Columns
Americans have had their mail-in ballots counted after Election Day for generations - a Supreme Court ruling could end the practice
January 12 ,2026
What is an election and when is it completed?
:
Amanda Klekoski von Koppenfels
University of Kent
University of Kent
(THE CONVERSATION) — What is an election and when is it completed?
That’s the legal question at the heart of Watson v. Republican National Committee, the mail-in ballot case the U.S. Supreme Court took up in November 2025. The court will most likely hand down a ruling before the midterm elections in 2026.
Mississippi law, similar to that of 15 other states, allows for mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be received by election officials up to five days later, then counted.
But the Republican National Committee is arguing in the Watson case, which was brought against the state of Mississippi in January 2024, that this procedure is not legal. An election, the argument goes, includes the receipt of ballots; therefore, all ballots must be in hand at the close of Election Day – the congressionally established “Tuesday after the first Monday” in November.
President Donald Trump’s March 2025 executive order 14248 similarly calls for ballots to be received no later than Election Day if they are to be counted, saying that doing otherwise “is like allowing persons who arrive 3 days after Election Day, perhaps after a winner has been declared, to vote in person at a former voting precinct, which would be absurd.”
The Supreme Court’s decision on mail-in ballots could have major consequences for the 47.6 million Americans who voted by mail in 2024, as well as more than 900,000 overseas military and civilian voters covered under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. More than 28 million of the 47.6 million domestic mail-in votes and nearly 800,000 of the 900,000 votes cast and counted under the uniformed and overseas citizens act were from states that allow for return of mail-in ballots after Election Day.
As a political scientist and scholar of migration, I have conducted research for over 20 years on military service members and civilian U.S. citizens living overseas.
Currently, 16 states plus the District of Columbia allow domestic absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive after Election Day; 29 states extend that right to military and civilian voters living overseas, recognizing that international mail often delays ballot return.
According to the U.S Constitution, states administer elections. Under the equal protection clause, however, the federal government can pass legislation to prevent inequalities in access to voting. This includes facilitating the right to vote of military service members and civilian U.S. citizens living overseas.
The Supreme Court will decide whether federal law overrides state election administration in determining whether ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but arrive later can be counted.
—————
A 250-year history
The history of absentee, or mail-in, ballots in U.S. elections stretches back 2-1/2 centuries.
Soldiers first voted by mail during the American Revolution, when men from the town of Hollis, New Hampshire, wrote their town leaders asking to have votes counted in local elections.
Pennsylvania passed the first law allowing soldiers to vote absentee in the War of 1812, a right expanded in the Civil War when 19 Union and seven Confederate states allowed soldiers to vote absentee.
Absentee voting for soldiers from all states was codified in federal law in 1942. A 1944 amendment specified that ballots that were postmarked by Election Day and arrived within two weeks after Election Day could be counted.
Some civilians residing overseas, including civilian government employees and spouses and dependents of military and civilian employees, gained absentee ballot voting rights with the 1955 Federal Voting Assistance Act. All overseas U.S. citizens were enfranchised with the 1975 Overseas Citizens Voting Act. The 1986 Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act consolidated military and civilian voting rules. Later laws addressed electronic communications.
Over 1,000 military service members requested an absentee ballot in Mississippi’s 2024 election, along with nearly 1,000 civilian overseas voters. Nationally, more than 900,000 people voted in 2024 under the uniformed and overseas citizens act.
Many of these U.S. citizens would be affected by a ballot receipt deadline on Election Day. Their votes, coming from around the world, are often not able to be counted because of late arrival.
—————
Under the magnifying glass in Florida
Overseas absentee military and civilian ballots came to widespread notice in Florida in the 2000 presidential election. That election – and ultimately the presidency — centered on state election law being waived by canvassing boards under pressure from the Republican Party to count military and civilian absentee ballots received after Election Day.
The Supreme Court decided in December 2000 to stop further counting of mail-in ballots received after Election Day because of tight certification deadlines, with the Electoral College meeting just six days later.
Congress was concerned about the unequal treatment of ballots at home and abroad in the 2000 election. To move toward addressing these concerns, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act in 2002, which includes measures to facilitate overseas voting.
—————
Ensuring that everyone gets a vote
Increasing mail-in voting has been a question of making sure everyone who qualifies to vote can do so. Oregon was the first state, in 1998, to offer mail-in voting. Surveys have shown that more Democrats than Republicans voted by mail in 2020. Sending ballots to all voters reduces that gap.
By 2020, 33 states offered “no excuse” domestic absentee voting, with others expanding or facilitating mail-in voting during the COVID-19 pandemic that year.
The Federal Voting Assistance Program is charged with making it easier for overseas voters to vote. It continues to find obstacles, including problems in returning ballots on time. Meanwhile, Florida election supervisors in November 2025 requested that Florida officials reinstate a checkbox that was dropped from Florida absentee ballots in 2021. The checkbox allowed the voter to request an absentee ballot for the next election.
—————
Mail-in ballot security
Following concerns about the security of mail-in ballots in the 2000 election in Florida, the 2002 Help America Vote Act required that all states have a minimum security requirement.
The multiple levels of scrutiny include signature comparison, ballot tracking and penalties for malfeasance from the moment of registration to ballot request, to ballot receipt. With these layers of security there were only an estimated four fraudulent votes cast for every 10 million mail-in ballots in the 2016, 2018, 2020 and 2022 U.S. general elections.
—————
Mail-in voting elsewhere
The United States is one of 32 countries worldwide that allow mail-in voting for at least some of its citizens. These include the United Kingdom since 1945 and Germany since 1957.
In Germany’s federal elections in 2025, 37% of all voters, or 18.5 million citizens, cast a ballot by mail. German citizens who are eligible to vote automatically receive ballots. In the United Kingdom’s 2024 election, just under 5%, or nearly 1.3 million citizens, applied for mail-in ballots.
—————
The bottom line
The Supreme Court case could reshape the voting landscape in the United States, potentially affecting 47 million people, including some 5 million military and civilian voters living abroad. Watson v. Republican National Committee could also affect laws in 29 states. The outcome of the case has the potential to make voting more difficult for millions of civilian and military voters at home and abroad.
That’s the legal question at the heart of Watson v. Republican National Committee, the mail-in ballot case the U.S. Supreme Court took up in November 2025. The court will most likely hand down a ruling before the midterm elections in 2026.
Mississippi law, similar to that of 15 other states, allows for mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day to be received by election officials up to five days later, then counted.
But the Republican National Committee is arguing in the Watson case, which was brought against the state of Mississippi in January 2024, that this procedure is not legal. An election, the argument goes, includes the receipt of ballots; therefore, all ballots must be in hand at the close of Election Day – the congressionally established “Tuesday after the first Monday” in November.
President Donald Trump’s March 2025 executive order 14248 similarly calls for ballots to be received no later than Election Day if they are to be counted, saying that doing otherwise “is like allowing persons who arrive 3 days after Election Day, perhaps after a winner has been declared, to vote in person at a former voting precinct, which would be absurd.”
The Supreme Court’s decision on mail-in ballots could have major consequences for the 47.6 million Americans who voted by mail in 2024, as well as more than 900,000 overseas military and civilian voters covered under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. More than 28 million of the 47.6 million domestic mail-in votes and nearly 800,000 of the 900,000 votes cast and counted under the uniformed and overseas citizens act were from states that allow for return of mail-in ballots after Election Day.
As a political scientist and scholar of migration, I have conducted research for over 20 years on military service members and civilian U.S. citizens living overseas.
Currently, 16 states plus the District of Columbia allow domestic absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive after Election Day; 29 states extend that right to military and civilian voters living overseas, recognizing that international mail often delays ballot return.
According to the U.S Constitution, states administer elections. Under the equal protection clause, however, the federal government can pass legislation to prevent inequalities in access to voting. This includes facilitating the right to vote of military service members and civilian U.S. citizens living overseas.
The Supreme Court will decide whether federal law overrides state election administration in determining whether ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but arrive later can be counted.
—————
A 250-year history
The history of absentee, or mail-in, ballots in U.S. elections stretches back 2-1/2 centuries.
Soldiers first voted by mail during the American Revolution, when men from the town of Hollis, New Hampshire, wrote their town leaders asking to have votes counted in local elections.
Pennsylvania passed the first law allowing soldiers to vote absentee in the War of 1812, a right expanded in the Civil War when 19 Union and seven Confederate states allowed soldiers to vote absentee.
Absentee voting for soldiers from all states was codified in federal law in 1942. A 1944 amendment specified that ballots that were postmarked by Election Day and arrived within two weeks after Election Day could be counted.
Some civilians residing overseas, including civilian government employees and spouses and dependents of military and civilian employees, gained absentee ballot voting rights with the 1955 Federal Voting Assistance Act. All overseas U.S. citizens were enfranchised with the 1975 Overseas Citizens Voting Act. The 1986 Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act consolidated military and civilian voting rules. Later laws addressed electronic communications.
Over 1,000 military service members requested an absentee ballot in Mississippi’s 2024 election, along with nearly 1,000 civilian overseas voters. Nationally, more than 900,000 people voted in 2024 under the uniformed and overseas citizens act.
Many of these U.S. citizens would be affected by a ballot receipt deadline on Election Day. Their votes, coming from around the world, are often not able to be counted because of late arrival.
—————
Under the magnifying glass in Florida
Overseas absentee military and civilian ballots came to widespread notice in Florida in the 2000 presidential election. That election – and ultimately the presidency — centered on state election law being waived by canvassing boards under pressure from the Republican Party to count military and civilian absentee ballots received after Election Day.
The Supreme Court decided in December 2000 to stop further counting of mail-in ballots received after Election Day because of tight certification deadlines, with the Electoral College meeting just six days later.
Congress was concerned about the unequal treatment of ballots at home and abroad in the 2000 election. To move toward addressing these concerns, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act in 2002, which includes measures to facilitate overseas voting.
—————
Ensuring that everyone gets a vote
Increasing mail-in voting has been a question of making sure everyone who qualifies to vote can do so. Oregon was the first state, in 1998, to offer mail-in voting. Surveys have shown that more Democrats than Republicans voted by mail in 2020. Sending ballots to all voters reduces that gap.
By 2020, 33 states offered “no excuse” domestic absentee voting, with others expanding or facilitating mail-in voting during the COVID-19 pandemic that year.
The Federal Voting Assistance Program is charged with making it easier for overseas voters to vote. It continues to find obstacles, including problems in returning ballots on time. Meanwhile, Florida election supervisors in November 2025 requested that Florida officials reinstate a checkbox that was dropped from Florida absentee ballots in 2021. The checkbox allowed the voter to request an absentee ballot for the next election.
—————
Mail-in ballot security
Following concerns about the security of mail-in ballots in the 2000 election in Florida, the 2002 Help America Vote Act required that all states have a minimum security requirement.
The multiple levels of scrutiny include signature comparison, ballot tracking and penalties for malfeasance from the moment of registration to ballot request, to ballot receipt. With these layers of security there were only an estimated four fraudulent votes cast for every 10 million mail-in ballots in the 2016, 2018, 2020 and 2022 U.S. general elections.
—————
Mail-in voting elsewhere
The United States is one of 32 countries worldwide that allow mail-in voting for at least some of its citizens. These include the United Kingdom since 1945 and Germany since 1957.
In Germany’s federal elections in 2025, 37% of all voters, or 18.5 million citizens, cast a ballot by mail. German citizens who are eligible to vote automatically receive ballots. In the United Kingdom’s 2024 election, just under 5%, or nearly 1.3 million citizens, applied for mail-in ballots.
—————
The bottom line
The Supreme Court case could reshape the voting landscape in the United States, potentially affecting 47 million people, including some 5 million military and civilian voters living abroad. Watson v. Republican National Committee could also affect laws in 29 states. The outcome of the case has the potential to make voting more difficult for millions of civilian and military voters at home and abroad.
Cooking with Love: Lentil soup from Yemen brings calm and comfort
January 12 ,2026
I would add that a soup is also the song of the heart. Seeing a bowl of soup, somehow, automatically relaxes me, and every spoonful in my mouth eases my muscles.
Majida Rashid
Soup is the song of the hearth…and the home.
– Chef Louis P. De Gouy
I would add that a soup is also the song of the heart. Seeing a bowl of soup, somehow, automatically relaxes me, and every spoonful in my mouth eases my muscles.
Traditional Pakistani soup is chicken or bone broth. It is especially made for new mothers. In some areas of Pakistan, women are fed the broth every day, be it winter or summer, for 40 days after the childbirth.
I was introduced to proper soups in Iran. Iranian soups are called Aash and they could be a complete meal on their own. Soups of other Middle Eastern countries are different from Iranian Aash. They are slightly easier to make.
Those soups came in handy when I moved to Ann Arbor, Michigan. After living in the clement weather of Botswana, Southern Africa, Michigan winters felt brutal. Sometimes even the weather advisory repeatedly suggested to not go out unless necessary, as long exposure could result in frostbite.
But staying inside was welcoming depression. So, I biked in the neighborhood, even in the lowest of temperatures. I would wrap myself in a few layers of clothing and double layer of socks and gloves and wear a ninja like bike mask. Next, I would bike for a quarter of a mile, come home, warm myself and bike again. Once even a police car followed me! Anyway, at the end of a two-mile ride, I felt uplifted but hungry. Then I took refuge in soups to calm myself.
The following lentil soup, Shourba Bilsen, is originally from Yemen. It’s hearty and nutritious. Other than high fiber, lentils also are a good source of protein, a little iron and folates. They also keep sugar spikes under control.
This soup is slightly different from Shourbat Adas, the lentil soup that is served in Middle Eastern restaurants. While the latter is made with skinned orange lentils, whole brown Middle Eastern lentils are used for Shourba Bilsen. Other beans like ful medames, fava beans, can also be used. Ful medames are popular beans in the Levant region and in Egyptian cuisine. They are even served for breakfast.
Boiling bones results in a lot of froth on the surface. It’s important to skim off even the last bit of the froth. Traditionally the ratio of lentils and beef bones is 2 to 1. But I use 2 lbs of beef bone and 1 cup of lentils instead. The soup refrigerates well for a couple of days.
Shourba Bilsen
(Serves 3-4)
Ingredients
1 cup whole brown lentils
2 lbs bones of beef or lamb
10 cups water
1/4 cup olive oil
1 large onion, finely chopped
4 cloves garlic, chopped
4-6 medium, ripe but firm, tomatoes
1-1/4 cups finely chopped fresh coriander
Salt and black pepper to taste
1/2 teaspoon Moroccan ground ginger, optional
Directions
Wash and soak lentils overnight.
The next day, thoroughly wash the bones.
Put them in a deep pot and add water.
Bring to a boil, lower the heat and simmer.
Skim the froth from the top until there is no more left.
Drain the lentils, add them to the broth, stir gently and bring to a boil.
Skim the froth.
Lower the heat, cover and let it simmer, without stirring, for an hour. Stirring can separate the skin which would float on the soup.
Remove the bones and discard.
Continue simmering the lentils over low heat and prepare the onions.
Heat the oil in a saucepan and sauté the onions until golden brown.
Add the chopped garlic and fry until it changes color.
Leave aside some coriander for garnish and add the remaining to the onions.
Cook for a minute.
Stir in the tomatoes, cover and cook for a few minutes.
Season with salt and pepper to taste.
Add ginger, if using.
Cover and let it simmer for 5 minutes.
Add the tomato mixture to the lentils and stir gently.
Cover and simmer over low heat for another hour or until the soup thickens.
Stir the soup occasionally so it doesn’t stick to the base of the pan.
Pour into a serving bowl and garnish with the reserved coriander.
Serve hot with pita bread and leafy salad.
—————
Foodie Majida Rashid lives in Texas. Food and cooking are her passion. Her presentation about her love of food can be viewed on USA Today’s network: https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=l0xi566VSPo – We Spread Love Through Food. @Frontiers_Of_Flavor. Her philosophical writing can be read at apakistaniwomansjourney. wordpress.com.
– Chef Louis P. De Gouy
I would add that a soup is also the song of the heart. Seeing a bowl of soup, somehow, automatically relaxes me, and every spoonful in my mouth eases my muscles.
Traditional Pakistani soup is chicken or bone broth. It is especially made for new mothers. In some areas of Pakistan, women are fed the broth every day, be it winter or summer, for 40 days after the childbirth.
I was introduced to proper soups in Iran. Iranian soups are called Aash and they could be a complete meal on their own. Soups of other Middle Eastern countries are different from Iranian Aash. They are slightly easier to make.
Those soups came in handy when I moved to Ann Arbor, Michigan. After living in the clement weather of Botswana, Southern Africa, Michigan winters felt brutal. Sometimes even the weather advisory repeatedly suggested to not go out unless necessary, as long exposure could result in frostbite.
But staying inside was welcoming depression. So, I biked in the neighborhood, even in the lowest of temperatures. I would wrap myself in a few layers of clothing and double layer of socks and gloves and wear a ninja like bike mask. Next, I would bike for a quarter of a mile, come home, warm myself and bike again. Once even a police car followed me! Anyway, at the end of a two-mile ride, I felt uplifted but hungry. Then I took refuge in soups to calm myself.
The following lentil soup, Shourba Bilsen, is originally from Yemen. It’s hearty and nutritious. Other than high fiber, lentils also are a good source of protein, a little iron and folates. They also keep sugar spikes under control.
This soup is slightly different from Shourbat Adas, the lentil soup that is served in Middle Eastern restaurants. While the latter is made with skinned orange lentils, whole brown Middle Eastern lentils are used for Shourba Bilsen. Other beans like ful medames, fava beans, can also be used. Ful medames are popular beans in the Levant region and in Egyptian cuisine. They are even served for breakfast.
Boiling bones results in a lot of froth on the surface. It’s important to skim off even the last bit of the froth. Traditionally the ratio of lentils and beef bones is 2 to 1. But I use 2 lbs of beef bone and 1 cup of lentils instead. The soup refrigerates well for a couple of days.
Shourba Bilsen
(Serves 3-4)
Ingredients
1 cup whole brown lentils
2 lbs bones of beef or lamb
10 cups water
1/4 cup olive oil
1 large onion, finely chopped
4 cloves garlic, chopped
4-6 medium, ripe but firm, tomatoes
1-1/4 cups finely chopped fresh coriander
Salt and black pepper to taste
1/2 teaspoon Moroccan ground ginger, optional
Directions
Wash and soak lentils overnight.
The next day, thoroughly wash the bones.
Put them in a deep pot and add water.
Bring to a boil, lower the heat and simmer.
Skim the froth from the top until there is no more left.
Drain the lentils, add them to the broth, stir gently and bring to a boil.
Skim the froth.
Lower the heat, cover and let it simmer, without stirring, for an hour. Stirring can separate the skin which would float on the soup.
Remove the bones and discard.
Continue simmering the lentils over low heat and prepare the onions.
Heat the oil in a saucepan and sauté the onions until golden brown.
Add the chopped garlic and fry until it changes color.
Leave aside some coriander for garnish and add the remaining to the onions.
Cook for a minute.
Stir in the tomatoes, cover and cook for a few minutes.
Season with salt and pepper to taste.
Add ginger, if using.
Cover and let it simmer for 5 minutes.
Add the tomato mixture to the lentils and stir gently.
Cover and simmer over low heat for another hour or until the soup thickens.
Stir the soup occasionally so it doesn’t stick to the base of the pan.
Pour into a serving bowl and garnish with the reserved coriander.
Serve hot with pita bread and leafy salad.
—————
Foodie Majida Rashid lives in Texas. Food and cooking are her passion. Her presentation about her love of food can be viewed on USA Today’s network: https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=l0xi566VSPo – We Spread Love Through Food. @Frontiers_Of_Flavor. Her philosophical writing can be read at apakistaniwomansjourney. wordpress.com.
LEGAL PEOPLE
January 12 ,2026
Butzel attorney and shareholder Michael C. Decker has been appointed practice department chair for Litigation.
:
Butzel Long
Butzel attorney and shareholder Michael C. Decker has been appointed practice department chair for Litigation.Butzel’s Litigation and Dispute Resolution Practice Department represents clients in a range of complex issues and areas of litigation. The firm’s experience includes the handling of appeals, bankruptcy and restructuring matters, business entity disputes including non-compete and trade secret matters, commercial litigation, product liability matters, securities litigation, professional liability matters, real estate litigation, technology and electronic discovery issues, and white-collar criminal defense and investigations.
Based in Butzel’s Troy office, Decker concentrates his practice in the areas of construction and construction litigation.
Decker represents and counsels construction companies and contractors on all aspects of both public and private projects, from inception to completion. He has experience drafting and negotiating contracts, subcontracts, and other agreements and prosecuting and defending performance, payment, and delay related claims on behalf of construction companies and contractors, as well as owners and sureties.
He has experience prosecuting and defending claims concerning the Miss Dig Act and violations on behalf of construction companies and contractors. He has prosecuted and defended such claims before state and federal courts, state and public agencies, and arbitration and mediation panels.
Decker has experience assisting owners and contractors with residential construction related matters. Specifically, he has assisted owners and contractors drafting and negotiating residential construction contracts, subcontracts, and other agreements and resolving performance and payment related issues, as well as prosecuting and defending claims.
He also represents and counsels businesses and business professionals with day-to-day business-related issues.
Decker has been named to Best Lawyers in America® - Litigation-Construction, 2021-2026. He has been recognized as a Rising Star in Business Litigation in 2013-2024 by Super Lawyers. He has been recognized as a Top Lawyer in Construction Litigation in 2017-2025 by DBusiness. In 2021, he was named to Michigan Lawyers Weekly’s “Leaders in the Law.”
Decker is a graduate of Wayne State University Law School (2011). He received a Bachelor of Science from Central Michigan University in 2007.
He is a member of the State Bar of Michigan and the State Bar of Florida. He is admitted to practice in various courts in both Michigan and Florida.
In addition, Butzel recently announced that Vanessa M. Crocetto has been promoted and appointed chief experience officer (CXO), effective January 1, a newly created C-suite role that underscores the firm’s commitment to exceptional client service, innovation, and relationship-driven legal counsel.
The chief experience officer position is a leadership role within the legal industry, designed to ensure that every aspect of a client’s engagement with the firm — from initial contact through matter conclusion and beyond — reflects Butzel’s standard of excellence and its philosophy of unreasonable hospitality. In this role, Crocetto will continue to lead the firm’s Marketing and Business Development functions, while expanding her mandate to oversee firmwide client experience and enrichment strategies.
As a member of Butzel’s C-suite, Crocetto collaborates closely with firm leadership, and attorneys across all nine offices in Michigan and Washington, D.C. She serves as the voice of the client within the firm, aligning business decisions, service delivery, and growth strategies with client priorities. Her work includes guiding key client teams, overseeing structured feedback and engagement programs, advancing value-based pricing conversations, and translating client insights into actionable strategies that enhance service quality and long-term relationships.
Crocetto also leads the firm’s Client Enrichment Strategy, which focuses on deepening client relationships, strengthening loyalty, and identifying new opportunities across practice areas. Through tools such as client journey mapping, analytics, and proactive engagement planning, she helps ensure that every client interaction reflects Butzel’s commitment to thoughtful, relationship-driven service.
Prior to her appointment as CXO, Crocetto served as Butzel’s chief marketing officer, where she helped advance the firm’s marketing, business development, and client-engagement strategy.
She is an active member of the Lex Mundi Marketing & Business Development Network and the Private Enterprise Council, serves on several internal firm committees, and is a member of the Board of Directors for Avalon Healing Center.
Crocetto earned a Bachelor of Arts in Communications and Political Science from Western Michigan University and began her career in the Michigan Legislature before transitioning into the legal industry.
“This role reflects a belief that client service is not a single department or function — it’s a shared responsibility and a cultural commitment,” said Crocetto. “I’m honored to continue leading our marketing and business development efforts while expanding our focus on delivering a cohesive, thoughtful, and human-centered client experience at the highest levels.”
Butzel is also pleased to announce that two local attorneys were recently elected shareholders. They include Derek G. McBride and Barrett R. H. Young.
Based in Butzel’s Detroit office, McBride has more than two decades of experience as a transactional attorney. He is a business lawyer who primarily focuses his practice on Real Estate Law, Commercial Transactions, and Commercial Lending. He counsels and represents clients in a variety of industries on virtually all aspects involved in real estate and business transactions. McBride is recognized for providing practical solutions to clients while always maintaining a focus on their business objectives.
McBride’s experience encompasses positions as in-house counsel for a U.S.-based steel manufacturing entity and a multi-national banking and financial services corporation. He has assisted clients in the origination of complex commercial loans, such as construction and asset-based loans and real estate financing. McBride has experience drafting and negotiating complex commercial agreements that range from software licensing agreements to raw material supply agreements and other intricate commercial contracts, including international shipping agreements.
He also has an interest in the entertainment industry and has advised independent film companies regarding legal issues in connection with the production of feature films and distribution agreements. McBride also has represented clients in trademark and copyright matters, as well as celebrity endorsement deals.
McBride was named to DBusiness - Top Lawyers - Real Estate Law, 2024. He earned a law degree from the Detroit College of Law and a B.A. from Albion College.
Based in Butzel’s Detroit office, Young’s practice includes appeals, commercial litigation, the First Amendment, defamation, privacy, intellectual property, the Freedom of Information Act, the Open Meetings Act, counseling media organizations, and advising schools on student disciplinary issues.
After he earned his undergraduate degree from Harvard University, Young worked in the Faculty Division of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies in Washington, D.C. He then went on to earn his law degree from The University of Chicago.
Following law school, Young was an associate at an Am Law 100 Firm located in Washington, D.C. He also served as the senior counselor to Deputy Secretary of Labor Patrick Pizzella. Before joining Butzel, he clerked for U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Richard Allen Griffin, Sixth Circuit.
Young has been recognized by The Best Lawyers in America® – Ones to Watch in America – Appellate Practice, Commercial Litigation, 2023, 2025–2026.
Additionally, Butzel Chief Information Officer David Williams has been named to Michigan Lawyers Weekly’s 2025 Class of “Unsung Legal Heroes.”
For more than two decades, Williams has been immersed in the Information Technology (IT) industry. Recognized for his innovative approach to providing practical, efficient, and economical IT solutions to organizations, he effectively directs all IT operations for Butzel’s nine office locations throughout the country.
As Butzel’s chief information officer (CIO) and a member of the C-Suite, Williams is responsible for ensuring up-to-date and secure IT systems are in place for the firm’s employees and clients.
Since joining Butzel in February of 2024, Williams has revolutionized the IT department by establishing a team of customer service-focused individuals. This has fostered a “build before buy” mindset, leading to changes in process workflows and efficiency gains for menial tasks. Leveraging the teams’ collective expertise and technical acumen, Williams and his team have brought automation and data analytics to the forefront, improving decision-making processes. Further, he emphasizes cross-department collaboration to ensure that no facet of the organization is overlooked.
Williams has overhauled the company’s infrastructure and cybersecurity posture, implementing new policies that not only align with but often exceed industry standards like the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Prior to joining Butzel, Williams served in executive-level IT leadership roles in the automotive, health care, supply chain, and finance industries. He is passionate about recognizing each member of his team for their unique personal attributes and mentoring each professional to achieve their highest career objectives.
Williams is a four-time recipient of the ICE Mortgage Technology Ellie Mae Innovation Award, which recognizes industry leaders for creating extraordinary solutions to achieve business goals.
Williams earned a B.S. in Information Technology from the University of Phoenix and an associate degree in Design Engineering from the University of Michigan – Flint.
—————
Plunkett Cooney
Plunkett Cooney senior tax attorney Joseph A. Peterson was recently named to serve on the State Bar of Michigan (SBM) District I Character and Fitness Committee.
Appointed by the Board of Commissioners, Peterson’s two-year term began on Jan. 1. In his role as a committee member, he will support the work of the SBM, conducted under the direction and authority of the Board of Law Examiners and Michigan Supreme Court, by investigating the character and fitness of candidates for admission to the bar association.
Peterson serves as the Tax Law Practice Group leader of Plunkett Cooney. He primarily focuses his practice on the resolution of individual and business tax controversies, including audit defense, collections and litigation involving the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and/or state of Michigan governmental entities.
A member of the firm’s Bloomfield Hills office, Peterson’s expertise includes negotiating the resolution of outstanding tax issues by utilizing penalty abatements, lien removals, discharge or subordination, installment agreements and offers in compromise to settle tax balances, which provide individuals and businesses with a fresh start with the IRS or state of Michigan. He has experience obtaining innocent spouse relief for his clients, and he monitors the IRS transcripts of high-net-worth individuals and businesses to prevent additional tax assessments and to address future audits. Peterson also represents clients in U.S. Tax Court.
Peterson also has experience regarding the Employee Retention Credit Program (ERC) and Paycheck Protection Program forgiveness. He also consults with clients to safeguard against any future ERC audits conducted by the IRS relating to the program.
Admitted to practice in state and federal courts in Michigan, as well as in the U.S. Tax Court, Peterson received his law degree from Wayne State University Law School in 2015 and his undergraduate degree from Metropolitan State University of Denver in 2012.
In addition, the Board of Directors of Plunkett Cooney recently named Michael D. Hanchett as one of the firm’s newest partners.
Hanchett serves as co-leader of Plunkett Cooney’s Governmental Law Practice Group, and he is a member of the firm’s Labor and Employment Law Practice Group. His public-sector experience includes general counsel services for municipalities. He also represents their interests in state and federal courts when government liability disputes arise.
Hanchett has expertise defending police liability litigation, including search and seizure, use of force, pursuits and corrections law. In addition, he has experience representing municipalities in employment law, including claims of alleged discrimination, retaliation and civil rights claims brought under state and federal laws.
A member of the firm’s Bloomfield Hills office, Hanchett has the distinction of being honored by Best Lawyers in America as “One to Watch” in municipal law since 2021 and by Michigan Lawyers Weekly as a 2024 “Up & Coming” Lawyer. He graduated from the University of Toledo College of Law in 2016 and received his undergraduate degree from Ferris State University in 2013.
—————
Dickinson Wright PLLC
Dickinson Wright is pleased to announce that Lexi Lauring has joined the firm’s Detroit office as an associate.
Lauring focuses her practice on banking and finance law. She advises banks and other institutional lenders on a broad range of loan origination and workout matters. She assists with the structuring, negotiation, and closing of complex financing transactions, tailoring practical solutions to align with clients’ business objectives.
Lauring is a member of the Board of Directors of the Detroit Bar Association. She is also a member of the Turnaround Management Association, the Association for Corporate Growth, and the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan.
Lauring received her B.A. from Bryn Mawr College and her law degree from Wayne State University Law School.
Dickinson Wright is also pleased to announce that for the seventh year in a row the firm’s real estate practice is ranked among the top three real estate law groups in the 2025 “Best of the Best” report by Midwest Real Estate News.
“We are thrilled to be named the number three law firm in the 2025 Best of the Best report. This year’s rankings, once again, demonstrate our success in working side-by-side with our clients to execute their real estate plans from conception to completion,” says Michael Lusardi, Dickinson Wright Real Estate Practice Group chair.
—————
Foley, Baron, Metzger & Juip PLLC
Foley, Baron, Metzger, & Juip PLLC is pleased to announce the promotion of attorney Silvia Mansoor to associate principal with the firm, effective January 1.
Mansoor focuses her practice on defending healthcare professionals and organizations in complex medical malpractice litigation, as well as business dispute matters. She represents clients throughout all stages of litigation and is known for her strategic approach and strong advocacy on behalf of healthcare providers and organizations.
Before joining Foley, Baron, Metzger, & Juip, Mansoor practiced for several years at a busy Detroit litigation firm where she handled cases from inception through trial. Prior to that, she gained experience in business transactions and startup matters, providing her with a well-rounded foundation that informs her current practice.
Her professional accomplishments have been recognized, including being named a 2024 Michigan Lawyers Weekly Up & Coming Lawyer, receiving the Oakland County Bar Association’s 2019 Bonnie L. Beutler Outstanding New Lawyer Award, and being repeatedly selected as a Rising Star by Super Lawyers.
Mansoor earned her law degree from Michigan State University College of Law. During law school, she also interned with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office, and the 37th District Court of Michigan with Judge Matthew P. Sabaugh, and clerked with an Ingham County law firm.
Foley, Baron, Metzger, & Juip is also pleased to announce the promotion of attorney Chloé Schumacher to principal with the firm.
Schumacher’s practice focuses on representing physicians, mid-level medical providers, nurses, and pharmacists in complex medical malpractice litigation and civil rights defense matters. She has experience defending healthcare providers in claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, particularly those arising from the delivery of healthcare services in county jails and state prisons.
Schumacher earned her law degree from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law in 2016. She interned for U.S. District Court Judge Mona K. Majzoub, Eastern District of Michigan.
Following law school, Schumacher practiced medical malpractice defense at a Detroit law firm, representing physicians, nurses, and healthcare institutions. She also gained in-house experience while working for one of the Big Three automotive companies, where she served as associate labor counsel and was directly involved in national-level negotiations with the United Auto Workers. In addition, Schumacher has experience in alternative dispute resolution, including negotiation and arbitration.
Schumacher is involved in the legal community and is a member of the Negligence Section of the State Bar of Michigan, the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan, the Michigan Defense Trial Counsel, and the Detroit Bar Association. She is also a former member of the University of Detroit Mercy Law chapter of the American Inns of Court, where she served as a barrister.
—————
Strobl PLLC
Strobl PLLC is pleased to announce the addition of six experienced attorneys to its growing team. Joining the firm are R. Keith Stark, Kenneth M. Boyer, William D. Girardot, Christopher E. LeVasseur, Joseph N. Novell, and Elizabeth A. Orsi. Collectively, they bring experience in business law, estate planning, commercial litigation, and real estate.
The attorneys joining Strobl PLLC come from Stark Reagan PC, a Troy-based firm founded in 1973 that has been a part of the Metro Detroit business community for more than 50 years. The firm is also pleased to announce its new name, Strobl Stark PLLC. The company website (StroblLaw. com) and email domain remain unchanged.
The integration of the Stark Reagan team expands the combined firm’s experience in complex commercial litigation, tax law, employment disputes, business succession planning, and transactional work.
With a career spanning 50+ years, Stark represents closely held businesses, business owners, and individuals across Michigan and Florida. His practice includes business organization, succession planning, and sophisticated wealth transfer strategies.
Boyer is an experienced attorney focusing on estate planning and business law, providing strategic guidance to protect and preserve clients’ assets.
Girardot represents closely held businesses in corporate governance, commercial finance, mergers and acquisitions, and employer–employee matters.
LeVasseur focuses on commercial litigation with an emphasis on labor and employment law, sales commission disputes, and alternative dispute resolution.
Novell is a transactional business attorney with extensive experience in mergers and acquisitions, commercial finance, and real estate transactions.
Orsi practices in business and corporate law, real estate, and estate planning, bringing a versatile background that includes her prior experience in criminal defense.
In recognition of his exceptional legal expertise, leadership, and dedication to clients, Strobl Stark is also pleased to announce the promotion of Evan Kaploe to member.
—————
Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC
Howard & Howard is pleased to announce that local attorneys Eric Butler, Alex Leonowicz, and Hubert Yi have been named as new shareholders of the firm, effective immediately.Butler received a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Kettering University in 2018. Prior to joining Howard & Howard’s Intellectual Property Intern Program, he worked as an engineering co-op at an automotive powertrain supplier and an automotive chassis supplier, gaining exposure to design, testing, and manufacturing settings.
He also worked as an IP co-op assisting with tasks such as reviewing invention disclosures, conducting patent/trademark searches, reviewing PTO office actions, and drafting patent claims.
Butler attended the University of New Hampshire’s Franklin Pierce School of Law where he earned his law degree.
Leonowicz has more than a decade of experience in contract law and complex business transactions. Prior to joining Howard & Howard, he served as general counsel and chief operating officer for a Michigan-based cannabis company founded in 2019. He was responsible for the formation and governance of over 10 entities across multiple states, obtained and maintained licenses across three different states, drafted and negotiated acquisition of retail and cultivation facilities in multiple jurisdictions, and more.
Leonowicz earned his law degree from the University of Detroit School of Law.
Yi’s practice is focused on securing global IP protection for the inventions and innovations of his clients in a variety of technologies within the electrical and mechanical arts. He also conducts due diligence investigations and advises clients regarding freedom-to-operate and patentability opinions.
Yi joined Howard & Howard in 2015 as an intellectual property intern, where he learned the intricacies of patent drafting, patent prosecution, and freedom-to-operate investigations. During his internship, he attended evening law school classes at Wayne State University Law School while maintaining a full-time position with the firm.
—————
Conrad Mallet
Detroit Mayor Mary Sheffield recently announced the reappointment of Conrad Mallet as corporation counsel.
Mallet, a tenured and respected public servant and health administrator, spent 20 years as a top administrator at the Detroit Medical Center, including his service as president of one of Michigan’s largest hospitals, Sinai-Grace. Prior to that, Mallett spent eight years as a member of the Michigan Supreme Court, his last two years as its chief justice.
—————
Clark Hill PLC
Clark Hill recently announced the promotion of several attorneys to member, effective Jan. 1. Among those promoted to member is Rick Fanning – Labor & Employment, Detroit.
—————
Office of Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer
Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer recently announced the appointment of Tanya Grillo to the 16th Circuit Court in Macomb County.
Grillo is managed assigned counsel coordinator at the City of Southfield, an administrative hearing officer at the City of Mount Clemens, and the founding and managing partner at Grillo Law PLLC. She also previously served as regional manager at the Michigan Indigent Defense Commission for Lapeer, Macomb, Oakland, and St. Clair Counties. Grillo is the president of the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan’s Executive Board and is a board member of the National Conference of Women’s Bar Association.
Grillo earned a Bachelor of Arts in political science from the University of Central Florida and a law degree from Cooley Law School.
“I am deeply honored by Governor Whitmer’s appointment and grateful for the opportunity to serve the people of Macomb County and the State of Michigan,” said Grillo. “I take this responsibility seriously and am committed to serving with integrity, fairness, and respect for the rule of law. I will work every day to uphold the trust placed in me and to serve with the dignity this office deserves.”
This appointment will be made to fill a partial term following the upcoming resignation of Judge Diane Druzinski. Grillo’s term will expire at twelve o’clock noon on January 1, 2027.
—————
Dykema
Dykema recently announced that its Executive Board elected new members to the firm effective January 1. Local new members include:
Samuel Kilberg – Real Estate; Bloomfield Hills
Kilberg’s practice encompasses various aspects of the real estate industry, including land use and zoning, landlord-tenant, eminent domain, purchase/sale, and financing. He routinely guides developers, utilities, and small businesses through the zoning entitlement process. Kilberg has experience in securing state and local permits; navigating land-use approvals; and advising on project financing for renewable, storage, and transmission assets. His combination of real estate knowledge allows him to assist clients at every stage of the development process, including site selection, acquisition, entitlements, and financing.
Kilberg earned a law degree, and a B.A. from Michigan State University. Kilberg sits on the Council for the State Bar of Michigan Real Property Section and serves as chair of the Membership Committee and editor of the section’s monthly E-Newsletter.
Victoria Remus – Taxation and Estates; Bloomfield Hills
In her practice, Remus offers comprehensive services encompassing estate and gift planning, probate and complex trust administration, forming tax-exempt entities, and crafting customized business succession solutions for individuals and families. Integral to her estate planning practice, Remus handles a high volume of tax returns year-round, including multifaceted estate, gift, trust, and tax-exempt organization returns. Her knowledge across all areas of tax law enables clients to achieve optimal outcomes, even on the most difficult tax situations and returns. For her high-net-worth clients, Remus has experience in minimizing present and future tax liabilities through estate and gift planning.
Remus earned a law degree from Michigan State University College of Law and a B.A. from Saint Mary’s College. During law school, Remus served as a judicial extern to U.S. Tax Court Judge Ronald L. Buch in Washington, D.C.
—————
Honigman LLP
Honigman LLP recently announced that Kasturi “Kas” Bagchi has rejoined the firm as a partner in the Transactional and Real Estate Finance Practice Group of its Real Estate Department. She returns to Honigman after nearly five years with Miller Canfield, where she was a principal.
Bagchi manages risks for clients in loan, real estate, and other asset-based transactions. She also counsels lenders on mortgage loans, note purchases, and note financings designed to help distressed borrowers avoid foreclosure. She has closed more than $600 million in Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) and Freddie Mac loans on behalf of borrowers.
Bagchi earned her law degree from Tulane University Law School and her B.A. from the University of California, Los Angeles.
Honigman is also pleased to announce that the firm’s executive committee has elected the following local attorneys as partners, effective January 1, 2026:
Brian Braum Jr. (Detroit) is a member of the Corporate Department. He focuses his practice on finance, banking, mergers and acquisitions, venture capital and general corporate services, with experience in asset-based lending and other commercial financing structures. Braum earned his law degree from DePaul University College of Law.
Paul W. Howarah (Detroit) is a member of the Corporate Department. He focuses on mergers and acquisitions, private equity transactions, corporate governance, and general corporate matters. Howarah earned his law degree from Wayne State University Law School.
Nicholas D. Weier (Detroit) is a member of the Litigation Department who concentrates his practice on e-discovery strategy, advice, and services; antitrust and trade regulation; and complex commercial litigation. Weier earned his law degree from Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University.
Haba K. Yono (Detroit) is a member of the Labor and Employment Department. She focuses her practice on employment counseling, litigation, and strategic workforce planning. Yono earned her law degree from Wayne State University Law School.
—————
Maddin, Hauser, Roth, & Heller PC
Maddin Hauser is pleased to announce that Kim M. Rattet has joined the firm. An attorney with nearly 25 years of experience, she brings litigation skills working with real estate lenders in workouts, foreclosures, and insolvency proceedings, as well as counseling lenders on regulatory matters. She is a member of the firm’s Financial Services and Real Property Litigation practice group.
Rattet has safeguarded, protected, and advanced the interests of mortgage servicers, banks, credit unions, investor groups, commercial and multifamily property owners, and individual entrepreneurs in Chapters 7, 11, 12, and 13 bankruptcy proceedings. Her experience also encompasses a broad range of related real estate, automotive, and unsecured-creditor finance matters, including default servicing, commercial and residential litigation, proofs of claim, Rule 2004 examinations, property surrender issues, collateral recovery, loan workouts, sale motions, and dismissal motions.
Before joining Maddin Hauser, Rattet was a staff attorney to one of the busiest trustees in the nation. She supported the trustee in fulfilling all obligations under the United States Bankruptcy Code, the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, and directives of the Bankruptcy Court to the highest level of diligence, judgment, and integrity.
Maddin Hauser is also pleased to announce that Michigan Lawyers Weekly selected shareholder Ronald A. Sollish as a 2025 “Go To” lawyer in employment law for the second consecutive year.
Sollish has counseled owners, managers, and human resources professionals at companies across the U.S. to evaluate and develop successful strategies to mitigate risk and achieve goals. He has negotiated and closed complicated commercial transactions and real estate deals and protected clients’ interests in state and federal litigation, arbitration, and mediation.
Sollish also provides counsel in real estate, partnership, finance, corporate, and business law and liaises with colleagues in other disciplines. His clients range from individuals and small, closely held companies to publicly held international corporations in various industries and verticals.
A shareholder at Maddin Hauser, Sollish serves as president, executive committee member, and Corporate and Employment practice group chair. Under his leadership, his practice group has hosted its popular annual Employment Law Symposium and monthly Breakfast Bites Series for several years. Sollish also frequently speaks to industry associations and civic groups such as the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Michigan Association of Certified Public Accountants, and the American Society for Industrial Security.
Bodman PLC
Bodman PLC is pleased to announce that Kerry K. Cahill has joined the firm as a member in the Workplace Law Practice Group.
Based in Bodman’s Troy office, Cahill has more than 20 years of experience representing employers in a wide range of industries in employment and contract disputes. Her experience in employment law includes wrongful and retaliatory termination, discrimination and harassment, internal workplace investigations, wage-and-hour claims, Whistleblowers’ Protection Act claims, severance agreement negotiations, Family Medical Leave Act and Americans with Disabilities Act claims, civil rights litigation, and Title IX internal processes related to college sexual discrimination and misconduct investigations.
Cahill has developed policies and employee handbooks and conducted harassment training for a variety of professional organizations, executive leadership teams, and human resources professionals.
Before joining Bodman, Cahill was a partner in a Michigan-based employment law boutique where she worked directly with employers on all aspects of employment law, including compliance, litigation/ ADR strategies, and risk mitigation.
Cahill is a graduate from Wayne State University Law School and received her undergraduate degree from University of Michigan.
—————
Warner, Norcross, + Judd LLP
Warner Norcross + Judd LLP announced that several attorneys have been named partners.
The new partners are Sarah R. Bileti, Nina E. Lucido, Ashley E. Racette, and Timothy H. Smith. Bileti, Racette and Smith are based in Detroit, and Lucido is based in Macomb County. All are members of the State Bar of Michigan.
Bileti concentrates her practice on immigration law with a focus on domestic and international employment-based immigration matters that span employee work authorization, corporate restructuring challenges and Form I-9 compliance. She represents clients in health care, information technology, engineering, automotive, financial services, higher education, pharmaceuticals and energy, proactively developing strategies to address potential obstacles before they arise to ensure a smooth and efficient journey.
Bileti chairs the firm’s Immigration Practice Group, co-chairs the International Business and Trade Industry Group and launched the Talent Without Borders blog, which provides immigration updates impacting workforce planning and compliance.
Bileti was named to the Best Lawyers®: Ones to Watch list from 2021-23 and received JD Supra’s Reader Choice Top Ten Award for immigration law in 2025. She is a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, or AILA, and serves on the AILA National Business Steering Committee. She is licensed to practice in both Michigan and Colorado.
Bileti earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of Michigan, a master’s from Sotheby’s Institute of Art, and her law degree from Wayne State University Law School.
Lucido concentrates her practice in trusts and estates, tax and business succession planning and corporate operations. She is experienced with tax planning, charitable giving, trust administration, estate settlement and other areas for individuals, families, nonprofits and family offices.
Lucido has been recognized by Michigan Super Lawyers on its Ones to Watch list in 2025 and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch list since 2024. Super Lawyers recognized her as a Rising Star in 2024.
Lucido is a member of the Financial and Estate Planning Council of Metro Detroit and the Women Lawyers Association of Michigan. She is a graduate of Leadership Macomb. Lucido is a member of the ABA, Macomb County Bar Association, and Italian American Bar Association of Michigan.
Lucido earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of Michigan and a law degree from MSU College of Law. She completed a program at the Institute for Comparative Law & Jurisprudence at the University of Bialystok in Poland through MSU.
Racette is a commercial litigator who advises clients on complex business and contractual matters. She focuses her practice on supply chain conflicts and contractual disputes, representing automotive and other supply chain clients at all stages of business and contractual disputes.
Racette has been recognized on the Best Lawyers in America: Ones to Watch list in 2026 and Best Lawyers Detroit: Ones to Watch since 2021. Michigan Super Lawyers recognized her as a Rising Star in 2025. She serves on the Women’s Committee for the Eastern District of Michigan Bar Association.
Racette earned two bachelor’s degrees from the University of Louisville and a law degree from MSU College of Law.
Smith is a litigator representing clients in both state and federal courts. His practice focuses on appeals, supply chain conflicts, contractual disputes, complex commercial litigation and constitutional litigation.
Smith has been recognized on the Best Lawyers in America: Ones to Watch list in 2026 and Best Lawyers Detroit: Ones to Watch list in 2024. He is licensed to practice in both Michigan and New York.
Smith earned a bachelor’s degree from Middlebury College and a law degree from the University of Michigan Law School.
More solar energy is wrong for Michigan
January 09 ,2026
Michigan law mandates ever-increasing use of solar
photovoltaic cells to replace reliable, affordable, coal, natural gas
and nuclear power. Consider that after decades of mandates, tax breaks,
and subsidies that add to your taxes and electricity bills, solar is
only generating a bit over 2% of Michigan’s electric demand.
David T. Stevenson
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Michigan law mandates ever-increasing use of solar photovoltaic cells to replace reliable, affordable, coal, natural gas and nuclear power. Consider that after decades of mandates, tax breaks, and subsidies that add to your taxes and electricity bills, solar is only generating a bit over 2% of Michigan’s electric demand.
Requiring more solar is the wrong plan for so many reasons:
• The threat of blackouts is highest in the winter, when the sun is not up and nights and early mornings are cold.
• A state agency estimates Michigan’s solar mandate will require 209,000 acres of farmland.
• Large solar projects often run into justified local opposition to permitting decisions (state law allows a state agency to override local decisions).
• Having a northern climate and surrounded by water, Michigan is a relatively cloudy state with poor solar resources.
• Solar project costs are rising dramatically from inflation, supply chain problems and lost federal subsidies.
• Solar panels last only one-third to one-half as long as other generating sources, presenting reconstruction and massive waste-disposal issues.
• The state’s 2030 emission goals can be met without solar.
Read on for the details.
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation says Michigan’s regional grid has a high risk of power shortages, starting in 2028. Reliable coal power plants are being closed prematurely and replaced too slowly by weather-dependent wind and solar.
Solar projects often face resistance from local governments. The Michigan Farm Bureau also objects, as the Department of Natural Resources estimates that meeting solar and wind goals will require 209,000 acres of land. Recognizing local opposition, the Legislature gave the Michigan Public Service Commission authority to override local permit bans. Opponents to this law are attempting to repeal it through a ballot initiative.
Michigan has lower solar resource potential than more southerly located states, as shown below. Michigan is about 10% less productive at generating electricity through solar than North Carolina and 21% less efficient than Arizona. This translates to Michigan having 28% higher costs to generate solar electricity than Arizona. In 2024, Michigan’s solar projects generated 71% less electricity in December than in June (62 megawatt-hours/ megawatt vs. 212).
Construction costs are increasing. Solar panel prices rose about 9% in the first quarter of 2025, mainly because of higher tariffs. Another factor is that projects placed in service after 2027 will not receive 30% investment tax credits under federal law. Also, wind and solar projects are often placed far from existing transmission lines, requiring expensive infrastructure upgrades. Because of these factors, the price of solar projects could rise 40% or more, with those extra costs passed on to ratepayers in their electricity bills.
Michigan’s electric demand was 98.8 million megawatt-hours in 2024. Solar generation only totaled 2.3 million, or about 2% of that. The state’s goal of generating 52% of demand, or 52 million megawatt-hours, from zero-emission sources by 2030 could be achieved by adding a new small modular reactor at the Palisades nuclear plant and restarting the main plant.
The future of electric generation is clearly nuclear, not solar, and state legislation needs to change in recognition of this reality.
—————
Dave Stevenson has spent the last 14 years as the director of the Center for Energy & Environment for the Caesar Rodney Institute. He served on President Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency Transition Team and has become a resource for national energy and environmental issues. He is a veteran executive of the Dupont Company.
Requiring more solar is the wrong plan for so many reasons:
• The threat of blackouts is highest in the winter, when the sun is not up and nights and early mornings are cold.
• A state agency estimates Michigan’s solar mandate will require 209,000 acres of farmland.
• Large solar projects often run into justified local opposition to permitting decisions (state law allows a state agency to override local decisions).
• Having a northern climate and surrounded by water, Michigan is a relatively cloudy state with poor solar resources.
• Solar project costs are rising dramatically from inflation, supply chain problems and lost federal subsidies.
• Solar panels last only one-third to one-half as long as other generating sources, presenting reconstruction and massive waste-disposal issues.
• The state’s 2030 emission goals can be met without solar.
Read on for the details.
The North American Electric Reliability Corporation says Michigan’s regional grid has a high risk of power shortages, starting in 2028. Reliable coal power plants are being closed prematurely and replaced too slowly by weather-dependent wind and solar.
Solar projects often face resistance from local governments. The Michigan Farm Bureau also objects, as the Department of Natural Resources estimates that meeting solar and wind goals will require 209,000 acres of land. Recognizing local opposition, the Legislature gave the Michigan Public Service Commission authority to override local permit bans. Opponents to this law are attempting to repeal it through a ballot initiative.
Michigan has lower solar resource potential than more southerly located states, as shown below. Michigan is about 10% less productive at generating electricity through solar than North Carolina and 21% less efficient than Arizona. This translates to Michigan having 28% higher costs to generate solar electricity than Arizona. In 2024, Michigan’s solar projects generated 71% less electricity in December than in June (62 megawatt-hours/ megawatt vs. 212).
Construction costs are increasing. Solar panel prices rose about 9% in the first quarter of 2025, mainly because of higher tariffs. Another factor is that projects placed in service after 2027 will not receive 30% investment tax credits under federal law. Also, wind and solar projects are often placed far from existing transmission lines, requiring expensive infrastructure upgrades. Because of these factors, the price of solar projects could rise 40% or more, with those extra costs passed on to ratepayers in their electricity bills.
Michigan’s electric demand was 98.8 million megawatt-hours in 2024. Solar generation only totaled 2.3 million, or about 2% of that. The state’s goal of generating 52% of demand, or 52 million megawatt-hours, from zero-emission sources by 2030 could be achieved by adding a new small modular reactor at the Palisades nuclear plant and restarting the main plant.
The future of electric generation is clearly nuclear, not solar, and state legislation needs to change in recognition of this reality.
—————
Dave Stevenson has spent the last 14 years as the director of the Center for Energy & Environment for the Caesar Rodney Institute. He served on President Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency Transition Team and has become a resource for national energy and environmental issues. He is a veteran executive of the Dupont Company.
‘Neither Gaza nor Lebanon!’ Iranian unrest is about more than the economy - protesters reject the Islamic Republic’s whole rationale
January 09 ,2026
A familiar slogan has echoed through the streets of variousIranian
cities in recent days: “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, I sacrifice my life
for Iran.”
:
Kamran Talattof
University of Arizona
University of Arizona
(THE CONVERSATION) — A familiar slogan has echoed through the streets of variousIranian cities in recent days: “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, I sacrifice my life for Iran.”
That phrase has been chanted at protests that have sprung up around Iran since Dec. 28, 2025. The spark of the uprising and bazaar strikes has been economic hardship and government mismanagement.
But as an expert of Iranian history and culture, I believe the slogan’s presence signals that protests go deeper than economic frustration alone. When people in Iran chant “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon,” they are, I believe, rejecting the theocratic system in Iran entirely. In other words, the current crisis isn’t just about bread and jobs, it’s about who decides what Iran stands for.
——————
The origins of the slogan
The phrase “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, I sacrifice my life for Iran” first gained prominence during the 2009 Green Movement, when hundreds of thousands of people protested a disputed presidential election in Iran.
It has since appeared in successive major demonstrations, from the 2017-18 economic protests to the 2019 fuel price uprising. It was also prominent during the 2022 “Women, Life, Freedom” movement, sparked by the death of an Iranian-Kurdish woman, Mahsa Amini, following her detention by Iran’s morality police for not wearing a “proper” hijab.
The phrase ties together two key aspects of successive Iranian protest movements: domestic economic, political or social grievances and an explicit rejection of the government’s justification for that hardship – namely, that sacrifice at home is necessary to fulfill ideological goals of “resistance” abroad.
In particular, the slogan targets the Islamic Republic’s decades-long support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.
Estimates suggest that the regime has channeled between US$700 million and $1 billion annually to regional allies since the 1980s – funds that many Iranians argue should instead address domestic infrastructure, health care and education.
—————
From alliance to resentment
Understanding the full meaning of the slogan requires historical context. Under the U.S.-aligned Pahlavi monarchy, which ruled from 1925 to 1979, Iran maintained diplomatic and economic ties with Israel while pursuing modernization.
The Shah’s opponents, particularly leftist groups, exploited these connections, using slogans like “Iran’s become Palestine, why sit still, O people?” to mobilize against the monarchy.
Indeed, many of the Islamic revolutionary leaders that ousted the Shah in 1979 had ties with Palestinian groups.
After the revolution, the Islamic Republic inverted both its ties to the U.S. and Iran’s relationship with Israel, making anti-Israel rhetoric and support for Palestinian causes central to its identity.
Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution, declared solidarity with oppressed Muslims worldwide, positioning Iran as the vanguard of resistance against what he called “Western imperialism and Zionism.”
But this ideological commitment came with substantial costs for Iranians.
Iran’s support for Hezbollah during Lebanon’s civil war, its backing of Hamas in the Palestinian group’s fight against Israel, and its involvement in Syrian and Iraqi conflicts have contributed to international sanctions, diplomatic isolation and economic pressure on Iran. And these burdens have fallen disproportionately on ordinary citizens rather than the ruling elite.
—————
Economic crisis and political defiance
“Down with the Islamic Republic” is also chanted alongside “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon” in the current uprising – the most serious that the Iranian government has faced in years.
But neither lethal force – at least 1,203 arrests and more than two dozen deaths thus far – nor supreme leader Ali Khamenei’s Jan. 3 order for a harsher crackdown has quelled the unrest.
Instead, protests have expanded to 110 cities and villages.
The demonstrations illustrate how economic and political grievances intersect in Iran. When demonstrators chant “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon” while protesting bread prices and unemployment, they are not compartmentalizing issues – they are drawing a direct line between foreign policy choices and domestic suffering.
The slogan makes three simultaneous arguments.
First, it rejects imposed solidarity. Many Iranians, including those sympathetic to Palestinian rights, resent being conscripted into conflicts that are not their own. And the government’s insistence that Iranians must make sacrifices for distant causes breeds resentment rather than unity. Take the government’s effort to portray the 12-day war with Israel in June 2025 as a moment of national resistance. Rather, many Iranians instead blamed the leadership for either provoking the conflict or failing to meaningfully defend the country from Israeli – or American – bombs.
The slogan also demands accountability for resource allocation. When state media broadcasts funerals for fighters killed in Syria or Yemen while Iran’s hospitals lack basic supplies, the disconnect between rhetoric and reality becomes glaring.
And finally, the protest message reclaims political belonging rooted in Iranian national history – and not just the ideological concerns of the Islamic Republic. By invoking Iran specifically, “I sacrifice my life for Iran,” protesters assert that their primary allegiance is to their own country, not to transnational ideological movements, regional proxies or the ruling government’s ideology.
—————
The limits of solidarity
For all its longevity, however, the slogan has proven divisive. While some see it as a necessary assertion of self-determination after decades of enforced sacrifice, others – including some Iranian leftist intellectuals and activists – view it as abandoning solidarity with oppressed peoples.
But it doesn’t need to be an either/or. Many protesters risking bullets to demand “Iran first” are not expressing indifference to the suffering of Palestinians. Rather, they are insisting that effective solidarity requires a functioning state capable of supporting its own citizens, and that genuine liberation begins at home.
Regardless, the Islamic Republic’s response has been to frame criticism as betrayal, suggesting that those who question support for Gaza or Lebanon are complicit with imperialism – a narrative enforced through a mix of rhetoric and coercion.
But this framing increasingly fails to persuade a population that has watched living standards decline while billions of dollars flow to foreign conflicts. The effects of sanctions and shrinking foreign-currency revenues have pushed the Iranian state to raise taxes on households while shielding military and ideological spending. Meanwhile, the dollar’s daily surge and the rial’s rapid collapse have accelerated inflation and eroded purchasing power.
Authoring one’s own story
Undoubtedly, economic grievances underpin the current protests in Iran. However, the slogans used in Iranian protests – be they over election disputes, economic crises or women’s rights – indicate a broader critique of the Islamic Republic’s governing philosophy.
In the current wave of protests, demonstrators articulate through slogans both what they reject – “Down with the Islamic Republic” – and what many now seek to happen: “This is the final battle; Pahlavi will return,” a reference to the exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi.
The “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon” chant asks: What does it mean for a government to prioritize foreign conflicts over domestic welfare? How long can imposed solidarity substitute for actual prosperity? And who has the right to determine which causes are worth sacrifice?
Such questions extend beyond Iran. They challenge assumptions about how governments invoke international causes to justify domestic policies and when citizens have the right to say, “Our story comes first.”
As such, the chant “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, I sacrifice my life for Iran” is, I believe, both protest and reclamation. It rejects the Iranian state’s narrative of mandatory sacrifice while asserting the right of people to author a national story focused on Iran’s own needs, challenges and aspirations.
That phrase has been chanted at protests that have sprung up around Iran since Dec. 28, 2025. The spark of the uprising and bazaar strikes has been economic hardship and government mismanagement.
But as an expert of Iranian history and culture, I believe the slogan’s presence signals that protests go deeper than economic frustration alone. When people in Iran chant “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon,” they are, I believe, rejecting the theocratic system in Iran entirely. In other words, the current crisis isn’t just about bread and jobs, it’s about who decides what Iran stands for.
——————
The origins of the slogan
The phrase “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, I sacrifice my life for Iran” first gained prominence during the 2009 Green Movement, when hundreds of thousands of people protested a disputed presidential election in Iran.
It has since appeared in successive major demonstrations, from the 2017-18 economic protests to the 2019 fuel price uprising. It was also prominent during the 2022 “Women, Life, Freedom” movement, sparked by the death of an Iranian-Kurdish woman, Mahsa Amini, following her detention by Iran’s morality police for not wearing a “proper” hijab.
The phrase ties together two key aspects of successive Iranian protest movements: domestic economic, political or social grievances and an explicit rejection of the government’s justification for that hardship – namely, that sacrifice at home is necessary to fulfill ideological goals of “resistance” abroad.
In particular, the slogan targets the Islamic Republic’s decades-long support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.
Estimates suggest that the regime has channeled between US$700 million and $1 billion annually to regional allies since the 1980s – funds that many Iranians argue should instead address domestic infrastructure, health care and education.
—————
From alliance to resentment
Understanding the full meaning of the slogan requires historical context. Under the U.S.-aligned Pahlavi monarchy, which ruled from 1925 to 1979, Iran maintained diplomatic and economic ties with Israel while pursuing modernization.
The Shah’s opponents, particularly leftist groups, exploited these connections, using slogans like “Iran’s become Palestine, why sit still, O people?” to mobilize against the monarchy.
Indeed, many of the Islamic revolutionary leaders that ousted the Shah in 1979 had ties with Palestinian groups.
After the revolution, the Islamic Republic inverted both its ties to the U.S. and Iran’s relationship with Israel, making anti-Israel rhetoric and support for Palestinian causes central to its identity.
Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution, declared solidarity with oppressed Muslims worldwide, positioning Iran as the vanguard of resistance against what he called “Western imperialism and Zionism.”
But this ideological commitment came with substantial costs for Iranians.
Iran’s support for Hezbollah during Lebanon’s civil war, its backing of Hamas in the Palestinian group’s fight against Israel, and its involvement in Syrian and Iraqi conflicts have contributed to international sanctions, diplomatic isolation and economic pressure on Iran. And these burdens have fallen disproportionately on ordinary citizens rather than the ruling elite.
—————
Economic crisis and political defiance
“Down with the Islamic Republic” is also chanted alongside “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon” in the current uprising – the most serious that the Iranian government has faced in years.
But neither lethal force – at least 1,203 arrests and more than two dozen deaths thus far – nor supreme leader Ali Khamenei’s Jan. 3 order for a harsher crackdown has quelled the unrest.
Instead, protests have expanded to 110 cities and villages.
The demonstrations illustrate how economic and political grievances intersect in Iran. When demonstrators chant “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon” while protesting bread prices and unemployment, they are not compartmentalizing issues – they are drawing a direct line between foreign policy choices and domestic suffering.
The slogan makes three simultaneous arguments.
First, it rejects imposed solidarity. Many Iranians, including those sympathetic to Palestinian rights, resent being conscripted into conflicts that are not their own. And the government’s insistence that Iranians must make sacrifices for distant causes breeds resentment rather than unity. Take the government’s effort to portray the 12-day war with Israel in June 2025 as a moment of national resistance. Rather, many Iranians instead blamed the leadership for either provoking the conflict or failing to meaningfully defend the country from Israeli – or American – bombs.
The slogan also demands accountability for resource allocation. When state media broadcasts funerals for fighters killed in Syria or Yemen while Iran’s hospitals lack basic supplies, the disconnect between rhetoric and reality becomes glaring.
And finally, the protest message reclaims political belonging rooted in Iranian national history – and not just the ideological concerns of the Islamic Republic. By invoking Iran specifically, “I sacrifice my life for Iran,” protesters assert that their primary allegiance is to their own country, not to transnational ideological movements, regional proxies or the ruling government’s ideology.
—————
The limits of solidarity
For all its longevity, however, the slogan has proven divisive. While some see it as a necessary assertion of self-determination after decades of enforced sacrifice, others – including some Iranian leftist intellectuals and activists – view it as abandoning solidarity with oppressed peoples.
But it doesn’t need to be an either/or. Many protesters risking bullets to demand “Iran first” are not expressing indifference to the suffering of Palestinians. Rather, they are insisting that effective solidarity requires a functioning state capable of supporting its own citizens, and that genuine liberation begins at home.
Regardless, the Islamic Republic’s response has been to frame criticism as betrayal, suggesting that those who question support for Gaza or Lebanon are complicit with imperialism – a narrative enforced through a mix of rhetoric and coercion.
But this framing increasingly fails to persuade a population that has watched living standards decline while billions of dollars flow to foreign conflicts. The effects of sanctions and shrinking foreign-currency revenues have pushed the Iranian state to raise taxes on households while shielding military and ideological spending. Meanwhile, the dollar’s daily surge and the rial’s rapid collapse have accelerated inflation and eroded purchasing power.
Authoring one’s own story
Undoubtedly, economic grievances underpin the current protests in Iran. However, the slogans used in Iranian protests – be they over election disputes, economic crises or women’s rights – indicate a broader critique of the Islamic Republic’s governing philosophy.
In the current wave of protests, demonstrators articulate through slogans both what they reject – “Down with the Islamic Republic” – and what many now seek to happen: “This is the final battle; Pahlavi will return,” a reference to the exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi.
The “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon” chant asks: What does it mean for a government to prioritize foreign conflicts over domestic welfare? How long can imposed solidarity substitute for actual prosperity? And who has the right to determine which causes are worth sacrifice?
Such questions extend beyond Iran. They challenge assumptions about how governments invoke international causes to justify domestic policies and when citizens have the right to say, “Our story comes first.”
As such, the chant “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, I sacrifice my life for Iran” is, I believe, both protest and reclamation. It rejects the Iranian state’s narrative of mandatory sacrifice while asserting the right of people to author a national story focused on Iran’s own needs, challenges and aspirations.
Why 2026 could see the end of the Farm Bill era of American agriculture policy
January 09 ,2026
With Congress back in session, legislators will take up a set of issues
they haven’t comprehensively addressed since 2018 – the year the last
farm bill passed.
:
Christopher Neubert and Kathleen Merrigan, Arizona State University
(THE CONVERSATION) — With Congress back in session, legislators will take up a set of issues they haven’t comprehensively addressed since 2018 – the year the last farm bill passed.
Farm bills are massive pieces of legislation that address a diverse constellation of topics, including agricultural commodities, conservation, trade, nutrition, rural development, energy, forestry and more. Because of their complexity, farm bills are difficult to negotiate in any political environment. And as the topics have expanded since the first iteration in 1933, Congress has generally agreed to take the whole thing up once every five years or so.
However, the most recent farm bill’s provisions expired in 2023. They have been renewed one year at a time ever since, but without the comprehensive overhaul that used to accompany farm bills.
As former federal employees handling agriculture policy who now study that topic, it’s unclear to us whether a comprehensive, five-year farm bill can be passed in 2026, or ever again.
The July 2025 enactment of the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” the Trump administration’s budget priorities in the tax and spending bill, revised funding levels for many programs that were historically handled in the farm bill. For instance, that law included a 20% cut in funding to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, which helps low-income families buy food. And it doubled support for the largest farm subsidy programs.
Those changes and current divisions in Congress mean the nation’s food and agriculture policy may remain stuck in limbo for yet another year.
—————
Cuts to SNAP used for farm subsidies
For decades, political conventional wisdom has held that sweeping federal farm bills are able to pass only because farmers seeking subsidies and anti-hunger advocates wanting increased SNAP dollars recognize the mutual advantage in working together. That’s how to build a broad, bipartisan consensus strong enough to garner the 60 votes in the U.S. Senate to avoid a filibuster and actually pass a bill.
But the One Big Beautiful Bill Act tax and spending law did not create a compromise between those competing interests. It slashed SNAP spending by US$186 billion over the next decade. At the same time, it boosted price support for farmers who grow key crops like corn, soybeans and wheat by $60 billion, in addition to a $10 billion economic relief package passed at the end of 2024 to address high costs of seeds, fertilizer and other farming supplies.
Supporters of anti-hunger programs are furious that these funds for farmers are being paid for by cutting SNAP benefits to families.
In addition, about one-third of the SNAP cuts came by shifting the program’s cost to state budgets. States have always carried some of the costs to administer SNAP, but they have never before been required to fund billions of dollars in benefits.
Many states will be unable to cover these increased costs and will be forced to either reduce benefits or opt out of SNAP altogether, dramatically cutting the help available to hungry Americans.
Groups that support SNAP are unlikely to help pass any bill relating to food or farm policy that does not substantially reverse the cuts to SNAP.
And farmers who receive money under the two largest farm subsidy programs are not even required to grow the specific crops those programs are meant to support. Rather, they must simply own farmland that was designated in 1996 as having grown that crop in the early 1980s.
Farmers have repeatedly said they would prefer federal farm policies that support markets and create conditions for stable, fair commodity prices. And evidence shows that spending more money on farm subsidies does little to actually improve underlying economic conditions affecting the costs of farming or the prices of what is grown.
And yet, in early December 2025, the Department of Agriculture released an additional $12 billion to help offset losses farmers experienced when Trump’s tariffs reduced agricultural exports. In mid-December, the National Farmers Union said that money still wasn’t enough to cover losses from consistently low commodity prices and high seed and fertilizer costs.
—————
A regular five-year farm bill may be out of reach
The success of any bill depends on political will in Congress and outside pressure coming together to deliver the required number of votes.
Some leaders in Congress remain optimistic about the prospects of a farm bill passing in 2026, but major legislation is rare with midterm elections looming, so meaningful progress appears unlikely. It seems to us more likely that the ongoing stalemate will continue indefinitely.
In September 2025, Politico reported that instead of a complete five-year farm bill, the House and Senate committees on agriculture might take up a series of smaller bills to extend existing programs whose authorizations are expiring. Doing so would be an effective declaration that a permanent five-year farm bill is on indefinite hold.
—————
Prospects for sustainable farm policy
By using financial incentives cleverly, Congress has shifted farming practices over time in ways that lawmakers determined were in the public’s interest.
The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, for instance, allocated $20 billion over four years to encourage farmers to reduce or offset carbon emissions, which the Agriculture Department calls “climate-smart agriculture.” Those funds, along with a separate Department of Agriculture initiative with similar aims, were well received by American farmers. Farmers applied for far more money than was actually available.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act tax and spending law cut those funds and repurposed them for traditional Agriculture Department programs for farmers who want to implement conservation practices on their land.
But unexpectedly, the Trump administration’s “Make America Healthy Again,” or MAHA, agenda contains some ideas that climate-smart advocates have previously advanced. These include scathing indictments of the effects of conventional agriculture on Americans’ health, including concerns over pesticide use and the so-far-undefined category of “ultra-processed foods.”
The MAHA agenda could be an opportunity for organic farmers to secure a boost in federal funding. In December, the Agriculture Department committed $700 million toward “regenerative” practices, but that’s a trifling amount compared with the billions commodity farmers received in 2025.
And the administration’s allies who support conventional agriculture have already expressed concerns that MAHA efforts might reduce the nation’s agricultural productivity. The administration may end up caught between the MAHA movement and Big Ag.
Overall, in this new political environment, we believe advocates for changes in agriculture and food aid will likely need to rethink how to advance their agendas without the promise of a farm bill coming anytime soon.
Farm bills are massive pieces of legislation that address a diverse constellation of topics, including agricultural commodities, conservation, trade, nutrition, rural development, energy, forestry and more. Because of their complexity, farm bills are difficult to negotiate in any political environment. And as the topics have expanded since the first iteration in 1933, Congress has generally agreed to take the whole thing up once every five years or so.
However, the most recent farm bill’s provisions expired in 2023. They have been renewed one year at a time ever since, but without the comprehensive overhaul that used to accompany farm bills.
As former federal employees handling agriculture policy who now study that topic, it’s unclear to us whether a comprehensive, five-year farm bill can be passed in 2026, or ever again.
The July 2025 enactment of the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” the Trump administration’s budget priorities in the tax and spending bill, revised funding levels for many programs that were historically handled in the farm bill. For instance, that law included a 20% cut in funding to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, which helps low-income families buy food. And it doubled support for the largest farm subsidy programs.
Those changes and current divisions in Congress mean the nation’s food and agriculture policy may remain stuck in limbo for yet another year.
—————
Cuts to SNAP used for farm subsidies
For decades, political conventional wisdom has held that sweeping federal farm bills are able to pass only because farmers seeking subsidies and anti-hunger advocates wanting increased SNAP dollars recognize the mutual advantage in working together. That’s how to build a broad, bipartisan consensus strong enough to garner the 60 votes in the U.S. Senate to avoid a filibuster and actually pass a bill.
But the One Big Beautiful Bill Act tax and spending law did not create a compromise between those competing interests. It slashed SNAP spending by US$186 billion over the next decade. At the same time, it boosted price support for farmers who grow key crops like corn, soybeans and wheat by $60 billion, in addition to a $10 billion economic relief package passed at the end of 2024 to address high costs of seeds, fertilizer and other farming supplies.
Supporters of anti-hunger programs are furious that these funds for farmers are being paid for by cutting SNAP benefits to families.
In addition, about one-third of the SNAP cuts came by shifting the program’s cost to state budgets. States have always carried some of the costs to administer SNAP, but they have never before been required to fund billions of dollars in benefits.
Many states will be unable to cover these increased costs and will be forced to either reduce benefits or opt out of SNAP altogether, dramatically cutting the help available to hungry Americans.
Groups that support SNAP are unlikely to help pass any bill relating to food or farm policy that does not substantially reverse the cuts to SNAP.
And farmers who receive money under the two largest farm subsidy programs are not even required to grow the specific crops those programs are meant to support. Rather, they must simply own farmland that was designated in 1996 as having grown that crop in the early 1980s.
Farmers have repeatedly said they would prefer federal farm policies that support markets and create conditions for stable, fair commodity prices. And evidence shows that spending more money on farm subsidies does little to actually improve underlying economic conditions affecting the costs of farming or the prices of what is grown.
And yet, in early December 2025, the Department of Agriculture released an additional $12 billion to help offset losses farmers experienced when Trump’s tariffs reduced agricultural exports. In mid-December, the National Farmers Union said that money still wasn’t enough to cover losses from consistently low commodity prices and high seed and fertilizer costs.
—————
A regular five-year farm bill may be out of reach
The success of any bill depends on political will in Congress and outside pressure coming together to deliver the required number of votes.
Some leaders in Congress remain optimistic about the prospects of a farm bill passing in 2026, but major legislation is rare with midterm elections looming, so meaningful progress appears unlikely. It seems to us more likely that the ongoing stalemate will continue indefinitely.
In September 2025, Politico reported that instead of a complete five-year farm bill, the House and Senate committees on agriculture might take up a series of smaller bills to extend existing programs whose authorizations are expiring. Doing so would be an effective declaration that a permanent five-year farm bill is on indefinite hold.
—————
Prospects for sustainable farm policy
By using financial incentives cleverly, Congress has shifted farming practices over time in ways that lawmakers determined were in the public’s interest.
The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, for instance, allocated $20 billion over four years to encourage farmers to reduce or offset carbon emissions, which the Agriculture Department calls “climate-smart agriculture.” Those funds, along with a separate Department of Agriculture initiative with similar aims, were well received by American farmers. Farmers applied for far more money than was actually available.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act tax and spending law cut those funds and repurposed them for traditional Agriculture Department programs for farmers who want to implement conservation practices on their land.
But unexpectedly, the Trump administration’s “Make America Healthy Again,” or MAHA, agenda contains some ideas that climate-smart advocates have previously advanced. These include scathing indictments of the effects of conventional agriculture on Americans’ health, including concerns over pesticide use and the so-far-undefined category of “ultra-processed foods.”
The MAHA agenda could be an opportunity for organic farmers to secure a boost in federal funding. In December, the Agriculture Department committed $700 million toward “regenerative” practices, but that’s a trifling amount compared with the billions commodity farmers received in 2025.
And the administration’s allies who support conventional agriculture have already expressed concerns that MAHA efforts might reduce the nation’s agricultural productivity. The administration may end up caught between the MAHA movement and Big Ag.
Overall, in this new political environment, we believe advocates for changes in agriculture and food aid will likely need to rethink how to advance their agendas without the promise of a farm bill coming anytime soon.
headlines Detroit
headlines National
- Could Trump’s judicial appointments slow in the new year?
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Practical guidance for ethically changing law firms
- ‘Christmas Lawyer’ uses settlement with homeowners association on more holiday decorations
- DOJ sues state officials over laws protecting immigrants at courthouses
- Building the case for trial in the last 60 days
