By MES Dispatch Staff
The Briefing
- The Michigan House of Representatives passed a three-bill package on June 9, 2026, that would establish a 25-foot buffer zone around first responders on duty, making it a criminal offense to approach and remain within that perimeter with intent to interfere, harass, or threaten after receiving a verbal warning.
- The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Alicia St. Germaine, R-Harrison Township, and Rep. Mike Harris, R-Waterford Township, received bipartisan support in the House and now moves to the Michigan Senate.
- Penalties under the bills range from a 60-day, $500 misdemeanor for a standard violation to a 15-year, $7,500 felony if the violation causes the death of a first responder.
- Several Democratic lawmakers opposed the package, citing concerns about potential infringement on free speech and residents’ ability to observe and record law enforcement; an amendment to limit the buffer zone to EMS and fire personnel — excluding law enforcement — was rejected.
- The bills are supported by the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police, Michigan Fraternal Order of Police, and Michigan Sheriffs’ Association, and opposed by the ACLU of Michigan and the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan; similar laws in Arizona, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, and Tennessee have faced court challenges on constitutional grounds.
LANSING, Mich. — The Michigan House of Representatives passed a three-bill package June 9 that would create a 25-foot protective buffer zone around first responders performing their duties, establishing new criminal penalties for individuals who approach and remain within that perimeter with the intent to interfere, harass, or threaten — legislation that advanced with bipartisan support but drew significant opposition from Democratic lawmakers and civil liberties organizations.
The bills — House Bills 5574, 5575, and 5576 — amend the Michigan penal code to create a new criminal offense triggered when an individual, after receiving a verbal warning, approaches and remains within 25 feet of a first responder on duty with intent to impede, interfere with, threaten, or harass that responder. The legislation has been described as a “halo law,” a term applied to similar protective perimeter statutes enacted in several other states in recent years. Michigan law already prohibits assault, obstruction, and endangerment of first responders and law enforcement officers, but the bills expand those provisions to also cover harassment.
House Bill 5574, sponsored by Rep. Alicia St. Germaine, R-Harrison Township, amends the penal code to codify the new offense. House Bill 5575, sponsored by Rep. Mike Harris, R-Waterford Township, defines the covered first responders to include law enforcement officers, corrections officers, firefighters, and EMS personnel — including medical first responders, EMTs, paramedics, and EMS instructor-coordinators. House Bill 5576 establishes the penalty structure: a standard violation would carry a maximum of 60 days in jail and a $500 fine; a violation resulting in injury to a first responder would be a two-year felony with a $1,000 fine; and a violation causing the death of a first responder would carry up to 15 years in prison and a $7,500 fine.
St. Germaine cited what she described as a growing pattern of first responders being singled out and harassed while on duty. “This bill establishes a reasonable boundary so first responders can focus on protecting the public, not managing unnecessary distractions,” she said during House floor testimony. She did not identify a specific incident as the impetus for the legislation. Harris separately said the bills would help address ongoing difficulties with recruiting and retaining public safety personnel.
Multiple Democratic lawmakers voted against the package, raising concerns about the potential for the buffer zone to restrict residents’ rights to observe and record law enforcement activity. Rep. Dylan Wegela, D-Garden City, said the language defining the zone was insufficiently specific, particularly in scenarios involving individuals filming police for accountability purposes. He also raised concerns about interactions between law enforcement and protesters: if officers moved toward demonstrators, residents would face a choice between withdrawing from a public space or facing arrest. Rep. Emily Dievendorf, D-Lansing, called the bills likely unconstitutional and said an attempt to amend the package to limit the buffer zone to firefighters and EMS personnel — excluding law enforcement — was unsuccessful. “We can and should protect first responders without undermining constitutional rights or limiting the public’s ability to hold government actors accountable,” Dievendorf said.
The legislation received endorsements from the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police, Michigan Fraternal Order of Police, and Michigan Sheriffs’ Association. Michael Sauger, president of the Michigan Fraternal Order of Police, said the bills provide narrowly tailored protections that preserve lawful speech and constitutional rights, and that they are intended to address conduct intended to obstruct or intimidate — not to restrict public observation of government officials. The ACLU of Michigan and the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan formally opposed the package. A House Fiscal Agency analysis noted that similar buffer zone laws adopted in Arizona, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, and Tennessee have been challenged in court on constitutional grounds. A comparable federal bill, Senate Bill 3179 — focused on federal immigration enforcement officers — was introduced in late 2025 but has not advanced. The Michigan bills now advance to the state Senate for consideration.