Civil rights organization says it’s unconstitutional to label people for life without individual review
DETROIT – Today the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan (ACLU), on behalf of 10 people who all previously won federal court rulings that Michigan’s Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA) is unconstitutional, filed a federal class action lawsuit against state officials over the latest version of the law. It is the fourth federal lawsuit the civil rights organization has filed challenging SORA in the past decade. The federal courts and the Michigan Supreme Court have repeatedly ruled that the earlier iteration of SORA was unconstitutional.
Today’s lawsuit, Does v. Whitmer, or Does III, filed in U.S. District Court, argues that the new SORA statute, which went into effect in 2021, is also unconstitutional. Specifically, SORA fails to provide for individual review or an opportunity for removal, forcing tens of thousands of people, including people who didn’t even commit a sex offense, to be branded as sex offenders and subjected to extensive, and in most cases life-long restrictions, without any consideration of their individual circumstances, which is a violation of their due process and equal protection rights. The 193-page complaint also argues that SORA imposes unconstitutional retroactive punishment, including by retroactively extending the registration terms of thousands of people to life.
Michigan has one of the largest registries in the country; there are approximately 45,000 Michigan registrants, and almost 10,000 more who live out of state.
“For nearly a decade, we have been fighting to put an end to an ineffective, bloated and unconstitutional registry that not only fails to protect survivors, but in fact makes families and communities less safe,” said Miriam Aukerman, ACLU of Michigan senior staff attorney. “The latest version of SORA is more of the same, and still puts tens of thousands of people on this list automatically without any consideration of their individual circumstances. What we’re asking for is very simple: consider the facts in each case before someone is tarred as a sex offender for life. Dying shouldn’t be the only way a person can get off the registry.”
See the available court documents at the links below:
I’ve looked at the 6th Circuit’s calendar for oral arguments for this month. We’re NOT on the calendar. Wish we knew what’s really going on. However… we’re unable to email Tim because he doesn’t like it when we reach out to him looking for answers.
I had a question for everybody. This might sound stupid but, I thought each month we have to register. We only have three days not a whole month.
Thanks all for the info.
Has anyone reviewed The Supreme Court’s decision in Holsey Ellingburg v. United States (No. 24-482)?
I wonder if and how this could help our lawsuit here in Michigan especially the pre-2011 class.
Email from the actual came in this morning goine to put the bottom part up after this one.
Bottom part to the actual email this morning
Michigan ACLU has finally released an update;
Sixth Circuit Update: We filed our final brief in the Sixth Circuit on December 16, 2025. The state filed its final brief, on January 12, 2026. We expect the case to be argued before a three-judge panel in late winter or early spring. After that, we cannot predict how long it will take for the Court of Appeals to issue its decision. Depending on the decision, the losing side could then seek rehearing “en banc,” meaning a larger group of Sixth Circuit judges would hear the case. Or the losing side could ask the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case. Either option is just a request: neither the “en banc” Sixth Circuit nor the U.S. Supreme Court have to take the case.
We periodically add newly-filed documents to the ACLU website, so you can find additional briefs and information at: https://www.aclumich.org/en/what-you-need-know-about-does-iii.
Michigan Supreme Court: On December 19, 2025, the Michigan Supreme Court decided a criminal appeal (People v. Kardasz) that raised the issue of whether SORA 2021 violates the Cruel or Unusual Punishment Clause of the Michigan Constitution. The Court said it did not, but in the process ruled that SORA 2021 is punishment. This is important for Does III, because the court applied the same legal test (to decide that the law is punitive) as the one that applies to our Ex Post Facto Clause claims. That means we can cite to Kardaszas another example of a state high court holding that conviction-based online registries like Michigan’s are unconstitutional as applied retroactively because they are punitive.
In addition, the Michigan Supreme Court will soon be hearing a case called People v. Ellis where it will consider retroactive application of SORA under the “recapture” provision (where people whose sex offense pre-dates SORA are required to register after a new non-sex conviction). That case will shed light on the Court’s thinking about retroactive application of SORA more generally. Finally, the Court will also be hearing a case called People v. Ringle, which challenges lifetime electronic monitoring.
Thanks as always for your support and patience, and best wishes for 2026.
The Does III Litigation Team
ACLU of Michigan
2966 Woodward Ave
Detroit, MI 48201
United States
Maybe they do watch our posts !
If we are taking off the registry. The state better get their check book out.
I’m just going to put this here for all you Michigan people. They’re arguing that anyone prior to 2011 and the legislature already submitted amendments to 2021 SORA based on Does IV. Here is a little fun tidbit for my Michigan peeps.
STATE OF MICHIGAN 91ST LEGISLATURE REGULAR SESSION OF 2002
ENROLLED SENATE BILL No. 1275
AN ACT to amend 1994 PA 295, entitled “An act to require persons convicted of certain offenses to register; to prescribe the powers and duties of certain departments and agencies in connection with that registration; and to prescribe penalties and sanctions,” by amending sections 2, 5, 5a, 7, 8, 9, and 10 (MCL 28.722, 28.725, 28.725a, 28.727, 28.728, 28.729, and 28.730), sections 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 as amended and section 5a as added by 1999 PA 85, and by adding sections 1a and 4a.
Directly from the Bill itself and clearly prescribed PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS. So anyone whose crime predates 2002 SORA at the very least should be done in maybe a year? It would not be from your conviction date, it would have to be BEFORE the act became punishment. For sure it is punishment in 2002 as the legislature so nicely stated.
All of their BS has come full circle. No more smoke and mirrors because SCOTUS now says a court must review text and structure. The Michigan SORA statute is prescribing punishment, in plain words.
Just wondering about the DNA, That started after people were sentenced Any thoughts seems to me that would be an expo facto issue