Michigan’s attorney general is the state’s top law enforcement official and representative in court.
The person elected to that role on Nov. 3 will spend the next four years making decisions about when to sue the federal government, argue against utility rate increases, issue opinions about legislation or prosecute large and small offenses.
Current Attorney General Dana Nessel is term limited, so Michiganders have six new choices for this role on their ballot.
Michigan Public requested interviews with each candidate. Only three are lawyers recognized by the state bar. Here’s what they had to say about how they would approach the job:
Can't see the graphic? Reload your page or click here.
The attorney general has the power to issue binding legal opinions on state agencies and spending. When the Republican-led state House unilaterally canceled hundreds of millions of dollars in state spending early this year, current Attorney General Nessel pushed back with an opinion that said the cuts were unconstitutional.
The House GOP responded with a lawsuit, which ultimately ended in a settlement.
A bill was later introduced to limit the attorney general’s power in issuing opinions. It passed the House, but has not moved for months in the Democrat-led state Senate.
Can't see the graphic? Reload your page or click here.
Current Attorney General Nessel frequently files testimonies against utility rate increases being considered by the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC). Lately, she’s been getting involved in data center cases, too. Most recently, she argued the MPSC unlawfully approved special contracts for the Oracle and OpenAI data center in Saline Township.
Can't see the graphic? Reload your page or click here.
Non-attorney candidates for Michigan attorney general
State law says the attorney general is expected to appear in court on behalf of the state, but does not explicitly say the AG must be a member of the bar.
But, the law does require anyone who calls themselves an “attorney” or “lawyer” to be a bar member. And, University of Detroit Mercy Law Professor Aman McLeod points to a 1937 ruling in which the Michigan Supreme Court said that rule implicitly applies to anyone holding the title of attorney general.
Still, two candidates argue they should be able to take office without having ever practiced law as members of the bar. Here’s what they said about that and how they would approach the job of attorney general:
Libertarian Party candidate Jason Dye argued that a requirement to be a member of the bar as attorney general violates the U.S. constitution. He said he would get “rid of the bar association” and said his experience running the We The People News website prepared him to manage a team of attorneys.
Dye is “1000% against” data centers and Flock license plate cameras. He suggested forming a militia in response to data center development, though he did not specify what that militia would do. Dye said he would review lawsuits filed by the current attorney general against the Trump administration and maintain any suits that have merit.
Green Party candidate Jeff Polonowski argued that he did not need to be an attorney, because he would just have to manage the state’s lawyers. When asked how his experience as a chemist and Otsego Township planning commissioner prepared him to manage a team of attorneys, he said “that would be a hard one to explain.” Though, he notes he has been involved in some zoning lawsuits. When asked why he’d run for attorney general as opposed to state offices that don’t involve litigation, he said, “I was asked to lend my name to the ballot.”
Polonowski said he would prioritize human trafficking prevention if elected. He said the task of regulating data centers should be left to the legislature and local officials, but the attorney general should support efforts to enforce local and state regulations.
U.S. Taxpayers Party candidate John Ludtke, who is also not a member of the bar, did not respond to requests for an interview in time for publication.
