Well, I certainly hope so.

You are incorrect.

I also wanted to point out that in the Does v. Swearingen case the plaintiffs are all seeking relief from the original 1997 law regarding the registry. All plaintiffs were sentenced prior to the original enactment.

I found it here. It provides a lot.
https://www.aclumich.org/en/SORA

What is a Class Action Lawsuit?

A class action is a form of lawsuit that permits one or more people (called “plaintiffs”) to represent a larger group (called a “class”) of individuals who all have similar claims. A class action allows the court to decide those claims for everyone at once.

In Does II, there are six individual class representatives who are bringing the case on behalf of all registrants. This is in contrast to Does I, which was brought only on behalf of individual plaintiffs. The class in Does II includes all individuals who are currently or will be subject to registration under Michigan’s SORA. Does II also has an ex post facto subclass which includes people who are or will be on the registry for offenses committed before the 2011 amendments were added to SORA.

In a class action, the court first has to decide whether to “certify” the class. That decision determines whether only the named plaintiffs can bring the case, or whether the decision will apply to everyone in the proposed class. A motion has been filed in Does II seeking to certify a class of all registrants, as well as the ex post facto subclass.

If the class is certified, you do not have to do anything to become part of the class.

When were the changes made in 2011? Also, in said year 2011, if you were charged in the early part of the year but convicted prior to years end where would you fall?

Ex: Charge month May but conviction date November…changes come out in between where do you fall?

So, David, how do you explain the facial challenge to the statutes? Specifically Paragraph 106, 108, 112, 115, 118, 122, 124, 127, 129 and the prayer for relief in 131 of the current complaint. So if the statute is declared facially unconstitutional it will only benefit the 5 named “Does”?

The Michigan case sought and was granted class action status. The Florida case has not sought class action status. The court cannot grant relief were specific relief is not sought .

You are completely wrong, David.

Does 1-5 v. Swearingen is not a class action suit and will only provide relief to the 5 Does.