The Michigan Attorney General has determined that a full and complete investigation of what happened within the Catholic Church is required. This investigation is and will continue to be independent, thorough, transparent, and prompt. My department and this investigation will find out who knew what, and when.
The Michigan Department of Attorney General utilizes the services of Special Assistant Attorneys General from time to time when the unique circumstances of a particular case create the need for specialized services not currently available within the department.
The Conviction Integrity Unit (the “CIU”) investigates claims of innocence to determine whether there is clear and convincing new evidence that the convicted defendant was not the person who committed the offense.
In Michigan, a victim is an individual who suffers direct or threatened physical, financial, or emotional harm as a result of the commission of a crime.
The Task Force launched in 2019 and consists of more than 55 different organizations in the public, private and nonprofit sectors - all working together to combat elder abuse.
The laws regarding expungement of criminal offenses in Michigan changed in major ways in April of 2021. This page is designed to help applicants navigate their way through the new laws, help them determine if they are eligible to have convictions expunged, to answer frequently asked questions about the new laws, and to provide links for resources and assistance.
To investigate and prosecute hate crimes by following up on every credible tip and offer departmental resources to assist local and federal law enforcement partners in this effort.
The Michigan Attorney General is leading the fight against this horrific crime by prosecuting the state's first-ever criminal cases under state law banning human trafficking in Michigan. Victims of human trafficking are in bondage through force, fraud or coercion, for the purpose of sex or labor exploitation.
Michigan Identity Theft Support
Michigan Attorney General's robocall initiative is leading several efforts to protect Michigan residents from the billion plus robocalls made to them every year.
The Open Meetings Act (OMA) took effect January 1, 1977. In enacting the OMA, the Legislature promoted a new era in governmental accountability and fostered openness in government to enhance responsible decision making.1 Nothing in the OMA prohibits a public body from adopting an ordinance, resolution, rule, or charter provision that requires a greater degree of openness relative to public body meetings than the standards provided for in the OMA. 2
Search is currently unavailable. Please try again later.
The web Browser you are currently using is unsupported, and some features of this site may not work as intended. Please update to a modern browser such as Chrome, Firefox or Edge to experience all features Michigan.gov has to offer.
In early 2020, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Army Corps of Engineers implemented a new rule that defined which bodies of water are regulated under the Clean Water Act. This new rule rolled back federal protections of numerous wetlands and ephemeral streams.
The Department of Attorney General joined a number of other states and cities in suing the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to challenge the validity of this rule. That litigation remains ongoing.
The Department of Attorney General joined numerous other states in filing an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court in the matter of County of Maui v Hawaii Wildlife Fund.
The Clean Water Act primarily regulates discharges of pollution to the waters of the United States. The issue in this case was whether a polluter may avoid regulation by discharging pollution not directly to a body of water, but rather to unregulated groundwater near a protected body of water.
On April 1, 2018, an industrial barge owned by VanEnkevort Tug and Barge, Inc. and MOM Erie Trader, LLC accidentally deployed and dragged its anchor through the Straits of Mackinac, striking the Line 5 dual pipelines and damaging power cables that supply Upper Peninsula residents with electricity.
While there was fortunately no release of oil from the Line 5 pipelines, damaged power cables released approximately 400-800 gallons of dielectric fluid into the Straits of Mackinac.
The Department of Attorney General filed an enforcement action on behalf of the Attorney General, the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources in the Ingham County Circuit Court, and also joined an admiralty lawsuit as a claimant in the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan. The matter was resolved by a settlement agreement in which the defendants agreed to pay a combined total of $200,000 in civil fines and costs, and to implement new anchor monitoring technology on their vessels and mandatory anchor-awareness training for all shipboard staff.
The Department of Attorney General filed an enforcement action on behalf of the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy for pollution of Carrier Creek and surrounding wetlands in Eaton County.
After extensive litigation, Brookside Crossing, LLC agreed to remediate the site, but refused to pay any civil fines. Following a lengthy trial, the Eaton County Circuit Court ordered Brookside Crossing, LLC to pay a combined total of $345,500 in civil fines and attorney fees. These orders were upheld by the Michigan Court of Appeals in an opinion issued on October 22, 2020.