reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
MI Comp L § 3.53 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 282 of 1964 - Congressional Apportionment (3.51 - 3.55)|Section 3.53 - Map and Legal Description; Preparation and Conveyance by Secretary of State; Appropriation.

3.53 Map and legal description; preparation and conveyance by secretary of state; appropriation.Sec. 3.  (1) The secretary of state shall prepare a map and a legal description of each district constituted under this act. The legal description shall be in terms of political subdivisions, such as counties, cities, and townships; man-made features, such as streets, roads, highways, and railroads; and natural features, such as waterways, which political subdivisions and man-made and natural features form the boundaries of the district. The secretary of state shall convey the map and legal description of each district to the legislature and the governor.  (2) For the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, there is appropriated for the department of state the sum of $30,000.00 for the costs incurred by the secretary of state in complying with subsection (1). 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).
MI Comp L § 3.54a (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 282 of 1964 - Congressional Apportionment (3.51 - 3.55)|Section 3.54a - Redistricting Plan; Principles.

3.54a Redistricting plan; principles.Sec. 4a.  All of the following apply to the redistricting plan in section 1a:  (a) The number of county breaks in the redistricting plan is determined by the following principles:  (i) Breaking a county line means assigning part of the population of a county to 1 or more counties in the formation of a district.  (ii) If population is shifted from a county to a single election district, including a district from 2 geographically separate areas, there is 1 break. Except as provided in subparagraph (iii), if population from a county is shifted to 2 or more election districts, there are 2 or more breaks.  (iii) If 1 part of a county is shifted to a district and the rest of the county is shifted to another district, there is 1 break.  (b) The redistricting plan was designed to comply fully with both section 2 of the voting rights act of 1965, 42 USC 1973, and the requirements of the equal protection clause of amendment XIV of the constitution of the United States, as set forth in Shaw v Reno, 509 US 630 (1993), and subsequent cases concerning racial gerrymandering. In light of these dual obligations, the plan avoids any practice or district lines that result in the denial of any racial or ethnic group's equal opportunity to elect a representative of its choice and, at the same time, does not subordinate traditional redistricting principles for the purpose of accomplishing a racial gerrymander or creating a majority-minority district. As a consequence, the plan does not result in retrogression or dilution of minority voting strength, particularly in light of the demographic limitations caused by relative population losses and the neutral criteria set forth in section 3 of the congressional redistricting act, 1999 PA 221, MCL 3.63. However, the plan does not sacrifice traditional neutral principles, such as, most importantly, preservation of county and municipal boundaries, for the purpose of engaging in a gerrymander that unnecessarily favors 1 racial group over others.  (c) The redistricting plan for congressional districts consists of 14 single-member districts composed of convenient territories contiguous by land. History: Add. 2011, Act 128, Eff. Mar. 28, 2012
MI Comp L § 3.55 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 282 of 1964 - Congressional Apportionment (3.51 - 3.55)|Section 3.55 - “Block” and “Tract” Defined.

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).
MI Comp L § 3.61 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 221 of 1999 - Congressional Redistricting Act (3.61 - 3.64)|Section 3.61 - Short Title.

3.61 Short title. Sec. 1.  This act shall be known and may be cited as the "congressional redistricting act". History: 1999, Act 221, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
MI Comp L § 3.62 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 221 of 1999 - Congressional Redistricting Act (3.61 - 3.64)|Section 3.62 - Enactment of Redistricting Plan for Congressional Districts Apportioned to Michigan.

3.62 Enactment of redistricting plan for congressional districts apportioned to Michigan. Sec. 2.  Not later than November 1, 2001, and every 10 years thereafter, the legislature shall enact a redistricting plan for congressional districts apportioned to Michigan. History: 1999, Act 221, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
MI Comp L § 3.64 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 221 of 1999 - Congressional Redistricting Act (3.61 - 3.64)|Section 3.64 - Severability Provision.

3.64 Severability provision. Sec. 4.  If any portion of this act or the application of this act to any person or circumstances is found to be invalid by a court, the invalidity shall not affect the remaining portions or applications of the act which can be given effect without the invalid portion or application. The provisions of this act are severable. History: 1999, Act 221, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
MI Comp L § 3.71 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 222 of 1999 - Congressional Redistricting Plans (3.71 - 3.75)|Section 3.71 - Jurisdiction of Supreme Court to Hear and Decide Cases Involving Congressional Redistricting Plan.

3.71 Jurisdiction of supreme court to hear and decide cases involving congressional redistricting plan. Sec. 1.  The supreme court has original and exclusive state jurisdiction to hear and decide all cases and controversies in Michigan's 1 court of justice involving a congressional redistricting plan. A case or controversy in Michigan's 1 court of justice involving a congressional redistricting plan shall not be commenced in or heard by the state court of appeals or any state trial court. If a case or controversy involves a congressional redistricting plan but an application or petition for review was not filed under section 2 or 3, the supreme court may, but is not obligated to, undertake all or a portion of the procedures described in section 4. History: 1999, Act 222, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
MI Comp L § 3.72 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 222 of 1999 - Congressional Redistricting Plans (3.71 - 3.75)|Section 3.72 - Application for Review by Supreme Court of Redistricting Plan; Modification of Plan by Court; Remand of Plan to Special Master.

3.72 Application for review by supreme court of redistricting plan; modification of plan by court; remand of plan to special master. Sec. 2.  Upon the application of an elector filed not later than 60 days after the adoption of the enactment of a congressional redistricting plan, the supreme court, exercising original state jurisdiction may review any congressional redistricting plan enacted by the legislature, and may modify that plan or remand that plan to a special master for further action if the plan fails to comply with the congressional redistricting act. History: 1999, Act 222, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
MI Comp L § 3.73 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 222 of 1999 - Congressional Redistricting Plans (3.71 - 3.75)|Section 3.73 - Requesting Supreme Court to Prepare Redistricting Plan for Congressional Districts.

3.73 Requesting supreme court to prepare redistricting plan for congressional districts. Sec. 3.  Unless legislation enacting a redistricting plan for congressional districts is approved on or before the deadline established in the congressional redistricting act, a political party, or a member of the United States house of representatives on or after November 2 immediately following the deadline established in the congressional redistricting act, may petition or otherwise file pleadings or papers with the supreme court requesting that the supreme court prepare a redistricting plan for congressional districts in compliance with the redistricting guidelines provided in the congressional redistricting act. History: 1999, Act 222, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
MI Comp L § 3.74 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 222 of 1999 - Congressional Redistricting Plans (3.71 - 3.75)|Section 3.74 - Actions to Be Taken by Supreme Court Upon Application or Petition for Review.

3.74 Actions to be taken by supreme court upon application or petition for review. Sec. 4.  If an application or petition for review is filed in the supreme court under section 2 or 3, the supreme court shall do all of the following:  (a) Exercising original state jurisdiction or other state jurisdiction pursuant to Michigan court rule 7.301(A)(7) or any successor court rule, undertake the preparation of a redistricting plan for congressional districts.  (b) Appoint and utilize a special master or masters as the court considers necessary.  (c) Provide, by order, for the submission of proposed redistricting plans by political parties and other interested persons who have been allowed to intervene. Political parties shall be granted intervention as of right.  (d) After hearing oral argument or appointing special masters, propose 1 plan for consideration of the parties and the public, and make that plan available for public inspection at least 30 days before the time set for hearing in subdivision (f).  (e) Prescribe, by order or otherwise, the procedure for and the deadlines pertaining to filing objections and rebuttal to the proposed plan in advance of the hearing scheduled in subdivision (f).  (f) Hold a hearing on the proposed plan at a time determined by the court but not later than March 1 immediately following the deadline established in the congressional redistricting act.  (g) In order to provide for the orderly election process and for candidates to meet statutory deadlines for filing and residency, and after making any revisions to the proposed plan that the supreme court considers necessary, order a redistricting plan for congressional districts not later than April 1 immediately following the deadline established in the congressional redistricting act. History: 1999, Act 222, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
MI Comp L § 3.75 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 222 of 1999 - Congressional Redistricting Plans (3.71 - 3.75)|Section 3.75 - Severability Provision.

3.75 Severability provision. Sec. 5.  If any portion of this act or application of any portion of this act to any person or circumstance is found to be invalid by a court, the invalidity shall not affect the remaining portions or applications of this act that can be given effect without the invalid portions or application if the remaining portions are not determined by the court to be inoperable. The provisions of this act are severable. History: 1999, Act 222, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
MI Comp L § 3.111 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 207 of 1969 - Purchase of Rifles and Shotguns (3.111 - 3.112)|Section 3.111 - Rifles and Shotguns; Purchases by Residents.

3.111 Rifles and shotguns; purchases by residents.Sec. 1.  Residents of this state may purchase rifles and shotguns in any state if they conform to the federal gun control act of 1968, Public Law 90-618, and the regulations issued under that act, as administered by the secretary of the treasury, and with the laws of the state in which the purchase is made. History: 1969, Act 207, Imd. Eff. Aug. 6, 1969 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 378, Imd. Eff. Dec. 18, 2012
MI Comp L § 3.112 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 207 of 1969 - Purchase of Rifles and Shotguns (3.111 - 3.112)|Section 3.112 - Rifles and Shotguns; Purchases by Nonresidents.

3.112 Rifles and shotguns; purchases by nonresidents.Sec. 2.  Residents of another state may purchase rifles and shotguns in this state if they conform to the federal gun control act of 1968, Public Law 90-618, and the regulations issued under that act, as administered by the secretary of the treasury, and with the laws of the state in which the purchaser resides. History: 1969, Act 207, Imd. Eff. Aug. 6, 1969 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 378, Imd. Eff. Dec. 18, 2012
MI Comp L § 3.161 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 124 of 1960 - Highway Reciprocity Board (3.161 - 3.177)|Section 3.161 - Michigan Highway Reciprocity Board; Definitions.

3.161 Michigan highway reciprocity board; definitions. Sec. 1.  When used in this act:  (a) "Person" means any individual, firm, partnership, association and corporation.  (b) "Jurisdiction" means other states of the United States, the District of Columbia, territories and possessions of the United States, foreign countries or political subdivisions of foreign countries.  (c) "Properly registered" as applied to place of registration or licensing means the jurisdiction in which the board acting under section 5 determines a vehicle must be registered or licensed in order to be granted the privileges and benefits of this act when operating in this state.  (d) "Board" means the Michigan highway reciprocity board. History: 1960, Act 124, Imd. Eff. Apr. 26, 1960
MI Comp L § 3.162 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 124 of 1960 - Highway Reciprocity Board (3.161 - 3.177)|Section 3.162 - Creation, Composition.

3.162 Creation, composition. Sec. 2.  There is hereby created the Michigan highway reciprocity board to consist of the secretary of state, the state highway commissioner and the chairman of the Michigan public service commission. History: 1960, Act 124, Imd. Eff. Apr. 26, 1960
MI Comp L § 3.163 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 124 of 1960 - Highway Reciprocity Board (3.161 - 3.177)|Section 3.163 - Authority to Make Reciprocal Agreements and Compacts.

3.163 Authority to make reciprocal agreements and compacts. Sec. 3.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the board may enter into and make such reciprocal compacts, agreements or arrangements as the board deems proper or expedient and in the interests of the people of this state, with the proper authorities of other jurisdictions, either individually or with a group of jurisdictions, concerning the fees, charges, taxation, operation and regulation of trucks, tractors, trailers, automobiles, buses, and all other automotive equipment engaged in international, interstate or intrastate commerce upon and over the public highways. History: 1960, Act 124, Imd. Eff. Apr. 26, 1960
MI Comp L § 3.164 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 124 of 1960 - Highway Reciprocity Board (3.161 - 3.177)|Section 3.164 - Compacts and Agreements; Conditions, Contents, Requirements.

3.164 Compacts and agreements; conditions, contents, requirements. Sec. 4.  The compacts, agreements, or arrangements may grant to the owners or operators of vehicles properly registered in the jurisdictions, with which made, privileges and exemptions substantially like and equal to those granted by such jurisdictions to owners or operators of vehicles properly registered in this state, and shall provide that the owners or operators of vehicles registered in this state who have complied with all the laws, rules and regulations of this state respecting registration, registration fees, taxes, fees and operation of motor vehicles within this state, including owners or operators who comply with the provisions of any compact, agreement or arrangement which provides for the payment of less than all the registration fees or taxes otherwise payable to this state, when using the highways of such other jurisdictions, shall receive substantially equal privileges and exemptions. The compacts, agreements or arrangements may exempt the owners or operators of such foreign registered vehicles, using the highways of this state, from the payment of any or all taxes, fees or other charges imposed by the laws of this state, or may provide for the payment of a proportional part of such taxes, fees or other charges, with such appropriate restrictions, conditions and privileges as the board in its discretion determines to be in the best interest of the health, welfare and safety of the people of this state. Before any owner or operator may become entitled to the privileges and exemptions of any compact, agreement or arrangement, the person first must have his vehicle or vehicles properly registered under the laws of the jurisdiction which the board, acting under section 5, determines to be proper for his vehicles or under the provisions of any compact, agreement or arrangement to which his jurisdiction is a party, and shall conspicuously display a legal registration plate upon each vehicle so registered as prescribed by the law of his jurisdiction or by the terms of any compact, agreement or arrangement, and the operator of each vehicle while in possession and control thereof shall have upon his person a certificate of registration, or other official evidence of compliance with the above requirements, issued for the vehicle. History: 1960, Act 124, Imd. Eff. Apr. 26, 1960
MI Comp L § 3.165 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 124 of 1960 - Highway Reciprocity Board (3.161 - 3.177)|Section 3.165 - Jurisdiction for Registration and Licensing of Vehicles.

3.165 Jurisdiction for registration and licensing of vehicles. Sec. 5.  In administering the provisions of this act, the board may determine the proper jurisdiction for the registration or licensing for all vehicles whose owners or operators seek the privileges and benefits of this act. The board, in determining the jurisdiction where owners or operators must register or license their vehicles in order to be eligible for the privileges and benefits of this act, may require the vehicles to be registered or licensed in any of the following jurisdictions:  (a) The jurisdiction where the person registering the vehicle maintains his legal residence.  (b) The jurisdiction in which the person registering the vehicle operates a commercial enterprise or a branch of a commercial enterprise.  (c) The jurisdiction in which the vehicle is most frequently dispatched, garaged, serviced, maintained, operated or otherwise controlled in or from.  (d) The jurisdiction where, because of an agreement or arrangement between 2 or more jurisdictions, or pursuant to a declaration, the board designates as the domicile of such vehicle. History: 1960, Act 124, Imd. Eff. Apr. 26, 1960
MI Comp L § 3.166 (2021)
2021 Michigan Compiled Laws|Chapter 3 - Federal and Interstate Relations|Act 124 of 1960 - Highway Reciprocity Board (3.161 - 3.177)|Section 3.166 - Registration or Licensing of Vehicle Operated From a Domicile in Other Jurisdiction.

3.166 Registration or licensing of vehicle operated from a domicile in other jurisdiction. Sec. 6.  A compact, agreement or arrangement entered into under the authority of this act, may contain provisions authorizing the registration or licensing in another jurisdiction of vehicles located in or operated from a domicile in the other jurisdiction, which vehicles otherwise would be required to be registered or licensed in this state; and in such event the exemptions and privileges extended by the compact, agreement or arrangement shall apply to such vehicles. History: 1960, Act 124, Imd. Eff. Apr. 26, 1960