]

Don’t forget about HB4951 you didn’t vote for

• Michigan Legislature HB4951 Bill Page
• House Fiscal Agency Legislative Analysis PDF
• Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act Definitions

Legal Defense: Komorn Law PLLC

If you or someone you know is facing marijuana-related charges under from the cannabis enforcement teams or federal drug laws, Attorney Michael Komorn of Komorn Law PLLC offers aggressive and strategic defense. With decades of experience in cannabis law and federal litigation, Komorn Law understands the nuances of Michigan’s evolving marijuana regulations and how to challenge overreach or misapplication in court.

Komorn Law can:

• Challenge unlawful search and seizure
• Dispute quantity assessments and intent
• Navigate federal vs. state law conflicts
• Advocate for reduced or dismissed charges

Supreme Court Rejects Gun Rights Cases, Leaving Assault Weapons Ban Unresolved

In a surprising move, the U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to hear two major gun rights cases, leaving unresolved questions about the constitutionality of assault weapons bans and high-capacity magazine restrictions. While the Court gave no explanation for its decision, several conservative justices voiced concern, signaling that the issue may return to the docket soon.

The cases involved challenges to state laws banning popular firearms like the AR-15 and limiting magazine capacity. These laws were contested under the precedent set by District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), which affirmed an individual’s right to possess firearms for self-defense. The Court’s refusal to hear the cases means lower court rulings upholding these bans remain in effect—for now.

• Assault Weapons Ban Challenges

  Plaintiffs argued that AR-15-style rifles are in “common use” and thus protected under Heller. Lower courts disagreed, citing public safety concerns.

• High-Capacity Magazine Restrictions

  States like California and New York limit magazines to 10 rounds. These laws were upheld despite arguments that they infringe on Second Amendment rights.

• Justice Statements

  Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissented from the denial, suggesting the Court should clarify its stance on modern firearm regulations.

Legal Defense: Komorn Law PLLC

When your rights are on the line, hire Komorn Law, established in 1993, to fight for you from district court to the federal level. Call our office at 248-357-2550.