In a decisive ruling, the Michigan Supreme Court has brought an end to a long-standing legal battle related to the Flint water crisis. The court’s recent order marks the culmination of attempts by state prosecutors to pursue criminal charges against those responsible for the public health disaster that unfolded in 2014. This article delves into the court’s decision, the background of the Flint water crisis, the charges, and the prosecutors’ reactions.
The Michigan Supreme Court’s Decision
On Tuesday, the Michigan Supreme Court issued an order that effectively closes the door on the state’s appeal against former Governor Rick Snyder. This decision is the last-ditch effort by state prosecutors to seek criminal charges against the individuals involved in the Flint water crisis.
The court’s order serves as a response to an appeal filed earlier this year by the state’s Flint Water Prosecution Team, aiming to reopen Rick Snyder’s case. The charges against Snyder and other former state officials were previously dismissed due to procedural errors. Last year, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that a judge had acted improperly as a “one-man grand jury” to indict the officials. Following this ruling, the cases were remanded to lower courts for dismissal, and subsequent attempts to revive the charges were met with failure.
The Flint Water Crisis: A Recap
The Flint water crisis began in 2014 when the city decided to switch its water sources. Tragically, this decision led to lead contamination of the city’s water supply, a dangerous neurotoxin, especially harmful to children. As Flint grappled with deteriorating water quality, it also witnessed an outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease, causing multiple deaths.
At the time, Rick Snyder was serving as the governor of Michigan, making him a central figure in the unfolding crisis. Snyder faced two counts of willful neglect of duty by a public official, a misdemeanor charge.
State prosecutors, led by Deputy Attorney General Fadwa Hammoud and Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy, sought charges against nine ex-officials, including Snyder, Nick Lyon, Dr. Eden Wells, Nancy Peeler, Howard Croft, Richard Baird, Jarrod Agen, Darnell Earley, and Gerald Ambrose, all of whom played roles in the Flint water crisis.
The Charges and the Legal Battle
In September, Michigan Supreme Court justices declined to hear appeals in seven of the other officials’ cases. Chief Justice Elizabeth Clement abstained from the cases, citing her previous role as Snyder’s chief legal counsel.
The joint statement issued by the prosecution team on Tuesday expressed their profound disappointment in the court’s decision: “Today, our Supreme Court has put the final nail in the coffin of the Flint Water Prosecutions. The Court decided that a process which has stood in place for over a century, one whose legitimacy the Court upheld repeatedly, was simply not ‘good enough’ to hold those responsible for the Flint Water Crisis accountable for their actions. Our disappointment in the Michigan Supreme Court is exceeded only by our sorrow for the people of Flint.”
Despite this setback, the prosecution team has pledged to release a comprehensive report on their efforts to bring criminal charges related to the Flint water crisis next year.
Current state law prevents the evidence presented to Judge David Newblatt, who served as the one-man grand jury and indicted the former officials, from being made public. Prosecutors have announced their intention to collaborate with state lawmakers to amend this law, potentially increasing transparency in future investigations.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel appointed Fadwa Hammoud and Kym Worthy to lead the state’s prosecution in the Flint Water Crisis cases after taking office in 2019. Nessel took a proactive stance, implementing a “conflict wall” to separate her involvement in civil litigation from the criminal prosecution related to the crisis. Following their appointment, state prosecutors dismissed prior charges initiated by Nessel’s predecessor, Attorney General Bill Schuette, and initiated a broader investigation. At that time, Nessel assured Flint residents, saying, “justice delayed is not always justice denied.”
Prosecutors’ Disappointment
The decision of the Michigan Supreme Court marks a somber conclusion to a legal saga that has spanned several years. It signifies that, at least through the current legal framework, accountability for the Flint water crisis may remain elusive. The prosecutors, who have been dedicated to seeking justice for the people of Flint, have expressed their deep disappointment in the court’s ruling.
A Glimpse into Future Efforts
While the court’s decision is undoubtedly a significant setback, the Flint Water Prosecution Team remains undeterred. They have affirmed their commitment to releasing a detailed report on their efforts and will work with lawmakers to change existing laws that restrict the release of critical evidence. Their persistence in seeking justice for the people of Flint suggests that the fight for accountability may continue through different avenues.
Conclusion
The Michigan Supreme Court’s recent decision, signaling the end of the appeal against former Governor Rick Snyder, marks a turning point in the Flint water crisis legal saga. As prosecutors express their disappointment, it remains to be seen what the future holds for those seeking accountability for the public health disaster that befell Flint in 2014. While one chapter may have closed, the book on the Flint water crisis is far from being written, and future efforts to secure justice and transparency continue to unfold.