A federal judge is commanding state authorities to stop enforcing rules under the Michigan Sex Offender Registry Act during the coronavirus pandemic.
According to an interim order U.S. District Judge Robert Cleland issued Monday, officials are “preliminarily enjoined from enforcing registration, verification, school zone, and fee violations of (the act) that occurred or may occur from February 14, 2020, until the current crisis has ended, and thereafter until registrants are notified of what duties they have under SORA going forward.”
On Valentine’s Day, Cleland declared the act unconstitutional and urged the state Legislature to move to bring the law into compliance.
Under the February decision offenders would still have had to report to their local law enforcement agency or state police post through mid-May, while orders encompassing Cleland’s ruling were drafted by the parties. After that, unless the state Legislature acts, the Sex Offender Registry Act would no longer be enforceable against those who offended before 2011.
Bobby yes… I think what Tim is saying is that judge Cleveland is getting pissed off because people are calling. It probably wouldn’t be a good idea to push it too far because sometimes more is not better. He’s not happy with the legislature which is a good thing and we don’t need him being pissed off At us.
@ Bobby S. Amen to your comments today. The Governor does have 21 days from last Friday,10/02/2020, to appeal the MSC’s decision that her emergency orders ARE unconstitutional. But, if the Attorney General does not submit the appeal I, too, am hoping Judge Cleland will start the 60 day clock for his FINAL judgment on our class action suit…and finally deliver us from this legal nightmare. Here’s hoping!!! I, too, am pre-2006/2011. Peace be with all of you.
This is False…. If you are on Probation or Parole… YOU ARE REQUIRED TO REGISTER. FAILURE TO DO SO CAN RESULT IN A VIOLATION OF TERMS OF PROBATION OR PAROLE. I had to even contact ACLU about this, and under the advisement of Miriam Auckerman, she stated that there was nothing in the injunction court order from Judge Cleland, about probationers and parolees not having to register. Her recommendation is to stay complaint, and continue to follow registration Verification while on paper, and keep registering as required by SORA. So all you that are on paper, make sure you dont fall into the trap, even though MSP is not enforcing SORA, the courts can still violate you for failure to follow court stipulations and orders.
Hi All,
I received this email today from, Tim from the ACLU if anyone is interested.
As most of you know the court has said the Governor exceeded her authority to keep issuing Emergency orders because of Covid 19.
We have a few weeks to get the answers we need, but the order was from the court and expires when the Gov. declares the crisis over. I think it is unclear if the interruption in her ability to effect executive orders would include declaring a crisis. As soon as we have more, we will email everyone. PLEASE DO NOT EMAIL ME WITH THE QUESTION WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW OR WHAT WILL HAPPEN NOW. As for the clock on the 60 days starting, we will know more in the next week or two.
Curious…….now the Michigan Supreme Court has shut down governor twhitmer‘s State of emergency declaration, does the clock on Judge Cleland’s mandate start again? Does the Michigan legislature finally HAVE to fix the unconstitutional SOR laws?
Everyone,
TO All who watched the Michigan Supreme Court hearing, it is kindve obvious that we lost. The court is likely to make it Sorna complaint which means removal will likely not happen for anyone.
The case was kicked down the road for WAY too long. The 60 day judgment may start with Cleland, but I can almost guarantee the Michigan supreme court will rule before then. This really sucks. I hate to admit, but this was a game of checkers, and the legislature pretty much did a check mate.
I suggest you watch the oral argument on YouTube. The justices really loved the prosecutors argument.
A bit sad, but most of us knew this would happen. We allowed the legislature way too much time to change the law.
I hope you realize this was their strategy all along 🙁
@Everyone,
Ok, i just got done watching the Michigan Supreme Court’s argument for Bett’s and all of us really. I was able to follow some of it, but most of it i was lost. So for are the Brain’s out there that watched this, and understands it, how did it go in your opinion, do you think we are in trouble, or do you think the MSC will be on or side in this, and how long does it take to get the MSC’s decision after oral arguments. Any help in explaining how this oral argument went would be very much appreciated. It sounded faverable, but then what to i know, i just hope this finally coming to an end, and those of us that should be removed are removed very soon. thanks again in advance for anyone’s opinion and assessment on how this went for us today.
@janice
I listened to the oral arguments on the People vs. Betts case before Michigan Supreme Court today. A lot of it dealt with severability of parts of the MSORN Amendmants (2006 and 2011). It seemed that the Solictor General was conceeding parts to keep the rest.
He conceeded that the residence and loitering requirements may be unconstitutional. He named a couple others (No testing/professional examinations for tier qualifications and public website)
Should/would we be accepting that kind of reasoning? That parts of SORNA are acceptable and parts are not? Does the Adam Walsh Act allow for that kind of severability?
Thanks!
Any idea how long it will take for them too make a ruling on this case now that the case has been submitted ? Also are they asking that the tier system be severed as well ?
@Tim in WI or anyone. Ok, call me an idiot or what ever ,but can someone or Tim in WI, please tell me in laymen’s terms or in words that a 5th grader might understand, what Tim in WI, was trying to say in his post to me. I understood some of it but then I started to get lost lol. So any clarification on what he was saying would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Having watched the oral arguments in their entirety, both sides, for the Betts case, here is a basic summation.
Our side is arguing that the decision already reached back in February should be used as a guideline on what to do with the registry as according to state law, and the federal SORNA should not be taken into account on the decision reached in the Betts case. From what I can hear, no one is disputing the unconstitutionality of SORA in Michigan, in fact the opposing counsel is in agreeance that the Current law is unconstitutional, but only within 3 or four parameters including residency restrictions, the public nature of the tier ranking system, and a few specific points concerning in-person-reporting. Our side is arguing that the few points concerning in-person-reporting that have already been found as unconstitutional should apply to more if not all of the In-person requirements as the burden is similar. There is a general focus on the ex-post-facto claim for unconstitutionality as it is punishment, but if it’s punishment in retroactive application it isn’t that far of a stretch to make it punishment for people sentenced after the fact. Practically anyone here could make an argument that SORA as is now lies in the 8th amendment area of unconstutionality when judged as a whole since it imposes probation/parolelike requirements on a person after their probation/parole. From what I gather though, the main point here is going to be between specific statutes and whether or not they can be removed from the law without screwing the whole registry up, but given how much time the legislature has had to fix these issues compared to other pieces of legislature they have acted on that ended up unconstitutional, I doubt that the supreme court will rule in favor of the state. it isn’t the job of the Michigan supreme court to write or rewrite a law for the legislature to make the law constitutional.
Well whitmers reign is over basically and now what do we do i still have yet to recieve anything from msp moving forward what are we to do pre11 here jan95 to be exact what do we do at this point hire counsel? Anyone hear anything?
@Bobby s
Any news i missed i havent herd or seen a peep regarding any movement in regards too letters mailed to us or any registering i get untill their is no pndemic clause in The language used just rwching out to see if anyone has heard anythin
RR
I was convincted in 2004. I’m so confused on what to do or how to go forward. I just talked to the MSP and they told me to follow the jurisdiction on which I live in. I just wish I could get some clarification on whether or not we are being removed or still have to follow the laws. Thank you
Congrats Guy/. Enjoy ur freedom
I have a pre 2011 conviction from 2000. I called the city police where i register in March and they told me that i had to come in and verify. I have verified with them March, June, and September. This week I have had city police come by twice to do compliance checks while I was at work. I thought enforcement was suspended until we received a letter from the MSP. Has anyone heard of a change? Does anyone have an email for the Michigan ACLU that is working on this. I believe some of you have mentioned speaking with Tim? Is there anything that I can do to make them follow Judge Cleland’s injunction?
@Josh @BM,. This is a joke, this is when Judge Cleland needs to step in now, and start having pre 2006 and 2011people removed from the registry ASAP, or shutting it down completely until registry is revised the way the 6th circuit and Cleland says , enough of these rediculous games that the State is playing. Do they think that we and the Courts ( Judge Cleland) are that ignorant that this bill is supposed to change anything give me a break.
I too read new bill for thursday and im jan 95 amd should be off th9s list as mamy pf us shuld and i did not see anywhere we would be removed getting really frustrated and feel the last bill would of removed us in this situation……I get the fight for all but quit draggging us through the mud and effn us over i was convicted in like dec95 and my 25 is up was never sentenced to the chnges so lets get the ball rolling this is utter bulllllllsheeetttt i was 19 and 46 now ive served my bit and this registration so come on and quit effffn us around should of took last bill and ran with it now its getting worse like taking a cobb for 10 and having judge not agree and getn 20 enuff of the bs give us what is right
Guys actually much of this registry can’t and should not be enforced. Eight years ago after my trial and everything was over. I went back to the detective, and yes he was in sort of a bind since my lawyer copped out on me. Course he did give me a letter saying I was not a SVP.
When I went to the detective he said to me, see I told you everything would be ok if you pleaded guilty. Well good for him. course I don’t think anyone likes to hold their breathe, Yes it took me some time to figure out that plea deal. Than when I ask him about other stuff such as me bringing down a milkshake and what that was all about, he said… Its all part of the game.
Now remember I just had a bit of foul language, I didn’t actually want to meet this person and it was the second night instead of the first. Now if I would of had any porno on my computer or naked kids I would probably of been looking at jail time.
10 years probation and if I had of signed a paper saying I was talking to a teenage girl, well that right their would be self incrimination by deceptive means, and they know that also as they are slick. Thats why one should have another wittness with you and than it can be a hard road to prove when the parole officer is not going to back you up.
While my Probation officer was ok I sort of hatted to see him leave. I did tell him he should of chosed a better vocation and a week or two latter he said he didn’t like that. He’s retired but still in another area of law enforcement. Probabbly working voter fraud or something.
Much of this registry with the pandemic is a nightmare, even before, but its all a lot of tricky persuasion which should be outlawed the way they work this whole ordeal, plus it bears on the constitution and moral and ethical reasoning leaning to entrapment.
Frankly I hope Michigan never rewrites anything. As long as Cleland’s order remains in effect, there is essentially no registry there. If they ever do get around to writing new registry law and debating it, that would be a good time to point out that there was no sex crime committed by person with prior sex crime convictions in the interim. Or, if there were, simply being on the registry would not have prevented it. The longer they take, the easier it is to make the point.
Just continue to violate my constitution rights there will be more lawsuits to come
Can someone please post the new hb everyone is referring to. Or a link please. Thank you.
Can anyone please post the new hb you are referring to or a link. I really appreciate it. Thank you
I found this bill introduced in August.
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2020-HB-6088
Hello everyone,
just got this email from Tim from the ACLU
Committee is cancelled tomorrow so no hearing on the SOR bill. We will let you know when it is rescheduled.