You are here

ACLU to MI registrants: Please remain compliant

ACLU of Michigan . . . We recommend that all registrants stay SORA-compliant until there is a final judgment. State criminal courts are not bound by federal appellate decisions (except for U.S. Supreme Court decisions), and is not yet clear how Michigan state courts will apply the Does v. Snyder decision. We strongly recommend full compliance to avoid criminal charges or other consequences. Individuals who are charged with criminal SORA violations (e.g., residing in an exclusion zone, failure to register) can try to raise the defense in criminal court that SORA is unconstitutional if it is being applied retroactively to them. Whether Does v. Snyder provides a defense may depend on factors like the date of the original sex offense and what part of SORA the individual allegedly violated. Individuals charged with SORA violations should seek qualified defense counsel or ask for appointed counsel if they cannot afford an attorney.

The Court of Appeals’ decision held that the 2011 amendments, which extended many registrants’ obligations from 25 years to life, cannot be applied retroactively. Because there is not yet a final judgment, we do not recommend that registrants file motions to shorten their registration periods back to 25 years. Individuals who would have already come off the registry under the pre-2011 version of SORA should consult with an attorney. Registrants whose offenses occurred before January 1, 2006 and who want to work or live within an exclusion zones (e.g. take a specific job or live with family) should consult with an attorney.

Registrants who are on parole or probation should follow all parole and probation orders related to their sex offender registration. Individuals who are facing current felony charges for non-sex offenses but who could be added to the registry based on a past sex offenses (“recapture” cases) should consult with an attorney.

Registrants who want to support the legislative effort to reform Michigan’s sex offender laws should contact the ACLU of Michigan.

More questions? Visit the ACLU of Michigan’s FAQ regarding Snyder.

This topic contains 13 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  Robin 4 months ago.

  • Author
  • #20540 Reply


    I am getting a mixed message from this. First they say they do not recommend filing a motion, because there has not been a final judgement. Then in the next sentence they say consult with an attorney. Which is it?

    • #20562 Reply


      They didn’t say don’t file a motion, they said remain compliant…. two totally different things

      • #20564 Reply


        I guess you forgot to read it. Here you go
        “Because there is not yet a final judgment, we do not recommend that registrants file motions to shorten their registration periods back to 25 years.”

        • #20614 Reply


          Yeah I missed it, and I read it 4 times….

    • #20565 Reply


      Well, actually they said they don’t “recommend it”, but they didn’t outright say “don’t attempt it”.

      • #20567 Reply


        Yeah…that must be it……

  • #20949 Reply

    Tim Lawver

    Given that SORNA is the basis for all electronic domestic surveillance and was upheld in DOE (2003) the recent determinations in federal courts that THESE USES of databases are obviously unconstitutional has placed the deep state in quite a bind, thus the delay while the desperate deep state develops a work around. Such uses of databases are not appropriate for the gov’t to impose without process and the public notice that comes along with it.

    So many believed all this is about the sex offender when essentially DOE was really about the deep state wanting unfettered use of a new tool known as an electronic database. If with respect to individual liberty the state can indenture the individual to a database than it is also reasonable to monitor the general population with them too – thus we got METADATA COLLECTION from the deep state.

    So ya’ all think my logic twisted have a look at SETSA – Stop enabling sex trafficking act which is making its way through congress. Once again we see the powers that be using “Sex” to advance the surveillance cause AND further undermine basic constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure. Head on over to to see the details of SETSA and eff’s objection to it.

  • #21123 Reply


    The U.S. Supreme Court will not be back from summer recess until October 1st. I would expect hearing from them some time next month. Yep, everyone should stay compliant until U.S. Supreme Court has their say. Thanks to all those that have worked on this case.

    • #21125 Reply


      The Court will actually begin preparing for the beginning of the new term a week earlier. The first conference is scheduled for Monday, September 25.

      • #21127 Reply


        I beat you LOL

        • #21130 Reply


          Yeah. But I used more words.

    • #21126 Reply


      Actually SCOTUS is scheduled to conference on this case Sept. 25th and will likely issue an order for it Sept. 28th.

      • #21128 Reply


        Oh wow! That is cool. Thanks for the info Fred and Robin.

Reply To: ACLU of Michigan implores Michigan registrants to remain compliant, for now
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

  • *You must check the "I am not a robot" box and follow the recaptcha instructions.
  • *Your submission must be approved by a NARSOL moderator.
  • *Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Do not promote your business, your blog, your website, or any other business, blog, or website.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.
Your information:

<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre> <em> <strong> <del datetime=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">