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 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 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 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.
Michigan's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq, provides that requesters can receive copies or make inspections of most public records of public bodies upon written request.
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.
July 07, 2025
LANSING – The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey recently denied Apple’s motion to dismiss a civil antitrust lawsuit filed by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and 15 other state attorneys general. The lawsuit, filed in March 2024, alleges that Apple illegally maintains a monopoly over smartphones by selectively imposing contractual restrictions on, and withholding critical access points from, developers.
In the decision issued on June 30 (PDF), the Court allowed the case to proceed, reaffirming that state attorneys general, independent of the federal government, have standing to sue companies whose anticompetitive conduct harms the well-being of its residents. The Court also found that the facts alleged in the lawsuit support the coalition’s argument that Apple engaged in anticompetitive behavior with intent and substantial likelihood of monopolizing the market.
“Mega corporations cannot be allowed to dictate the rules of the digital marketplace at the expense of their customers,” Nessel said. “I am pleased the Court has allowed this case to proceed, and I look forward to continuing our efforts to protect customers and promote fair competition.”
Attorney General Nessel filed the lawsuit alongside the DOJ and the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, and Wisconsin.
###
Media Contact: