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.
June 15, 2020
LANSING – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel today celebrated the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling that a federal civil rights law – as it relates to discrimination in employment under Title VII – protects gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender workers. She issued the following statement on the ruling and the road ahead:
“The Supreme Court’s decision today in Bostick v Clayton County, Georgia is a major victory for civil rights. In the Supreme Court’s own words, the message of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is ‘simple and momentous.’ Under Title VII, a statutory violation occurs if an employer intentionally relies in part on an individual employee’s sex when deciding to discharge the employee. In other words, under federal law, an employer cannot fire someone simply for being gay or transgender.
“But make no mistake, this is not the end of the story. It is just the beginning of the progress yet to be made on the important issue of equal protection. The Supreme Court’s decision, although groundbreaking, is relatively narrow. It involves only a federal law—Title VII—not state law. And the decision applies only to employment decisions. The Court left for another day decisions regarding housing, education, public accommodations, and anything else of the kind. And it left to future cases how religious liberty doctrines interact with Title VII. What this means is that we must continue to work together for equal protection under the law for all Michiganders.”
In July 2019, Attorney General Nessel joined a coalition of attorneys general who filed a brief in the Supreme Court cases of Altitude Express v. Zarda; Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia; and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC—which were being considered together by the court. In their brief, the coalition of 22 attorneys general argued that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination against transgender people or on the basis of sexual orientation. Nessel and her colleagues also argued that discrimination against LGBTQ employees blocks each state’s ability to promote equality and protect residents’ dignity, economic security and mental health.
Though important, today’s decision does not amend the protections afforded by the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act. Ensuring that members of the LGBTQ community have equal protections under both state and federal law is still a work in progress.
###
Author:
Courtney Covington