- In February, Michigan's Court of Appeals struck down the state's Anti-Terrorism law—the same law used to charge an MSU Student accused of making a threat against the community.
- Friday, the Michigan Supreme Court vacated the ruling.
- Video shows thoughts from two different lawyers, including the attorney for the accused MSU student.
(The following is a transcription of the full broadcast story)
I've been following the case of an MSU student charged with threatening violence at the university. Now a timely Michigan Supreme Court ruling has me asking officials what comes next in the case.
"Well I am very pleased to see the Supreme Court's ruling," Cooley Law School Professor Michael McDaniel said.
It was back in February that the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that Michigan's Anti-Terrorism law was unconstitutional.
The law makes it a crime to issue a terrorist threat or falsely report an act of terrorism.
Cooley Law School Professor Michael McDaniel knows it well. He helped write the law back in 2002.
"One of the issues that I raised with you, Colin, was that the Michigan Court of Appeals took such a broad construction of the terrorist threats statute that it had to be unconstitutional," McDaniel said.
RELATED: How the Michigan Court of Appeals' anti-terrorism law ruling could impact the MSU threat case
It's the same law used to charge MSU student Hope Duncan in connection to an online threat she allegedly made against the MSU Community.
Now that the Supreme Court has vacated that ruling and sent it back to the court of appeals, McDaniel says these concerns can now be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
"The trial court must still consider whether or not, in each case, the verbal actions of the criminal defendant are either fighting words or whether or not they're a true threat," McDaniel said.
I reached out to Duncan's attorney Mike Nichols for his reaction.
"Really, we don't think it changes all that much," Nichols said.
He says he believes his team's approach will remain the same.
"All of our arguments, including the one that what Hope Duncan did was simply not illegal conduct, we think all of those arguments are still there," Nichols said.
RELATED: Prosecutors play alleged recording of MSU threat suspect
When Duncan last appeared here in court, her attorneys were given two weeks to provide briefs on the constitutionality of the case. That deadline is Thursday, and Nichols tells me that is still the case, despite this ruling from the Supreme Court.
Want to see more local news? Visit the FOX47News Website.
For more news about MSU, go to the MSU Campus neighborhood page on our website.
Stay in touch with us anytime, anywhere.
Sign up for newsletters emailed to your inbox.
Select from these options: Neighborhood News, Breaking News, Severe Weather, School Closings, Daily Headlines, and Daily Forecasts.
