ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (10/16 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

We have emailed a link to the conference videos to all attendees and those who purchased the videos. If you haven’t received it and it is not in your spam folder, email

conference at all4consolaws dot org



MI: Michigan poised to double down on failed sex offender registry

[ – 2020-12-10]

In early 2012, more than eight years ago, five people challenged Michigan’s Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA) in court, arguing that the registry branded them as dangerous “sex offenders” without any individual review.

One was a man — we’ll call him John — who met a woman at a club open only to those 18 and older. They slept together and only later did he learn that she was actually 15. They fell in love, eventually married, and now have three kids. But due to her age, John was prosecuted and put on the sex offender registry. As a result, he has lost countless jobs, was often home­less and unable to live with his family, and couldn’t even attend his own kids’ basketball games.

Another man in the lawsuit — we’ll call him Paul — never even committed a sex offense. In 1990 when he was 20, he tried to rob a McDonald’s. But because he threatened the manager’s teenage son — an offense charged as “child kidnapping” even though it had no sexual component whatever — he was placed on the sex offender registry for life.

John and Paul won their case in 2016, when the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that SORA is unconstitutional. The court not only found that Michigan treats registrants as “moral lepers,” but it also concluded, based on a mountain of evidence, that registries don’t make people or communities safer.

Four years and another lawsuit later, the House has now passed a bill to revise SORA. But that bill ignores the judicial rulings, rejects the science, and would put John and Paul right back on the public registry.

Read the full article


We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The Hit Lists aren’t going anywhere. I think a real problem with the Hit Lists is that the criminal legislators and law enforcement are not sufficiently afraid. They think they are immune. They don’t fathom that this war should end up on their doorsteps and inside their homes. They don’t think it will affect them or their families. What a shame. It will, of course. Probably not as destructively as I would like, but it will.

All moral people need to be engaged in the WORST (War on Registry Supporters/Terrorists).

How nice to see this op-ed in the DFP. Hopefully this wakes up the public some and can (finally!) create some willingness to have a rational approach to things. I’m skeptical but maybe, just maybe, the sheeple will learn something from this piece. Clearly the legislators have not.

No matter what legislation Michigan passes, they can’t undo all of the various court rulings. It’s only a matter of time until Michigan is forced to take down it’s registry entirely.
Big win out of the 9th Circuit. California registrants and in other states in the 9th Circuit take notice. A registry in the 9th Circuit may be the next registry on the ropes right behind Michigan.

Hi Everyone!

We need to pull together and keep addressing to: Vote No on HB 5679!

We have 44,000 people in Michigan hurt by this sick unconstitutional registry and 44,000 people should be picking up their phone and taking 5 minutes out of the day to provide a message as Tim outlines below to their senator. Let’s debunk this together!!!

Everyone has to do this now or write an email again to say simply say: Vote No on HB 5679! Give the reason as well.

Change happens with unwavering persistence and numbers. We got it! Do this today!!!

Change will not happen if everyone thinks someone else will do it and people are not persistent. I sent messages twice this week on the phone to every Senator, not just my own district Senator, but all Senators. My family sent each Senator a quick email. There are 38 Senators. Yes, emailing takes time but aren’t you ready to get your voice out there every chance we have? We may not get another chance—this is our time, be encouraged not discouraged!

Call them now— they will vote next week and if they don’t vote the way we, the public ask them to do: Vote Them Out! They work for us! 44,000 needlessly suffering souls along with our families and friends!!!

Well, if you could get a family member or a friend to help you, there would be 88,000 messages. I and everyone needs each other right now— this is our time. Do it today!!!!! If not for yourself, but for everyone that is suffering in this ridiculous goat rodeo!

Go Well, A Concerned Mom

Tim from ACLU:
Call your Senator and tell them to Vote no on HB 5679. If you call more than just your own Senator and they ask you if you are a member of thier Committee then just tell them you are a Citizen of Michigan and want them to vote no on HB 5679 and tell them the reasons.

Senator Telephone Numbers and Names:
(You can google their email address on your phone. Do it today and thru the weekend!

Member Party District
Map (PDF)
Contact Info Phone Office

Alexander, Betty Jean Dem 5 Contact Info 517-373-0994 4300 Binsfeld Bldg

Ananich, Jim Dem 27 Contact Info 517-373-0142 S-105 Capitol Bldg

Barrett, Tom Rep 24 Contact Info 517-373-3447 3200 Binsfeld Bldg

Bayer, Rosemary Dem 12 Contact Info 517-373-2417 3600 Binsfeld Bldg

Bizon, John Dr. Rep 19 Contact Info 517-373-2426 3400 Binsfeld Bldg

Brinks, Winnie Dem 29 Contact Info 517-373-1801 6500 Binsfeld Bldg

Bullock, Marshall Dem 4 Contact Info 517-373-7918 3500 Binsfeld Bldg

Bumstead, Jon Rep 34 Contact Info 517-373-1635 4600 Binsfeld Bldg

Chang, Stephanie Dem 1 Contact Info 517-373-7346 S-9 Capitol Bldg

Daley, Kevin Rep 31 Contact Info 517-373-1777 5200 Binsfeld Bldg

Geiss, Erika Dem 6 Contact Info 517-373-7800 5500 Binsfeld Bldg

Hertel Jr., Curtis Dem 23 Contact Info 517-373-1734 7600 Binsfeld Bldg

Hollier, Adam Dem 2 Contact Info 517-373-7748 3300 Binsfeld Bldg

Horn, Ken Rep 32 Contact Info 517-373-1760 7100 Binsfeld Bldg

Irwin, Jeff Dem 18 Contact Info 517-373-2406 5300 Binsfeld Bldg

Johnson, Ruth Rep 14 Contact Info 517-373-1636 7300 Binsfeld Bldg

LaSata, Kim Rep 21 Contact Info 517-373-6960 S-310 Capitol Bldg

Lauwers, Dan Rep 25 Contact Info 517-373-7708 S-2 Capitol Bldg

Lucido, Pete Rep 8 Contact Info 517-373-7670 3100 Binsfeld Bldg

MacDonald, Michael Rep 10 Contact Info 517-373-7315 4200 Binsfeld Bldg

MacGregor, Peter Rep 28 Contact Info 517-373-0797 S-132 Capitol Bldg

McBroom, Ed Rep 38 Contact Info 517-373-7840 7200 Binsfeld Bldg

McCann, Sean Dem 20 Contact Info 517-373-5100 6600 Binsfeld Bldg

McMorrow, Mallory Dem 13 Contact Info 517-373-2523 6200 Binsfeld Bldg

Moss, Jeremy Dem 11 Contact Info 517-373-7888 6400 Binsfeld Bldg

Nesbitt, Aric Rep 26 Contact Info 517-373-0793 6100 Binsfeld Bldg

Outman, Rick Rep 33 Contact Info 517-373-3760 4400 Binsfeld Bldg

Polehanki, Dayna Dem 7 Contact Info 517-373-7350 5400 Binsfeld Bldg

Runestad, Jim Rep 15 Contact Info 517-373-1758 7500 Binsfeld Bldg

Santana, Sylvia Dem 3 Contact Info 517-373-0990 5600 Binsfeld Bldg

Schmidt, Wayne A Rep 37 Contact Info 517-373-2413 S-8 Capitol Bldg

Mike Shirkey Rep 16 Contact Info 517-373-5932 S-106 Capitol Bldg

Stamas, Jim Rep 36 Contact Info 517-373-7946 S-324 Capitol Bldg

Theis, Lana Rep 22 Contact Info 517-373-2420 7400 Binsfeld Bldg

VanderWall, Curt Rep 35 Contact Info 517-373-1725 4500 Binsfeld Bldg

Victory, Roger Rep 30 Contact Info 517-373-6920 4100 Binsfeld Bldg

Wojno, Paul Dem 9 Contact Info 517-373-8360 6300 Binsfeld Bldg

Zorn, Dale Rep 17 Contact Info 517
Info 517-373-3543

Here are my two cents. Anyone that has become ensnared on this bastard registry should be glued to their telephone whenever they have any free time. Chance, Janice, or any other civil rights attorneys that litigate these cases are very valuable, but the sheer number of registrants and their loved ones would look more like an army than a one man show. These laws that accumulated over time came to be, because their supporters CALLED and CALLED and CALLED. They can only be undone if we CALL and CALL and CALL.

Get on the phone….don’t wait.

If the courts have ruled that SORNA is unconstitutional, and the lawmakers ignore the rulings, why can’t you bring a civil rights lawsuit against the author/s of the bill? Hit them where it hurts the most in the wallet.

@ Political Prisoner if what your saying is possible and the plaintiffs win, the money doesn’t come out of their pockets. It’s all taxpayer money. Besides, they’d be happy to defend themselves. Win or loose, they sub contract the lawyers who are their friends or law partners, then they get “thank you’d” for the referral.

Great ! most of those tax cattle along with LE are begging for registries , I am all for sending the buzzards/IRS to steal more money from these walleyed cows that think nothing about anyone’s rights in till it is rights violations that affect them , so let them pick up that unconstitutional tab oink oink feed the lie

matter of fact what (Political Prisoner) is saying is an idea , don’t know if that can be done or not , But at least its an idea ! thought that was at least part of this site (ideas) and trying to end this unconstitutional registry , you know fighting back ?

Sometimes I feel
Like Glenn Closes character in Fatal Attraction,” Government we can’t be ignored much longer.” I wish SORNA was in the pot boiling away.

Hi everyone, I am just curious , but has any one gotten any responses from any Senator, like I did?, I actually got a response from Senator Irwin, who says he is voting NO on HB 5679, because it doesn’t come close to fixing the registry or what Cleland and the 6th Circuit says is unconstitutional. I can post it if anyone would like to read his response to me.

Has anyone ever stopped to think that even the general public will not want HB5679 to pass!!?? We, you , I have any army, a union….we are still part of that and need to be smart of that. So if this passes the Senate A SEX OFFENDER CAN LIVE ACCROSS THE STREET FROM SCHOOL PROPERTY!!!!!! We better let EVERYONE know and the numbers for everyone proposing the changes as well as those voting on changes!!!! I’m sure we are easier to make a deal with than the entire public. 44,000 people is small compared to all the voters that turned out for this election!
So, doesn’t it make sense to let the cat out of the bag?? Use our/their media to our advantage against them!!??
Common folk, leading their normal boring lives have no clue about what’s going on with SOR day to day unless the media let’s them be terrified or deems it important for them. Can you imagine how fast it would get out if all RSO’s started shopping for houses around all the schools and acknowledging they are on the registry!!?? Most of us never would or even want to. But imagine if we became the monsters they portray us to be. To them we are the boogeyman.
Let the ordinary citizens know as well about the changes and how it involves them. GET THEM INVOLVED!!!!!!! Use the army to fight the army…make sense?

So winning the Fed lawsuit(s), or the blatant disregard for ex post language prohibition means nothing to “the people.” Precisely why training individual registrants about defending themselves in FTR scenario is important. Call it what it is! Slavery!

Resistance is futile… must comply with the collective.

Gratiot co. Prosecutors office is involved?
I had no idea,,,,,,,,wow

@BobbyS…yes, would you please post your complete response from Senator Irwin, as you have offered. I would like to read his response. I am hoping more senators take the same approach to House bill 5679. Thank you. Peace be with all of you.

@Quietman, and anyone else interested,

Senator Irwin’s response to H.B.5679

Bobby S.

Thank you for contacting me about this issue.

As you know, HB 5679 aims to reform Michigan’s sex offender registry in response to Judge Cleland’s ruling that found it unconstitutional.

I oppose this bill as written because it does not fix the real problems inherent in our sex offender registry or the issues identified by Judge Cleland. In general, almost all sex offender registries have been useless in promoting public safety and reintegrating people who have committed sexual offenses back into society. Michigan’s registry in particular is overly broad, ineffective, and geared towards punishment rather than rehabilitation.

In the Senate, I am interested on working on reforms that solve the many problems in our sex offender registry and make it comply under the Michigan Constitution. I will also continue to seek solutions that provide relief for people and families who remain trapped by the onerous requirements of Michigan’s overly-punitive registry.

Again, thank you for contacting me about this issue. If you have any additional questions, please reach out to me or my office.

Jeff Irwin

The Office of State Senator Jeff Irwin
Phone: (517) 373-2406
Fax: (517) 373-5679

Senator Irwin has my vote from here on out. Very, very intelligent man and I only wish there were more like him. Very proud that he is a senator and our state.

Thanks for that post Bobby! I agree with @Nick about Senator Irwin seemingly being a guy we can get behind. It makes you wonder WHY he’s so reasonable on this topic. Is someone in his life affected by this piece of $h!t registry and new legislation? I tend to not take politicians at their word as a general rule but if his given reasons are legitimate then there aren’t many politicians who would publicly take that stance… wouldn’t hurt to take a closer look at his voting record on this issue and similar issues and see if he’s put his money where his mouth is….HB 5679 is a costly logistical nightmare and the only reason to pass this mess is to tie it up in continued litigation while maintaining the status quo. I’m afraid there aren’t enough Senator Irwin types out there but we’ll see….

@Michigan….Senator Jeff Irwin is apparently the real deal when it comes to SOR issues.. he was the only state senator to vote AGAINST the new child abuse registry and he voted favorably on several other smaller issues as would seem we have at the very least 1 politician who isn’t afraid to swim against the current.

My arm is in pain because I have pinched myself over a dozen times after reading this. This can’t be real. I must be dreaming. [sarcasm]

@Michigan…Well, not unexpectedly in my opinion but it appears that HB 5679 just passed the senate and will go back to the house for concurrence…..

Hope is dwindling…..5679 passed the Senate 21-17.


I just watched the live stream of the Senate meeting , and if i understood it correctly HB 5679 passed with 21 yes votes and 17 NO votes, and Mr. Irwin was a NO vote, then it went to a vote for immediate passage, which I think also passed, it all went so fast it was almost hard to follow what was happening, so now i guess we just have to hope that Whitmer vetoes it i guess, not sure how all this works exactly.

BILL HB5679 just passed in the Senate floor. Passed 21 Yea to 17 Nay.

12/16/2020 Expected in
12/16/2020 Expected in
12/16/2020 Expected in
12/16/2020 Expected in

It sounds like they are adding further “punishments” – retribution for suing the state, I suspect – to their newly approved Bill:

If this law were passed, and I was subject to the new provisions – especially those about regarding internet and social media identifiers – I would constantly be adding new internet email addresses, social media identifiers, etc. I would flood them with all these new addresses and make the registering agencies suffer a living hell of paperwork!!
🔸MI_Senate_scum@ gmail.comm
🔸Etc., Etc., Etc.!!

And all the information about any vehicle you might use? Rental vehicles? I might regularly rent vehicles just in order to continue submitting more and more paperwork to the popo!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣


I am with you on this one, as long as I could notify them online, and not have to go to my registering office each time.
This year was an exception, but in past years I have rented upwards of 20-25 cars. Would be hilarious to have them all on the registry.
If I worked for a used-car company, I guess I could register every car on the lot, since I might have to move them around 🙄

I’d interpret vehicles you “may” use to literally be every car on the road. Who’s to say you may not buy that vehicle down the line or become friends with that person and borrow it? So just register every car parked outside of the registry office. Remember that the law is 99% technicalities. No judge is going to rule on the “spirit” of it. So unless they want to explicitly describe within the law what “may” means in regards to the registry, I’d say 100% of cars qualify.

Over the past 10 years, that I am aware of, the tide is certainly shifting. It wasn’t that many years ago that 17 would not of voted no. We are slowly making headway. Some are listening. We now have a stance to sue on. The legislature has just approved a known unconstitutional bill.

Warpath… The way I read Tim’s letter he was saying that all new laws that are passed or automatically assumed to be constitutional. What a bunch of BS. Next year will be my 30th anniversary and there is no light at the end of the tunnel.

So Crazy.. Can not believe it has gone this far that these Ass Holes will Win . Sad ! Aclu melt down in my opinion . What a Shame ! .. Merry Christmas !

Yes, all new laws passed are assumed to be constitutional, but that does not mean that they are so. Prepare yourselves for the next lawsuit to prove it once again.

It should not be difficult to get a preliminary injunction based on the fact that Snyder is controlling law in the 6th Circuit, so the law will likely be DOA. Even the 6th cannot overrule Snyder unless it does so enbanc. Snyder has been used to obtain preliminary injunctions in other states within the 6th, like Tennessee as recent as this year.

The State will likely lose by default at the District Court and Circuit Court; but, be prepared for them to fight it all the back to SCOTUS.

Way I see it is, this time you have more proof that the legislative intent is punitive.

John Doe… You brought up some very good points. I guess eventually we will prevail but I just don’t know if it’ll be in my lifetime or not.

@Michigan – Unfortunately I’m not quite sure all of your assumptions on this new law being more restrictive and unconstitutional are accurate. The most weight given by the 6th Circuits decision was where a person can work, live, etc.. This is gone. This new law will have to be reviewed by the courts in toto, ie using Mendoza factors. And since the 6th recently stated that SORNA is not punishment, I’m not sure how this new law will reconcile the 2 competing 6th Circuits decisions. I can see a new First Amendment argument on posting identifiers online – Chilling Free Speech. I can also see some issues with “all vehicles owned or operated and all numbers registered or used” being overly broad and vague still. Does that mean I cannot rent a car without first telling them? Or can I use one for up to 3 business days before I need to report? I also see (have seen) issues with the definition “Residence” and having multiple. How is “resides at greater part of time” reconciled? In a 168 hour week if I am at one residence 85 hours is that the greater part of time? It is completely unclear what is determined as time parameters. Is it within a 24, 72, month, year timeframe that determines “greater”. If I speed above posted limit, I know I’m speeding. There is no time “limit” or definition. Just some thoughts.

If they are not going to strictly follow the constitution why comply With them ? why wait for them to drag us through hell for years fighting on unfriendly ground ? why not move to Michigan where they are already beating back the registry and winning ? why not use our numbers to hold this strong hold ? California is going backward . at least we have a shot at a huge lawsuit and injunction forcing these tyrants to prove that its not punishment as well as strongly unconstitutional , sick playing this game over 30 years pretending that I am not still a captive of the stinking state still being punished , this registry is not the same critter it was when I started out , Back then it was to LE only , then the new unconstitutional registry , now this crazy new trash we are looking down the barrel of , And if you don’t think its a barrel don’t comply with it , and just see for yourself that they will enforce it with men with guns , (That’s not free ) we can use our numbers better where the true fight is , where is the fight he in Cali ? Janice has fought back many things that make it better for some , while trusting LE we eat this “Bull Shit Tier Crime ” live in the negative , feel negative , real hope anytime soon negative , treated negative , “fighting back positive” being angry is the only thing that has kept me standing , angry I did hard time , angry that my family as well as everyone else’s family could be harmed at any time by some violent brain dead freak that wants to be a ” HIT LIST HERO” sick of being a mark for registry pushing nosy control freaks that say they are in fear and no one cares” My rights don’t end where these people fears begin , or do they ? some of us are being robed and raped of everything our very life is just hanging out in the wind for all to see while laughing , I Ain’t Laughing !

So they are requiring us to provide more information, but yet removed the residency restrictions, all while completely ignoring the reasons why Judge Cleland ruled it to be unconstitutional. No, I do not want my freaking email address published for everyone to see and possibly harass me. Hell, might as well put my phone number on there too. Obviously there were some senators who actually read the bill and are aware of the current litigation, but still too many who see Sex Offender Registration and just blindly vote yes. I hope AG Nessel is in the Governor’s ear and she gets her to veto the bill because it’s worth less than the paper it’s printed on.

A few questions:

1. It looks like the public posting of internet identifiers provision will only apply to people convicted after 2011? That’s bad and very unfair for them, and likely will be subject to the same constitutional challenge that the requirement of internet identifiers was for pre-2011 registrants, but I just want to clarify that I’m reading this right.

2. It doesn’t look like they’re getting rid of tiers, in terms of how often registrants are required to do in-person address verification, just not publishing tier level online?

3. They actually haven’t changed the window of time we have to report changes, just rephrased it–or am I reading it wrong?

It looks like that, if you’re pre-2011, this is mostly good things, aside from the vague language about residences or vehicles (I assumed we had to report any vehicles we ever used anyway). What I’m most intrigued by is the provision for being removed if you get a conviction expunged–I know, I know, we can’t actually do that, but my only conviction (“Using a computer to commit a crime”) was not listed as a non-expungable offense when I was convicted, but was added to that list a few years later, and I think I might have a shot at challenging that as ex post facto, since I partially agreed to plea because I had a shot at expungement–but I gave up on caring about that once the legislature made it clear that expungement would not lead to removal from the registry.

Other than that, yes, I’m quite disappointed–was hoping my 25 years on the registry would be reduced to 15 or even 20, and I’d be off now or in the near future, but I guess I still have 9 more years unless I can figure this expungement stuff out.

It says if you are required to register after July 1, 2011 then you need to provide that information. So since I’m still required to register after that date, then I assume I still have to provide that info. It basically does nothing and makes no sense with how it’s worded.

I’m pre-2011 and I feel like this does nothing for the pre-2011’s or any of us for that matter. It’s one step forward and two steps back.

I too plead guilty to one count of “Using a computer to commit a crime” under both my and my lawyers understanding that I would be able to get it expunged. This was in 2009, so I’m curious as to when the law changed to where it’s not expungable.

Confused. Hire an attorney that has been successful winning set-aside cases. Ask the attorney if you are even capable to get it before you give them a retainer. It cost me $3,000 and I had to get about 30 letters from family Friends and co-workers. I lost my first attempt but was finally set-aside the second time. It doesn’t show up on criminal investigations but I have still been fired from a job cause my name was out there. I am thrilled that they have allowed removal after expungements. I wish you luck. My prayers are with all of you that have to continue. I will keep fighting for you through The legal channels. America is based on second chances. As long as you behave everyone deserves one.

You should still be able to have it expunged. Expungement is actually a direct criminal legal thing and can’t be mucked about like they keep doing with the registries. Just about anything with registering is a civil thing which is why they can do whatever. Expungement is not that. So if your conviction was prior to the change, you’re grandfathered in to still be able to get it as that’s part of your plea promise that applies equally to all. How it affects you registering is what they can play around with. So go get your record cleaned up. It’s only a positive for you, regardless of how much it can currently help you with getting off the registry.

I have learned that 99% of the registrants that say they want to fight the registry don’t follow through. Almost all are all talk and no action. Their prefer to complain but won’t lift a finger to help.
I already have a lot going on. If you are prepared to jump into the fight, email me at

If you are in Michigan and covered by the Does legislation you WILL be removed from the registry. Any legislation to the contrary is irrelevant. Does II is pending. You have to remember that these rulings affect thousands on the registry. I believe it will be at least 10.000 and more likely north of 20,000. The problem is Michigan has to make individual determinations and this won’t happen overnight. I believe Michigan will ask for months that will turn to years. I believe it will be 2023 or 2024 before the dust settles, 2026 at the latest.
If you are affected by the Does II litigation (most pre-July 1, 2011 registrants) you only have to wait until Does II becomes final and Michigan makes a determination in your case. I believe it will take at least 3 or 4 years before all eligible registrants are removed. The future is difficult to predict so I may be wrong. My hope is that they take down the registry in it’s entirety and only place ones not affected by the rulings one by one back on the registry. But that option makes too much sense and probably would never happen with Judge Cleland. But stranger things have happened…

Bobby S.
Thanks for writing the senator. That sure was an enlightened response that I didn’t expect.

@Detroit,. I emailed the entire list that Tim provided, but Irwin was the only one that responded. I was also shocked to hear his take on the registry. Now I’m just hoping Whitmer vetos the stupid Bill, or Cleland might act and finally rule on Does ll, and gets the ball rolling. As alot of others on here I am pre- 95 it’s been 28 years for me, my original 25 years had passed obviously, and now that I’m 51 I am hoping I’m still alive when Does ll is finally finalized.

Bobby… I don’t know if this is true or not but it seems that I read recently where if Witmer vetoes 5679 the house and senate can override her veto? Does anybody know if this is true?

I can actually answer this one factually. They would need 2/3rds of the Michigan house AND 2/3rds of the Michigan senate to override a Whitmer veto. They might get that in the house but the senate vote to pass 5679 was 21-17 so I doubt they would be able to pull it off.

The bill has been presented to her. Once she signs it does anyone know how long before it takes affect?

@Detroit…is the “Recapture law” a part of the Michigan SORA law? And if so, was the law effective pre-2011…is the recapture law under the DOES II 6th circuit court’s 2016 ruling? I am not a legal beagle, so I really do not know how to ascertain this information without asking someone with a legal background. I committed the csc first, then another non-csc felony a month later, before I was eventually arrested. I was convicted of the csc first, then convicted of the second felony later. This all happened about 25 years ago… I’m still paying for my bad choices. Hoping to be free of all this when DOES II is finalized. Hoping! Thank you in advance for your answer (for your help). Peace be with all of you.

@Lost Hope
I expect with a bill like this that she’ll sign or veto at a time where it’ll get lost in the news cycle. People usually try to break news late on a Friday so that by the time Monday rolls around there is other news taking the spotlight. This is just a opinion or somewhat educated guess. I don’t see this being hushed up either way because it is sensationally newsworthy.

@Josh I would agree with your news cycle comments. To clarify my question, after signature does it become law immediately or is there some additional waiting period?

@Lost Hope
Don’t know for sure but I think it goes into effect upon her signing of it…anybody else know for sure?

Immediate effect was defeated on the 16th, so it’ll be 90 days before the new law kicks in. (assuming she signs it.)

Bobby S.:
If you survive covid you will probably live to see Does II become final. Hopefully, covid will be over by next November. Does II could be final by then. The ACLU hasn’t posted anything on it’s website. I believe they will as soon as things start to move. We don’t know what the ACLU will be requesting. They can ask that the entire registry be taken down and registrants be added as their cases are determined, which makes the most sense to me. I don’t think that will happen because a lot of people will feel it’s too radical.
The most likely scenario is that Does II will become final in either 2021 or 2022. They cannot remove everyone from the registry at once so the process will take 3-4 years. I believe the dust could settle by 2023 or 2024, 2026 at the latest. You have to remember that they have to make 45,000 determinations. Some determinations are simple and others are complex. And new persons are added to the registry each day. Remember, we are in uncharted territory so there is no way to reliably guess how this whole thing is going to play out. I am sure at least 10,000 will be removed and betting that number will go north of 20,000. They have to be removed. The question is how and when they will be removed.

If both your cases antedate the recapture provision, you might be off of the registry after Does II becomes final. At some point they will have to make individual determinations and when they get to your case, you have to argue for removal.

@Detroit…thank you for the encouragement in your response. Both my cases antedate the recapture provision of the law. So, I reckon I wait on the DOES II finalization process. I’ve been waiting for 24 years, I can be patient some more. (So many opportunities to be patient in this fallen world!) Thanks again. Peace be with all of you.

@Detroit / ALL Michigan

I know Detroit keeps talking about Does II and I understand his thinking process. What I have not heard him or anyone else talk about is the other 6th Circuit decision that came after Does II. The case was posted on here with a link to the decision (below). It flies squarely in the face of the Does II decision as it addressed Ex Post Facto as well.

I’m assuming a different panel heard this case and came to a different conclusion. SO my question is: HOW does the 6th Circuit reconcile their own differences and HOW does this case law NOW affect Judge Cleland in his eventual ruling??

Detroit / Michigan – anyone care to take a stab at this mess?

I am more than familiar with the Willman decision. It was a facial challenge to the federal SORNA. There have been several decisions stating that registrants have a federal duty to register even if they don’t have a state duty. Law enforcement is a traditional state duty in this country. I am not aware of any state requiring someone to register under federal SORNA if they are not required to register under state SORA and Willman is no different. So, for the most part, these decisions aren’t affecting registrants at the moment.
When you think of the number of former registrants affected by these decisions, it is quite large. Here in Michigan most registrants placed on the registry are tier I or tier II. But when you look at the registry, more than 50% are tier III. This is because Michigan has removed more than 20,000 tier I and II registrants from the registry. There is no accurate number as to the number of registrants removed from the registry across the country, but 500,000 would be a conservative estimate. Probably closer to 1,000,000 have been removed.
The U.S. Attorney General can go after these 500,000 to 1,000,000 persons to force them to register. There are 250,000 federal prison beds. Is the U.S. government going to release 250,000 murderers, rapists, robbers, drug traffickers, terrorists and others so it can enforce federal SORNA. I think not. Chapo Guzman’s bed in the federal system is pretty secure.
Just because the U.S. government prevails in these cases doesn’t mean that the person is on the registry. In this case Willman “lost” when the federal court ruled that he has a federal duty to register in Michigan. However, if you check MIPSOR, Willman is not on the public registry. The federal courts cannot force Michigan to register Willman or any other person. These are hollow victories for the U.S. government and not a threat to persons covered under the Does litigation.

Willman does not conflict with Does. It is consistent with Does. Willman settled the narrow issue if someone has a federal duty to register even though he has no state duty. The federal courts in Does have ruled that placing many sex offenders on the Michigan registry is unconstitutional. The federal court told Willman that he has a federal duty to register. Michigan cannot force him to register because his registration is unconstitutional. The federal attorneys who pushed this case are asses that wasted an incredible amount of money and court time to get a decision that can’t be enforced.
As long as Willman stays in Michigan, he won’t be on the registry. As long as the Does registrants stay in Michigan after they are removed, they won’t be on the registry. If they head south for the winter, they most likely will have to register where ever they go. I would bet most will stay indoors for January and February rather than head south.
I am aware of Willman and the other decisions. These decisions don’t affect anyone covered by the Does litigation. I don’t mention them because they only serve to confuse registrants.

Detroit, you state above “The federal courts in Does have ruled that placing many sex offenders on the Michigan registry is unconstitutional.” Is that in fact true? The 6th stated (and I’ve read Doe I / II many times) that MISORA was unconstitutional punishment in relation to EX POST due to restrictions on residency, Tier publication (key) corresponding to risk without assessment and reporting requirements.

But the new SORA law, if passed, does not publish corresponding Tiers, removes residency and school restrictions. What I see as an issue is IF you have to report in person still. That part is not clear in the new bill.

So couldn’t this bill pass the EX POST constitutional bar and not be punishment?

I suppose it depends on how Cleland finally rules correct? If he says no lifetime without assessment, regardless of published Tiers or requiring all the non public information is not ok AND it directly conflicts with the new HB 5679, those portions the state still couldn’t enforce. But if Cleland doesn’t state in his final opinion anything that conflicts with HB 5679, then the state skates by.

Am I correct or off base here?

In re: Willman
Look on MIPSOR. The bottom line is that Willman is not on the Michigan registry even though the court ruled he has a federal duty to register.

@Detroit – appreciate you taking the time to respond and offer your opinion! Thank you. What you said does make sense and I was aware of the “facial” challenge portion of Willman.

What are your thoughts on Cleland and how he may rule?

Cleland liked to play the role of hard assed prosecutor when he was prosecutor for St. Clair County. He has been no different as a judge. He is most famous for engaging in dirty underhanded conduct as prosecutor in sending Frederick Freeman to prison, who many, like former Michigan Supreme Court Justice Brennan, FBI and other federal agents and former agents, news anchors, etc., believe is innocent.
If the ACLU had drawn a different judge most pre-2012 registrants would be off of the registry today. He only agreed to the portion he found unconstitutional which he absolutely had to. The ACLU and the state appealed and the 6th Circuit made clear to him that he didn’t go far enough in finding the registry unconstitutional. Once Does I became final he refused to apply Does I to all similar situated registrants forcing the ACLU to file Does II in order to enforce Does I which doesn’t make any sense. This is why the ACLU opposes the current legislation and want Whitmer to veto it. They don’t want to be forced into any more needless litigation.
People forget Bill Schutte’s role in the Does I fiasco. He appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court which pissed off every other attorney general in the U.S. If the U.S. Supreme Court heard Does I they would have found every registry in the U.S. unconstitutional. Every other attorney general requested that the Supreme Court not hear the case so the damage will be limited to Michigan. Even the U.S. Solicitor General jumped in trying to keep the Supreme Court from hearing the case. This shows that most attorney generals agree that the registry is unconstitutional and afraid of the U.S. Supreme Court hearing Does or any other registry case on the merits. People don’t realize how the Does litigation changed the entire legal landscape in relation to the registry. People in other states keep whining and refusing to support litigation in Michigan. They are only concerned about getting off the registry in their own state. They don’t realize that the quickest way to get off the registry in their own state is by supporting the effort that can deliver the knock out blow.
Read my posts on this website and others. When people say they are ready to jump in and join the fight, I post my personal email so they can contact me. Hundreds, if not thousands, have read my posts and saw my email but I have never recieved one single response to all of the times I have posted my email address. These jerk offs are quick to tell me that I am wrong but refuse to contribute to this discussion in any productive way. I am not on the registry and never have been. I am quite content to leave the 99% who are idiots on the registry. I am only helping the 1% who deserve to be off of the registry.
As for Cleland. He has no choice in the matter. He has to sign and enforce a final order. I expect him to do so as slowly as possible. That’s why I wouldn’t be surprised if he didn’t sign the final order until 2022 even though 2021 is more likely. The wheels won’t start to turn until Cleland signs the final order. There’s a good chance it will take more than 20,000 people off the registry. I expect the state will ask for months and Cleland will give them years to make individual determinations. Of course, people with money to pay attorneys get to go to the front of the line. Registrants without money have to wait until the state gets to their case. There are currently no go to attorneys in Michigan concerning the registry. The only ones, such as Miriam Aukerman, can’t represent individual registrants. That’s because there is no money in the registry. Wait until Does II becomes final and all of these attorneys who “specialize” in SORA are going to be knocking on registrant’s doors looking for registrants willing to part with a few thousand dollars to get off of the registry earlier than others. Miriam Aukerman, Professor Riengold and other fine attorneys have done all of the heavy lifting. Low life dirtball attorneys who don’t care about registrants are waiting for Does II to become final. Rest assured, when Does II becomes final, registrants will be hiding from attorneys who “specialize” in SORA. When these low life greedy attorneys start to contact you, ask them, “where were you before Does II became final?”. Registrants have to be careful which of these attorneys they give their money to.

You have to remember that we are in uncharted territory. 5679 contains many provisions that are in direct conflict with various court decisions. Even though Does I wasn’t a class action, those affected by Does I should have been taken off of the registry. Bill Schuette took the position that registrants must sue individually in order to be removed from the registry. Does II was filed as a class action so will lead to those affected by Does I to be removed from the registry. Once Does II becomes final you have to remember that Michigan has to review 45,000 cases one by one. Michigan cases will present challenges because in many cases some records have been destroyed. Out of state cases will present many unique challenges because many courts and police departments cull old records. Then there are other challenges like the recapture provision. If a person is convicted of an out of state felony that is a misdemeanor in Michigan, they can raise that as an argument to be removed. Some conduct in other states is not even criminal in Michigan. If someone had sex with a 16 year-old in California they are on the California registry. The age of consent in Michigan is 16 so if they move to Michigan, how can Michigan put them on the registry for conduct that it doesn’t even view as criminal let alone a registerable offense?
Registrants are not going to go away until the registry is abolished. They are becoming more organized, aware of their rights and raising funds to challenge these laws, i.e., FAC and ilvoices. It’s only a matter of time until registrants in Michigan become organized and start raising funds to fight these laws. Registrants in Michigan have had the incredible luck that Miriam Aukerman and Professor Reingold coordinated in their attack on the Michigan registry and were very successful without registrants ponying up a dime. Professor Reingold has since retired so I am unsure if he is still in the fight but Miriam Aukerman is still standing front and center. Someday Miriam Aukerman will retire. Michigan registrants must organize and get behind Miriam Aukerman and the ACLU and continue the fight.
And if it weren’t enough that Michigan registrants are lucky, in 2018, Michigan voters elected Dana Nessel as attorney general, who agrees with the ACLU on the registry. So Michigan registrants had the incredible good fortune that Does I occurred in their state but now have the only attorney general in the country on their side. This wasn’t through organization or fundraising. This was just the dumb luck of having happen to live in Michigan as all of this was occurring.
Registrants in Michigan will be the first in the country to be removed in large numbers from the registry. Thank Miriam Aukerman, Professor Reingold and every one else who made this happen.

I understand what you’re saying, and it makes sense, but the people that are pre 2006 and 2011 and pre 1995. It seems like we should come of the registry automatically no questions asked, and they have no problem adding hundreds of people on the registry on a daily or monthly basis, so it should be just as easy to remove hundreds if not thousands on a daily or monthly basis as well. Just my opinion. It didn’t take them long to add me in 95 or 96, so it should be just as easy to remove me and there’s from the registry.

The die is already cast. Either registrants are affected by the Does litigation or they’re not. Any legislation that passes is only relevant to the affected registrants because it may cause a delay in their removal. The delay probably won’t be more than a few months. My concern is monetary damages. There is case law to support monetary damages after the courts have decided that the registry is unconstitutional. I don’t know if the Oliver Law Group is seeking monetary damages or not.
It does no good to be sitting on pins and needles because you finally may be getting off the registry. If you have funds for an attorney, he can review your case and give you an idea if you will be eligible for removal after Does II becomes final. He can even get your case moved to the front of the line. For registrants without money for an attorney, you just have to wait. I don’t believe they will begin removing registrants until at least 2022 and they may not get finished until 2026. You have to remember they have to review 45,000 case files. This will take years.

Interesting stuff Detroit. What I don’t quite understand is why are pre-2011 registrants getting off the registry? Is it because of the constitutional issues raised by the appeals court, and that they aren’t satisfied by this new legislation? Thus, there remains, for pre-2011 registrants, only an unconstitutional law on the books requiring them to register, and thus they will be removed from the requirement to register (albeit slowly)?

But what if Cleland says the new legislation satisfies the appeals court concerns? Can it be re-appealed to the appeals court? That doesn’t sound like a pre-ordained win to me.

Confused – I’m trying to understand it as well. I understand the 6th decision. So they remove us let’s say. THEN they pass this new law and boom, right back on. Lawsuits would have to start over. So I’m also confused. Cleland could rule the 2006 / 2011 amendments aren’t even MOOT since they no longer would exist. Or rule based on the 6th, which wouldn’t even be MI law and require us to start a new lawsuit based on the new law.

My only thought is that Cleland does rule there must be individual assessments (which is also contrary to SCOTUS in Connecticut v Does) to add on any of the new law requirements and MI doesn’t appeal. Nessel might not file the appeal. THEN the state would be bound by the decision and have to comply with assessments or choose to remove us. MI cannot enforce a known unconstitutional law (though it has).

Confused man:
The bill contradicts the court decisions so Cleland can’t rule that it is constitutional in it’s entirety. There is no need to appeal. The ACLU will hash it all out in the trial court. Pre July 1, 2011 registrants will just have to wait until the dust settles.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x