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.
Knowing how to guard your personal information is your first line of defense against identity theft.
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.
April 21, 2022
LANSING - Today the Michigan Court of Appeals issued a published decision affirming the Antrim County Circuit Court’s dismissal in the case of William Bailey v Antrim County, which challenged the 2020 presidential elections results.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel released the following statement in response to the opinion:
“This decision joins a growing number of court rulings that continue to uphold the legitimacy and accuracy of our elections. As we have remained from the very beginning, my office is committed to preserving the integrity of our democratic system. The panel’s ruling is additional reinforcement in this important fight.”
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson released the following statement in response to the opinion:
“This dismissal once again affirms not only the integrity and accuracy of the 2020 election results, but that those claiming otherwise will not be able to use our legal system as a vehicle for furthering their misinformation and conspiracy theories. The court’s ruling is a heartening reminder that despite ongoing efforts to dismantle our democracy and make it easier to overturn future elections, the data, the facts, and the truth are on our side.”
In a comprehensive opinion, Court of Appeals Judges Thomas C. Cameron, Mark J. Cavanagh, and Michael F. Gadola, rejected Bailey’s argument that the Michigan Constitution, as amended in 2018, grants private citizens an individual right to request an audit of election results.
The panel also decisively rejected Bailey’s other arguments, including that the “purity of elections” clause in the Michigan Constitution entitled Bailey to access the County’s tabulators and other election equipment, and that Bailey’s equal protection rights were violated. In addition to deciding that Bailey’s current claims failed to make allegations that stated a valid legal cause of action, the panel further concluded that any motion to amend his complaint to add additional defendants and claims--including unsupported claims of fraud and conspiracy--would be futile.
“There are no allegations in the complaint to support that the purported irregularities in Antrim County ‘might have affected the outcome’ of the presidential election, as the cited case law clearly requires,” the opinion states in part. “We conclude that plaintiff failed to allege any ‘clear and positive’ factual allegations... Instead, plaintiff merely raised a series of questions about the election without making any specific factual allegations as required.”
The full opinion is available online.
###
Author: