State police removed more than 20,000 people from Michigan's sex offender registry on Friday, following a ruling from the Michigan Supreme Court that found it unconstitutional to include those who were added to the list before amendments to the law were made in 2011.
More than 43,000 were on the list when the state’s highest court issued a unanimous ruling on Sept. 9, that found it unconstitutional to require someone to register for convictions before the Sex Offender Registry Act (SORA) was amended in 2011 to set terms on how long people had to remain on the list and required them to report in person if their phone number or work place changed.
Amendments made in 2021 to SORA made many of those requirements retroactive.
In its ruling last week, the Michigan Supreme Court found that people cannot be required to register in an “ex post facto” manner. The court ruled that “the 2021 SORA may not be retroactively applied to registrants whose criminal acts subjecting them to registration occurred before enactment of the 2011 SORA amendments.”
As such, those who registered as sex offenders for criminal convictions prior to July 1, 2011 were removed from the list, which is maintained by the Michigan State Police (MSP).
"The MSP did not make this change to the law,” Col. James F. Grady II, director of the Michigan State Police said in a statement. “However, the department maintains the database, is required to comply with the Court’s order and is taking the necessary steps to implement the ruling.”
The ruling is based on another Michigan Supreme Court decision from 2025. In People v Kardasz, the court found the sex registry to be a form of punishment in and of itself – a position that MSP disagreed with at the time.
“The SORA is not designed to keep tabs on offenders like probation or parole, but rather to give ordinary residents accurate information,” lawyers for MSP argued in an amicus brief. “It is for residents with children or young women and others with limited resources, looking for accurate information.”
“I completely understand that,” said State Appellate Defender Office Deputy Director Jessica Zimbelman. “I'm a parent.”
But Zimbelman found the court had made the right decision and that removing thousands of people from what she considers a “bloated” list to be a step in the right direction.
She co-authored an amicus brief in the Kardasz case arguing SORA was punitive, akin to probation or parole.
“I’m confident that our current registry – because it's so overblown, because it's so broad, because it's so burdensome and affects the people's lives tremendously who are on it. Isn't – isn't protecting us,” Zimbelman said.
