Age, Biography and Wiki

Stephen Markman was born on 4 June, 1949 in Detroit, Michigan, U.S., is an American judge. Discover Stephen Markman's Biography, Age, Height, Physical Stats, Dating/Affairs, Family and career updates. Learn How rich is he in this year and how he spends money? Also learn how he earned most of networth at the age of 74 years old?

Popular As N/A
Occupation N/A
Age 74 years old
Zodiac Sign Gemini
Born 4 June, 1949
Birthday 4 June
Birthplace Detroit, Michigan, U.S.
Nationality United States

We recommend you to check the complete list of Famous People born on 4 June. He is a member of famous with the age 74 years old group.

Stephen Markman Height, Weight & Measurements

At 74 years old, Stephen Markman height not available right now. We will update Stephen Markman's Height, weight, Body Measurements, Eye Color, Hair Color, Shoe & Dress size soon as possible.

Physical Status
Height Not Available
Weight Not Available
Body Measurements Not Available
Eye Color Not Available
Hair Color Not Available

Who Is Stephen Markman's Wife?

His wife is Mary Kathleen

Family
Parents Not Available
Wife Mary Kathleen
Sibling Not Available
Children 2

Stephen Markman Net Worth

His net worth has been growing significantly in 2023-2024. So, how much is Stephen Markman worth at the age of 74 years old? Stephen Markman’s income source is mostly from being a successful . He is from United States. We have estimated Stephen Markman's net worth, money, salary, income, and assets.

Net Worth in 2024 $1 Million - $5 Million
Salary in 2024 Under Review
Net Worth in 2023 Pending
Salary in 2023 Under Review
House Not Available
Cars Not Available
Source of Income

Stephen Markman Social Network

Instagram
Linkedin
Twitter
Facebook
Wikipedia
Imdb

Timeline

1787

Markman prefers an interpretation closer to the 1787 Constitution, and predicts that unless citizens act, justices making under-the-radar decisions on "forgettable and mundane disputes" (as opposed to high–profile decisions such as Roe v. Wade) will steer public policy in directions of their choosing in such areas as "racial quotas, social services funding, and immigration policy."

Markman prefers that public policy decisions be made by legislators instead of judges.

1949

Stephen J. Markman (born June 4, 1949) is a former justice of the Michigan Supreme Court.

1971

Markman received his Bachelor of Arts from Duke University in 1971, and he graduated from University of Cincinnati Law School in 1974.

1976

In re Certified Questions (Midwest Institute Of Health, PLLC v Governor), contrary to his prior advocacy of judicial restraint, Markman ruled for a fragmented court that Michigan's Emergency Management Act of 1976 (EMA) and the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act of 1945 (EPGA) were an "unlawful delegation of legislative power to the executive branch in violation of the Michigan Constitution."

The decision was "handed down by a narrow majority of Republican justices."

Michigan became an outlier.

At this time, every state and the Federal government had declared an emergency due to the CoViD-19 pandemic.

Michigan's lower courts had previously ruled against the Republican-controlled legislature.

This decision was an advisory opinion via a Federal lawsuit by outpatient medical providers over an order by Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer that barred nonessential medical procedures during the pandemic.

Markman lives in Mason, Michigan with his wife, Mary Kathleen, and their sons Charles and James.

List of justices of the Michigan Supreme Court

1978

Markman served as Chief Counsel of the United States Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution and as deputy chief counsel of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary from 1978 to 1985.

He was then nominated to be a United States Assistant Attorney General, heading the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy, by President Ronald Reagan and confirmed by the Senate.

While serving as assistant attorney general, his office wrote a recommendation regarding the issue of possible reconsideration of the Miranda v. Arizona decision by the U.S. Supreme Court.

When the Chicago Tribune criticized the recommendation, Markman responded with an opinion piece which the paper published entitled In Defense of Reconsidering Miranda; in this op-ed column, Markman argued for a more flexible interpretation of Miranda to bolster fair treatment of suspects in custody.

He wrote:

"The detailed report setting out my office's recommendations emphasized that changes in Miranda should be approached in the context of a general rethinking of policies concerning the questioning of suspects, which could include such reforms as videotaping or recording interrogations, imposing definite time limits on questioning, and prescribing specific rules concerning behavior and demeanor in questioning suspects. Measures like these would go far beyond the Miranda rules in ensuring fair treatment of suspects, but would predictably carry lesser costs to the public`s interest in effective police investigation. Conversely, no real progress can be expected in promoting either of these objectives in the context of custodial questioning so long as the myth persists that the specific procedures suggested in the Miranda decision must be regarded, for unexplained reasons, as sacrosanct and immutable."

1989

After being nominated by George H. W. Bush and approved by the United States Senate, Markman served as a United States Attorney in Michigan from 1989 to 1993.

1993

Since 1993, Markman has taught constitutional law at Hillsdale College, where he holds the title of distinguished visiting professor of Politics.

Markman has contributed to numerous legal publications and was a contributing editor at National Review.

He is a Fellow of the Michigan Bar Foundation, a Master of the Bench of the Inns of Court.

Markman was sent to Ukraine by the State Department to assist in developing the country's post-Soviet constitution.

1995

He joined the private sector firm of Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone in Detroit, where he practiced until he was appointed to the 4th District Michigan Court of Appeals by Governor John Engler in 1995.

1999

He was appointed by Republican governor John Engler on October 1, 1999, to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Justice James H. Brickley.

He held that position until 1999, when Governor Engler appointed him to the Michigan Supreme Court.

2000

Michigan voters elected him to the position in 2000.

2004

Markman was re-elected as Supreme Court judge in 2004 and 2012.

In Pride at Work v. Governor of Michigan, the Michigan Supreme Court, in a 5–2 ruling, ruled that Michigan's 2004 gay marriage ban also bars same-sex domestic partners of public employees from receiving health insurance benefits.

Markman wrote the majority opinion for the court where he said that while "marriages and domestic partnerships aren't identical, they are similar."

2008

In 2008, Markman wrote a piece for the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy saying, "[T]he Michigan Supreme Court has set as its priority the proper exercise of the 'judicial power,' to read the law evenhandedly and give it meaning by assessing its words, its grammar and syntax, its context, and its legislative purpose. The court's dominant premise has been on 'getting the law right'—moving toward the best and most faithful interpretation of the law—rather than reflexively acquiescing in prior case law that essentially reflected little more than the personal preferences of predecessor justices."

In Michigan Civil Rights Initiative v. Board of State Canvassers, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative should be placed on the November 2008 ballot, even if some petition signers signed the petition under the belief that it was in support of affirmative action.

In his opinion, Markman wrote, "The signers of these petitions did not sign the oral representations made to them by circulators; rather they signed written petitions that contained the actual language of the MCRI. ... In carrying out the responsibilities of self-government, 'we the people' of Michigan are responsible for our own actions. In particular, when the citizen acts in what is essentially a legislative capacity by facilitating the enactment of a constitutional amendment, he cannot blame others when he signs a petition without knowing what it says. It is not to excuse misrepresentations, when they occur, to recognize nonetheless that it is the citizen's duty to inform himself about the substance of a petition before signing it, precisely in order to combat potential misrepresentations."

2010

In April 2010, Markman published an essay in Hillsdale College's monthly publication, Imprimis, in which he argued against a living constitution with expanded input from judicial governance.

2017

Markman served as chief justice in 2017 and 2018.

2019

He did not seek another two years in 2019, and was replaced by Bridget Mary McCormack.

2020

Markman's term on the Supreme Court was up for re-election in 2020.

However, Markman was ineligible to run due to Michigan's Constitution prohibiting judges that are 70 or older running for office.

Markman was 71 in November 2020.

Markman has argued against an increased role by the judiciary in matters of public policy and suggested that unless citizens engage in a constitutional debate, public matters will be increasingly decided by judges.