Michigan Supreme Court Upholds 2021 Sex Offender Registration Act AS APPLIED to one individual – It’s punishment, just not cruel and unusual punishment
The Michigan Supreme Court recently issued a decision in People of Michigan v. Robert James Kardasz, a case that once again highlights how courts across the country are grappling with the constitutional limits of modern sex-offender registration laws. While the ruling directly applies only to Michigan, its reasoning has clear implications for Florida and other states that maintain expansive, lifetime registration schemes.
Robert James Kardasz was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and sentenced to a lengthy prison term. In addition to incarceration, the trial court imposed lifetime sex-offender registration under Michigan’s 2021 Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA), along with lifetime electronic monitoring. Kardasz challenged these requirements, arguing that the registration and monitoring provisions constituted cruel or unusual punishment under both the Michigan Constitution and the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. His appeal ultimately reached the Michigan Supreme Court.
In its opinion, the Court acknowledged something advocates have long argued: that modern sex-offender registration laws, despite being labeled “civil” by legislatures, operate in many ways as punishment. The Court recognized that lifetime registration, public disclosure, and ongoing in-person reporting impose significant, affirmative restraints on individuals long after they have completed their criminal sentences. Nonetheless, the Court concluded that these burdens, at least as applied to Kardasz, did not rise to the level of “cruel or unusual punishment.” The majority reasoned that the severity of the underlying offense, combined with the state’s asserted interest in public safety, justified lifetime registration under Michigan’s constitution and under federal constitutional standards.
The Court’s analysis reflects a careful—but ultimately deferential—approach. While it stopped short of declaring SORA a purely civil regulatory scheme, it also declined to strike it down. Instead, the Court emphasized proportionality, suggesting that lifetime registration may be constitutionally permissible when imposed on individuals convicted of the most serious offenses. This reasoning leaves the door open to future as-applied challenges by individuals whose offenses or circumstances are less severe, even as it upholds the statute in this particular case.
Kardasz also challenged the imposition of lifetime electronic monitoring, arguing that it constituted an unreasonable search and an excessive punishment. The Michigan Supreme Court declined to fully revisit those claims, effectively allowing the lower court’s ruling upholding lifetime monitoring to stand. As a result, both lifetime registration and lifetime electronic monitoring remain intact under Michigan law for individuals in similar circumstances.
For advocates in Florida, this decision is worth close attention. Florida’s sex-offender registry is among the most punitive in the nation, with lifetime registration, extensive public disclosure, frequent reporting requirements, and severe penalties for even technical violations. Like Michigan, Florida has consistently argued that its registry is a civil, regulatory measure rather than punishment. Yet courts—including Florida’s own—have increasingly acknowledged that these laws impose real, lasting restraints on liberty.
What makes the Michigan decision particularly relevant is the Court’s willingness to concede that SORA functions as punishment, even while upholding it. That acknowledgment is significant. It reflects a growing judicial recognition that sex-offender registries are not merely passive databases but systems that actively regulate where people can live, work, and exist in society. For Florida, where challenges to the registry often fail at the threshold question of whether the law is punitive at all.
At the same time, the Michigan decision serves as a cautionary reminder. Courts remain reluctant to invalidate registration schemes wholesale, especially when dealing with serious offenses and when legislatures justify these laws in the name of public safety. Success in Florida is therefore likely to depend on narrowly tailored challenges that focus on disproportionality, retroactive application, lack of individualized risk assessment, and the cumulative effects of lifetime registration combined with other restrictions, rather than broad facial attacks.
The decision can be found here: https://www.courts.michigan.gov/4af909/siteassets/case-documents/uploads/opinions/final/sct/165008_100_01.pdf, thanks Eugene for bringing it to our attention!
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Can anyone help me understand this? The Michigan SC cited 42 USC 20915(a) when saying: “SORNA currently requires states to link the duration of registration to offense-based tiers: Tier I offenders must register for 15 years, Tier II offenders for 25 years, and Tier III offenders for life.” Given that Federal law 42 USC 20915(a)) requires states to link to a tier system, why doesn’t Florida comply with federal law?
Florida law goes beyond compliance with Federal SORNA in terms of duration of registration (life duration for all registrable offenses).
That is if they want the federal money. Every state can create their own laws. They just won’t get the money.
Florida does comply with the law, in the sense that SORNA is a floor, not a ceiling. In order for a state to be considered SORNA compliant, it must meet the minimum requirements.
FAC
I wish we could put up a sign at the border of Florida, warning potential registered visitors to Nay Nay, stay away so they do not end up on Florida’s registry. I have seen time and time again someone comment on here that they came down to relax with their families and ended up with new obligations. And many of them were people who had already been removed from their own state’s registry.
I was removed from the registery in Washington State, and was a level 1 offender, never on the Internet. After moving to Florida they said I needed to be back on the registery. Even though it clearly states in Florida law that after I was removed from the registery in the state I committed my crime I should not have to register here. Just another loop hole? More money for them correct? Especially since they keep dead people on the registery, or people that have just visited.
@Don’t know
This is outrageous and downright pathetic. Disgusting that us on the registry do not seem to be covered by the constitution most of the time, even we have DONE our time. When I was being released from prison, they told me the first thing I had to do was go and register as an offender. This even though my crime was 6 years before the registry existed.
And yes, dead people are on the registry. I know several people who have passed away but are still on the registry. What purpose does that solve other than upsetting that person’s family members who died. So not even at death do we have any dignity left?
So sorry what you are going through this, as many of us are struggling to make sense of our situations, some of us decades after our sentences had passed.
Don’t know,
You write, “it clearly states in Florida law that after I was removed from the registry in the state I committed my crime I should not have to register here.”
Where is that law you are referring to?
If the offense you committed in Washington is a registerable offense (or similar to a registerable offense based on the elements) in Florida, then you will be required to register in Florida under Florida’s registration laws. The fact that you were removed from the registry in another state would only be relevant in Florida if the out-of-state offense is not a sex crime requiring registration under the laws of Florida.
Someone help me out with this and make it make sense.
When a person accused of murder gets released from doing time, they are referred to as an “Ex-offender”.
When someone who committed a sex crime completes their sentence/sentences, they are labeled a “Sex offender” and in Florida at least, for life.
The only thing that they have in common is they rhyme, Ex-offender/Sex-offender. Otherwise, we are continually held down and having to register numerous times a year and more if you have updates. Most other releasees can go on about their lives as long as they stay out of trouble. But we on the registry, trouble comes looking for us.
And don’t forget all the perks we get every year. The new laws that all of us love so much (Sarcasm)
No End
If God Himself came down to Earth and spoke to Florida’s Supreme court, the judges would probably say “We will think about it and get back to you at a later date”.
My opinion and how I feel because there has not been much love coming out of Florida’s rulings. I mean they made a path for removal but how many have actually been removed from the registry? Just because there is a path off, the judge has the final say.
I agree Jack. I’ll never get off. I had a FTR over a license plate my step dad didn’t tell me he changed 😢
Never say never. If the entire registry is found unconstitutional then you would be removed. But I agree, that probably isn’t going to happen. But we can always dream, hope and wish. Stay positive my friend. I know it is rough but none of us need more ulcers. Live your life the best you can and stay strong, if not for yourself, at least for your family.
Thank you for the kind words my friend. I’m doing my best. I own a home with my wife and kids and my family never looks at me any different. If anything, they think it’s all crap lol. Stay safe out there Jack 💪🍻
well, from what I’ve been seeing, a lot of people have been coming off the registry, especially in Miami Dade. The only way you can find out is go by each county clerk of court website and find them that way and see who petitioned and if they are still on the registry