Having trouble receiving FOX 17? Click here:

State pushes for lawsuit dismissal amid Unemployment Insurance Agency backlash

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

MICHIGAN -- The FOX 17 Problem Solvers got a hold of the state's formal response to a pending federal lawsuit against the Michigan Unemployment Insurance Agency.

Friday, the Michigan Attorney General's Office filed its formal response to the suit. It's 64 pages.

Among many claims, the AG's office says --

  • Plaintiffs in the case improperly asked for federal intervention
  • The state can't be sued in federal court under the 11th amendment (sovereign immunity)
  • The Unemployment Insurance Agency is simply following state law
  • No harm has been done
  • The protest, appeals, and hearing process works

The lead attorney who filed the lawsuit against the state, David Blanchard, said he is reviewing the state's response. The FOX 17 Problem Solvers will let you know what happens next.

Follow Darren Cunningham on Facebook

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

1 Comment

  • Dana Ralston

    Of all the arrogant, presumptuous positions that the state could take, they took one of the worst and most egregious of all.

    – Complaining about asking for federal intervention is basically the state calling people tattletales for going to someone above them that possibly has more power or influence than they do.
    – Pointing out they can’t be sued in federal court may or may not be true, depending on how one interprets the 11th Amendment, but the response comes across as “you can’t touch us”.
    – “Simply following state law”? The old excuse of “I was just following orders/obeying the law” has been used time and again in history to justify actions that were wrong or mistaken, when it should have been obvious that something was amiss.
    – “No harm has been done”, they say? What they’re basically saying is that all of the people in the stories talking about debt problems and bankruptcies are lying about their troubles.
    – The “process works”? Judging by the content of the many stories about people’s dealings with UIA, I’d say the evidence doesn’t support that contention at all.

    Sadly, UIA isn’t the only state agency with this kind of attitude. Friend of the Court and DHS both leap to mind as having the same mentality, especially when someone challenges them.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.