On June 8, seven Senators introduced a bill to amend the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA).  The bill would amend Section 7 of the Act to provide that "nothing in this Act shall be constructed to create a private cause of action against this State or a political subdivision of the State."  In part, the language of the bill may be in response to the decision in Casias v Wal-Mart, Case No. 1:10-cv-0078, US District Court Western District of Michigan, Southern Division (2010).  In that case, the court opined "[t]he MMMA meant to provide some limited protection for medical marijuana [sic] users from state actions...[n]othing in the language or purpose of the MMMA indicates an intent of the Michigan voters to regulate privateemployment..." (Emphasis added).  After the court's decision, questions remain unanswered regarding the MMMA rights, if any, of persons employed by the State government or with local units of government, and whether the MMMA provides protections for medical marihuana users with respect to their employment.  This bill may also immunize government actors from liability should they be required to turn over records previously thought to be confidential.  See United States v Michigan Department of Community Health, Case No. 1:10-mc-109, US District Court Western District of Michigan (2011).  In addition, this bill may alleviate some of the fear local government entities face in retaliation for passing ordinances regulating the use of medical marihuana.