Legislative Analysis
Phone: (517) 373-8080
LAW ENFORCEMENT USE OF FORCE POLICIES http://www.house.mi.gov/hfa
House Bill 6117 as introduced Analysis available at
Sponsor: Rep. Abraham Aiyash http://www.legislature.mi.gov
Committee: Criminal Justice
Complete to 12-10-24
SUMMARY:
House Bill 6117 would create a new act requiring law enforcement agencies to adopt (or
update) a policy to regulate the use of force by law enforcement officers.
Law enforcement agency would mean that term as defined in the Michigan
Commission on Law Enforcement Standards (MCOLES) Act. 1
Law enforcement officer would mean that term as defined in the MCOLES Act. 2
Beginning six months after the bill takes effect, each law enforcement agency in Michigan
would have to adopt a written use of force policy consistent with all federal, state, and local
laws that includes, at a minimum, all of the following provisions:
• A requirement that a law enforcement officer may only use physical force that is
objectively reasonable.
• Standards, procedures, and considerations for all of the following:
o Using physical force on an individual.
o Issuing a verbal warning.
o Using deadly force on an individual only when necessary to protect the law
enforcement officer or another individual from an imminent threat of death
or serious bodily harm.
o Using other alternatives to the use of physical or deadly force and de-
escalation techniques.
• A statement that the use of physical force that restricts air or blood flow to the throat
or windpipe of an individual constitutes deadly force.
Objectively reasonable would mean an inquiry as to whether the law enforcement
officer’s use of force is objectively reasonable in light of the facts and
circumstances known to the officer, without regard to the officer’s underlying intent
or motivation. The reasonableness of a particular use of force by an officer would
have to be judged from the perspective of a reasonable law enforcement officer on
the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight, and would have to take
into consideration the fact that law enforcement officers are often forced to make
1
See subdivision (e): https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-28-602.pdf
2
See subdivision (f): https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-28-602.pdf
House Fiscal Agency Page 1 of 3
 split-second decisions in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly
evolving. This reasonableness inquiry would have to consider all of the following:
• The severity of the crime at issue.
• Whether the individual posed an immediate threat to the safety of the law
enforcement officer or others.
• Whether the individual was actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade
arrest by flight.
• Whether the individual was experiencing a medical emergency that
rendered the individual incapable of making a rational decision under the
circumstances that posed an immediate threat of serious harm to the law
enforcement officer or others.
• Whether some degree of force by the law enforcement officer was
reasonably necessary to ameliorate the immediate threat.
• Whether the force used was more than reasonably necessary under the
circumstances.
Deadly force would mean any force that a reasonable law enforcement officer
would objectively consider likely to create a substantial risk of death or serious
bodily harm.
Serious bodily harm would mean a bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of
death, permanent disfigurement, or permanent loss or impairment of any bodily
limb or organ.
De-escalation technique would mean a range of integrated strategies and tactics
used by a law enforcement officer to diffuse a potentially volatile or violent
situation with the aim to reduce the immediacy of the threat and level of force
required for resolution while ensuring the safety of the officer and public.
Law enforcement agencies could adopt use of force policies that exceed the requirements
above or add additional requirements, and they would have to continuously review their
policies and update them when necessary to ensure that they are consistent with case law.
Agencies would also be required to make their use of force policies publicly available via
their website (if available) or by posting them at the agency’s physical location.
The bill would take effect 90 days after being enacted.
BACKGROUND:
House Bill 6117 is identical to Senate Bill 1091 of the current legislative session. These
bills are modified versions of Senate Bill 481 of the 2021-22 legislative session, which was
introduced as part of a 12-bill law enforcement package on the one-year anniversary of the
murder of George Floyd, an unarmed African American man who was subjected to (and
ultimately died as a result of) the use of force by a Minneapolis police officer during an
arrest in May 2020. Senate Bill 481 was considered by (but not reported from) the Senate
Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety.
House Fiscal Agency HB 6117 as introduced Page 2 of 3
FISCAL IMPACT:
House Bill 6117 could have a minor fiscal impact on the state and local units of
government, depending on the amount of administrative costs incurred by law enforcement
agencies related to the creation of new use of force policies or the updating of existing
policies to bring them into compliance with the provisions of the bill.
Fiscal Analyst: Aaron A. Meek
■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by House members in their
deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.
House Fiscal Agency HB 6117 as introduced Page 3 of 3