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
If the 6th circuit court of appeals was in tune with the state of Michigan they would rule on this issue before everyone has to send out 44,000 notifications to the public and many more to those still incarcerated, but that would make sense, and when has government ever done anything sensible?
So im going say something a pardon if it don’t make sense, or if it’s a functionality.
mice been reading about bills that want strip government benefits from registrants (further punishment) and limit jobs registrants can work where no minors are present (further punishment) Florida trying ban registrants from any body of water. California trying push for execution of “child predators”. Hasn’t this registry scheme gone far beyond the scope of just trying to keep an eye on registrants, to the point they are trying to spell out “legal execution” of registrants. “No healthcare, or near bodies of water, no government benefits, can’t afford food” thats a chain of events that can occur to registrants. They aren’t just trying watch registrants, they are trying watch registrants die, with no dignity.
point im getting at is, at this point Janice and everyone else should be going “for the throat” of the registry. It’s evolved beyond the intended purpose and have become a spelled out form of torture for registrants “slow and painful” and trying make it legal.
I believe the PLF case is tackling this nationwide
This is what I found about the ruleing everyone is talking about.
This is what the supreme court said.
I will say this if, you go on family watchdog and punch in your adress and look at the busiest area by you. The mapped area wil light up like a Christmas tree. The people forced to registry that are on the map probably goes back 40yrs. Or more not, one on there has committed the same crime again. The government sure does know how to lie about how dangerous the people forced to register are.
So this might be a dumb question, but in does 3 vs Whitmer internet identifiers was ruled unconstitutional correct? Does that ruling apply only to pre 2011 or pre and post 2011?
Isn’t someone in contempt of court today? ( Michigan state police)
I haven’t received any new documents regarding my requirements going forward, from the previous lawsuit,
That I think was supposed to be done by 2/20/2026 ?
I just did a Google search,and seen where the supreme court are going to be hearing cases March 10th-12th not sure how long before we hear a decision was wondering if they was going to have it so we could listen to it was hoping we would get some kind of an update from ACLU Anyone else heard anything about this,Any thoughts Thanks
Has the ACLU submitted their part of the court order?
just trying to stay up to date!
Hello everyone,
Well, went in today to check in, it went well he just asked if anything has changed. I said not in 15 years it hasn’t, it only took 5 minutes this time. December it took about a half hour, but that is because he was new here and just started. We were just talking as he was putting my info in , and he had no clue what was going on, he just said that stuff is way above my pay grade.
It went well and apparently no new updates on what is going on, or at least they are clueless at my cop shop.
Found this reading it it has something to do with ex post facto.
Crazy situation:
I went in yesterday to report. I missed reporting for the last two quarters but the system still had me listed as compliant. So yesterday, I was a bit concerned that they might call me on it but everything went smoothly. Now, instead of my last report date being nine months ago, it’s yesterday. Whew! At least I’m still on the outside and looking forward to the relief that we all hope (and believe) is coming soon.
Hi everyone,
I wanted to share something that is very concerning. I have a friend of mine who had a CSC 2nd and was sentenced in 1998. He originally had to register for 15 years. The 2011 changes made him register for 25 years. He was supposed to completed this March. He went in for his final registration and the date changed from March to March 2034. He asked what was going on and they recalculated his registry and told him that his regisistration date started when he was released from incarceration. The problem is that his time was supposed to be done this year and his registration date was supposed to be when he was convicted. Why the MSP are using the release date I do not know. I emailed Tim to forward this to the attorney’s but he tried to tell me that it goes from your release date not your conviction date which is incorrect, it is from you conviction date for pre-2011. Does anyone have any idea.
Hello everyone,
Just wanted to give a quick update, I’m not who has gotten their letter/package yet.
I received mine today in the mail , from what I read and understand it is pretty much stuff we already know it’s just putting on the record and telling us who the stay applies to and who it doesn’t apply too, and that we still need follow these orders until the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals makes it’s final decision. Hope this makes sense to everyone.