Groups Seek to Defend Michigan Proposal 2

Michiganders for Money Out of Politics moved to join two First Amendment lawsuits challenging the ballot measure that bans certain campaign spending.

Updated on Nov. 10, 2026 in Civic Engagement

Bold flat-color editorial illustration of a simplified state capitol dome centered on a pale cream field, with generous negative space. — Michigan supporters of Proposal 2, which voters approved with over 80% support, moved to join two First Amendment lawsuits seeking to strike the campaign spending ban. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Should outside groups spending on political ads be required to disclose their funding?

Organizers behind Proposal 2 filed a motion to intervene in two lawsuits challenging the measure, which passed with over 80% support on November 3, 2026. The measure bans campaign spending from regulated electric and gas utilities and major government contractors.

Why it matters

The intervention would give supporters a direct role in defending the measure rather than relying on state officials to do so. Michigan residents will see how the courts treat restrictions on political spending by these industries.

Proposal 2 passed with over 80% support on November 3, 2026, and bans campaign spending from regulated electric and gas utilities and major government contractors. Whether the court will allow the proposed intervenors to join the case has not yet been determined.

The players

Joanna Whaley

Whaley is a Michigan state representative-elect who faced outside-funded advertising during her 2026 campaign and intends to run for re-election.

Dana Nessel

Nessel is Michigan's Attorney General and is one of the current defendants in the lawsuits challenging Proposal 2.

Jocelyn Benson

Benson is Michigan's Secretary of State and is one of the current defendants in the lawsuits challenging Proposal 2.

The details

The Michiganders for Money Out of Politics ballot committee, Clean Water Action, Voters Not Politicians, and state Rep.-elect Joanna Whaley filed the motion. The Mackinac Center and utility companies each filed one of the two lawsuits, and the intervenors argue they have a direct stake in every provision of the measure.

November 3, 2026: Proposal 2 passed at the ballot.
Days after the election: Mackinac Center and utility companies filed lawsuits.
November 10, 2026: Intervention motion reported.

Political Context

The challenges argue that restricting campaign spending by certain industries conflicts with First Amendment protections for political speech. Opponents of Proposal 2 contend the measure goes too far in limiting who can participate in political campaigns.

The measure restricts campaign spending from regulated utilities and major government contractors, which affects which groups can fund political messaging in Michigan. Candidates and voters should expect continued legal uncertainty while the lawsuits proceed.

The takeaway

Ballot measures on campaign finance can face prolonged legal challenges, so voters and candidates should watch how the courts rule on these First Amendment questions.