Michigan Court Strikes Down Key Parts of Livestock Waste Permit
Circuit court judge invalidates major portions of livestock waste permit, ruling state regulators violated due process in adding manure restrictions.
LANSING, MICHIGAN — A circuit court judge has invalidated major portions of Michigan’s new permit governing large-scale livestock operations, ruling that state environmental regulators violated constitutional due process requirements when implementing stricter manure management restrictions.
Judge Richard Garcia of Ingham County’s 30th Circuit Court issued the June 8 order, determining that the head of the Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy exceeded proper authority by adding provisions that had been previously rejected through the administrative review process.
Director Added Rejected Provisions
The controversy centers on EGLE Director Phil Roos’s final decision last fall establishing new terms for permits regulating concentrated animal feeding operations. Roos included multiple restrictions that an administrative law judge had previously stripped from the permit, including a prohibition on applying animal waste to crop fields during the first two weeks of March.
The disputed permit governs how large-scale livestock farms manage liquid animal waste, with environmental groups pushing for tighter controls to protect Michigan’s waterways from contamination.
Due Process Violation Found
Garcia ruled that the current permit review process violates due process provisions in both state and federal constitutions. The judge found that factory farms and agricultural industry groups who challenged the permit were denied an impartial decision-making process.
The ruling stems from a change in Michigan’s environmental oversight structure. Previously, environmental permits underwent review by the Environmental Permit Review Commission, an independent board that provided checks and balances on regulatory decisions.
Administrative Changes Under Scrutiny
However, Governor Gretchen Whitmer eliminated the Environmental Permit Review Commission in 2024 through an executive order, transferring its authority directly to the head of EGLE. This change concentrated permit approval power in a single agency official rather than maintaining the previous multi-member review board.
The court’s decision represents a setback for environmental advocates who supported the stricter waste management requirements. The contested provisions were designed to prevent runoff from large livestock operations during vulnerable periods when frozen ground and early spring conditions increase the risk of contamination reaching groundwater and surface water sources.
Agricultural industry groups had argued that the additional restrictions were economically burdensome and exceeded the agency’s regulatory authority. The court’s ruling validates their constitutional challenges to the permit process, though it does not address the underlying environmental merits of the contested provisions.
The decision leaves uncertainty about how Michigan will regulate concentrated animal feeding operations going forward, as state officials must now determine whether to appeal the ruling or restructure the permit review process to address the court’s due process concerns.
