#doesvsnyder

By Mark Hicks . . . 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. Read full article Read summary from MI-ACLU Read the full article

Last week it came to NARSOL's attention that there had been a sudden new development in the Does v. Snyder case. Michigan State Police have decided that at this time they will not be registering anyone whose sexual offense conviction occurred prior to the April 2011 changes in the statute. A copy of the memorandum was faxed to Michigan ACLU. This decision appears to be due to the February 14 court order by District Court Judge Robert Cleland that gives Michigan legislators sixty days to change the law so that it is in compliance with the 2016 ruling by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. This development has created widespread confusion among Michigan registrants as the law has not yet been changed and is still very much in the statutes. It appears that Michigan State Police are giving registrants convicted prior to April 2011 permission to ignore the law while not providing any further information or confirmation that they do not need to register at this time. Also, local sheriff departments are not necessarily bound to the rules and policy changes of the state police and may decide to continue registering pre-2011 registrants. Michigan ACLU is advising registrants to try to register anyway and, if refused, to try to get something in writing that says they do not need to register at this time. If that is also refused, registrants should take steps to document their visit themselves. Write down the date and time you attempted to register and the name of the police officer or state trooper you spoke with. While this law is still on the books and no confirmation has been provided, it is important that registrants take steps to protect themselves. Michigan ACLU also advises that this does not mean pre-2011 registrants are coming off the registry. It merely means that at this time the state police are not registering them when they come in for their quarterly or bi-annually verification. This could change at any time, and pre-2011 registrants may be ordered to resume registering as usual while state legislators revise the law. We are paying attention to this case and will post updates as new developments are announced. In the meantime, Michigan registrants should do their best to continue following the SORNA law as written. Read the full article

On Feb. 14, U.S. District Judge Robert Cleland ruled to provide relief for registrants on the Michigan Sex Offender Registration Act. Judge Cleland ordered that if the legislature does not bring the law into compliance with constitutional requirements, the state will no longer be able to enforce the law against pre-2011 registrants.  Read the full article

(WXYZ) A federal judge has issued a ruling that invalidates portions of Michigan's Sex Offender Registry Act (SORA) that are unconstitutional. U.S. District Court Judge Robert Cleland issued the decision on Friday in a lawsuit that argued the SORA was unconstitutional. Cleland heard oral arguments in Port Huron Federal Court on Feb. 5 based on his previous 2015 ruling and from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2016 that some provisions of the registry are unconstitutional for some of the 44,000 convicted sex offenders on the public website. "For several years, registrants have been forced to comply with unconstitutional provisions of SORA. The parties, and this court, expected that the Sixth Circuit’s ruling would spur legislative action, and for some time, it appeared that the legislature was poised to pass a new and comprehensive statute, obviating the need for this opinion. Unfortunately, the legislature was not able to finalize a new registration statute," a portion of his ruling reads. According to Cleland, the court will invalidate the portions of the SORA, even though "the court recognizes that its ruling will fracture the existing structure of SORA." Cleland wrote that he anticipates the ruling will reginite efforts in Lansing to finalize a new registration statute that will survive constitutional review, as the national model has. "But until such time as the legislature acts, SORA will be unenforceable against a large portion of registrants and may be enforced only in part against the remaining registrants," the ruling reads. "To be clear: SORA will not become unenforceable as of the date of this order. Rather, the holdings in this opinion will become effective and enforceable only after the entry of a final judgment, at the time specified in that final judgment," according to the ruling. There is a 60-day window until the judgment will become effective so that the legislature can come up with a new statute. Read full article Read the full article