MI: ACLU suit seeks changes to Michigan sex offender registry
The lawsuit, filed in June in U.S. District Court, demands that the state lift the offenders’ lifetime registry requirements. That would allow them access to benefits they’re cut off from because they’re on the list — including the program Hetherington was kicked out of, the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing initiative.
“The lifetime requirement is effectively lifetime parole, because you have to report even small things like getting an email address or phone number,” said Miriam Aukerman, senior staff attorney at ACLU of Michigan.
“There are other reporting requirements, such as if you want to travel anywhere for more than seven days, you have to report that in person,” Aukerman said. “The statue also says people on the registry can’t loiter within 100 feet of a school, which means parents can’t watch their kids’ sports games or graduations without being in violation.”
State police spokeswoman Shanon Banner said the agency is in compliance.
“As a result of the 6th Circuit decision, the MSP informed law enforcement that similar retroactive enforcement of the requirements under the 2006 or 2011 amendments against other similarly situated offenders could likewise be unconstitutional,” she said in a written statement.
“However, it needs to be noted that the court did not find the sex offender registry itself to be unconstitutional, nor did it find prospective enforcement of the 2006 or 2011 requirements against offenders with offense dates after such amendments to be unconstitutional.”
Banner said state police are unable to take people off the list who had been retroactively required to report for life.
“Efforts to modify the registry as a whole require legislative changes to the (sex offender registry),” she said. “To this end, we have been engaged in discussion with the Legislature, Attorney General’s Office and other stakeholders for some time in regards to the offenders who were named in the lawsuit.”
Phone calls to the Attorney General’s Office were not returned.
Aukerman said the current system diverts police from monitoring potentially dangerous sex offenders because the list includes people convicted of less serious crimes.
“Our original lawsuit involved five people,” she said. “One of our clients was a little older than the girl he was dating in high school, and she got pregnant at age 15. He got prosecuted. He’s now married to the girl; they have kids together, but he’s on the sex offender registry for life. That’s not the kind of person law enforcement should be wasting resources monitoring.”
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Even with a prior court victory, registered citizens in Michigan still have to wait for years while reform is slow-walked by the legislature. Shameful! Just as laws are passed with effective dates, judgments should also be in order to prevent this sort of travesty. Justice delayed is justice denied!
“Banner said state police are unable to take people off the list who had been retroactively required to report for life.”
If they can put you on the registry with a few keystrokes; they can take you off with a few keystrokes !
I can understand the lifetime registry if it were for SVPs and repeat offenders, but for the most part there would never be another offence committed by SOs.
One correction to the original post. The school exclusion zone in Michigan is 1,000 feet, not 100. The Sixth Circuit did take the easy way out by not addressing the District Court’s finding that the registry itself was mostly unconstitutional. Banning retroactive rules satisfied the claims of the 5 plaintiffs, so they decided not to address the entire lower court decision. Still, the ex post facto victory affects a lot of us in Michigan. It was nice to finally see a high court declare that the registry is, indeed, a punishment in itself. I hope this lawsuit speeds changes up, and that it spreads nationwide eventually.
When will the ACLU realize the same thing is going on in Florida and take some action?
How many more registed citizens are going to have to become homeless before anything is done?
We are also on lifetime parole and I would like to be released while I still have a few good years left to enjoy my one and only life on this planet!
ACLU filed an action on behalf of the Homeless in Florida. That was lost recently.
Not lost yet— they are appealing! (Right?)
Yes
OK well, homeless was just an example. I was referring to the lifetime registry being the same situation as the other state and is really nothing but being out on parole with restrictions, ;aw enforcement monitoring, and everything else. Have they addressed that? The life time condition with no way off the registry even when permanently out of the state.
Every single person labelled with “sex offender” in Florida is listed for life and suffers as a result of it – THAT must change.