Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed an Amicus Brief on Jan 30 in People vs. Betts, Supreme Court No. 148981 .
Introduction: There are dangerous sexual predators, to be sure, and the public needs to be protected from them. But the current SORA it is not the way to achieve that goal because it places people on the registry without an individualized assessment of their risk to public safety. Indeed, it provides little differentiation between a violent rapist or reoffender and an individual who has committed a single, non-aggravated offense. And it provides no way for most registrants to lessen their registration period based on their circumstances and rehabilitation. Taken as a whole, SORA’s onerous requirements are punishment and their retroactive application violates both federal and state Ex Post Facto Clauses.
Conclusion: Michigan’s Sex Offender Registry Act, taken as a whole, imposes burdens that are so punitive in their effect that they negate the State’s public safety justifications. Accordingly, Amicus Curiae Attorney General Dana Nessel asks this Court to hold that SORA is punishment and its retroactive application violates the Ex Post Facto Clauses of the Michigan and United States constitutions. The unconstitutional 2011 amendments cannot be severed without leaving an Act that is inoperable without remedial efforts that are quintessentially legislative. Protecting the children and families of Michigan from sexual offending is critical, but it is the Legislature’s task to determine how best to do so within constitutional constraints.
Full Brief from FAC
This seems too good to be true. I feel like I’m either missing something or waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Great news!! Thank you, MI AG Nessel, for your honesty and courage!
Good news, but I wish it went further in arguing for the sheer pointlessness of the registry all together as we know individual risk assessments are massively flawed themselves.
This outweighs the AG filing from all the AGs in the Tenth Circuit who filed against Millard v Rankin IMO.
Gotta make a note of this quote here should Megan’s law, either version ever make it to the Supreme Court. “Public registration, the Smith majority said, is “more analogous to a visit to an official archive of criminal records than it is to a scheme forcing an offender to appear in public with some visible badge of past criminality.” Not anymore.
Seems to stress not all registrants are that dangerous…my my my we’re getting radical here. I like it. I like it a lot.
This seems big. Any chance that the court will strike it down?
Death by a thousand cuts! I’m going to use this moment and put that energy into writing for lobby day!
I have read this twice, and this sounds like great news for everyone in Michigan. Now maybe I am just an idiot, but for those of us that are both pre-sorna 2006 and 2011 and those of us that were convicted in the the early 1990’s before the registry even existed should be removed automatically even when or if the Legislature revises the registry is that correct?. I still don’t see them revising it when this is an election year.
This is a major crack in the dam.
The tipping point may very well come from Michigan.
A.G. Nessel,
Given there never was a close case at all I’d hope some accountability results for those who decided to render citizens subservient to database machine ,as sound policy, in defense of a free republic. Slavery it seems can take many forms and registries are property. Now the citizen data is fodder for profiteers on every level, for exploitation or affirmative , can we go back?. They used child rape to sell! Scapegoats for domestic surveillance saints & profiteers. It was the sex offender who paved the way for unfettered and unrestrained use by all parties.
Um, someone please pinch me!!!
“There are dangerous sexual predators, to be sure, and the public needs to be protected from them.” and “Protecting the children and families of Michigan from sexual offending is critical”
Why only sexual predators? Why only sexual offending? Why not all dangerous criminals and offending? Or at least the dangerous violent ones? Why? Is the government saying that protecting the public, my family and my children, from murderers, wife beaters, drug dealers, drunk drivers, etc is not critical? How is that even possible?
I got this in an email today, if anyone is interested in it.
https://www.michiganradio.org/post/federal-judge-hear-latest-arguments-case-sex-offender-registry-ruled-unconstitutional
If this is a new brief compared to the one Nassel filed last year, then I’m jumping up and down for joy. The veil is being pulled back and the law torn down. Whether or not it happens this year or in the years to come, the groundwork is being built on for its eventual removal.
Case to be heard by Federal judge on Wednesday, Feb. 5th, 2020:
Michigan Radio: Federal judge to hear latest arguments in case of sex offender registry ruled unconstitutional.
https://www.michiganradio.org/post/federal-judge-hear-latest-arguments-case-sex-offender-registry-ruled-unconstitutional
This could get quite interesting. If MI determines SORA to be punishment, MI will not be able to apply it to those convicted outside MI, regardless of when convicted. A State can only impose punishment for violation of ITS laws.
MI’s only recourse would be to re-write SORA to match what SCOTUS said was okay in Smith. Sadly for us, that would then probably preclude any federal suits because Smith would be cited as dispositive.
Punitive and Unconstitutional .….. Enough Said ! No More Stalling !
Could someone help me understand what the impact would be if the amendments are invalidated? Specifically if 2011 and 2006 are overturned what would happen to people who are convicted of an offense that predates those laws?
Got to wait and see @Austin
Nothing left to do but anxiously await the ruling:
https://www.wxyz.com/news/judge-to-issue-written-ruling-on-constitutionality-of-michigan-sex-offender-registry
Constitutional fight for Michigan sex offender rights now before federal judge.:
https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/02/constitutional-fight-for-michigan-sex-offender-rights-now-before-federal-judge.html
From Mlive.com regarding today’s motion hearing
From ACLU:
“Since the unconstitutional laws remain in place and are still being applied to sex offenders, Aukerman asked Cleland to impose a deadline on the Legislature to correct the law. She recommended lawmakers be given 60 days but said the time frame is flexible.”
The time frame is flexible?????? Its 4 years already!!!! NO! 60 DAYS AND THATS IT!!!!! STOP KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD LETTING THE LEGISLATURES TAKE THEIR SWEET TIME!!!!!
https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/02/constitutional-fight-for-michigan-sex-offender-rights-now-before-federal-judge.html
I was at the hearing on Wednesday. And frankly, it didn’t look to me like Cleland was gonna kick this to MSC. In fact, he looked to be quite fed up with the State. The State even went so far as to suggest that the judge could just take a red marker and cross out everything that’s unconstitutional. The judge told them that’s NOT his job.