The Michigan Department of Attorney General (DAG) works tirelessly to protect and serve the people of Michigan. The DAG handles a wide range of legal matters from civil and criminal cases, to providing legal counsel to state agencies and officers, to advocating for crime victims.
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 (CIU) reviews cases where someone is saying they did not commit the crime(s) of which they were convicted. There must be new evidence that shows they did not commit the crime. This new evidence must rise to the legal standard of "clear and convincing" evidence of innocence.
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.
Elder abuse happens when someone hurts, ignores, or takes advantage of an older adult. This may be someone who is of advanced age or is vulnerable and unable to protect themselves due to a mental or physical issues.
An expungement removes a conviction from public view. Most employers, landlords, and background checks will not see it. Law enforcement and some licensing agencies may still access it. This page will help explain who qualifies, how the process works, and where to get help.
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 workers enjoy a wide variety of legal protections regarding issues at work. There are a number of state and federal statutes that protect their wages, safety, and well-being.
Opioid addiction knows no social or economic barriers; it doesn’t care about race or gender. It claims young and old alike. The Michigan Department of Attorney General is committed to fighting this crisis.
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.
June 24, 2026
LANSING — Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, as part of a multistate coalition, filed an amicus brief (PDF) urging the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida to carefully scrutinize the parties’ conduct and purported “settlement” agreement in Trump v. IRS. In January 2026, President Trump, his family, and his business organization filed suit against the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), asserting claims related to the disclosure of President Trump’s tax return information by a government contractor. The District Court noted the possible lack of real adversity between the parties to the lawsuit and was skeptical of its own jurisdiction, but shortly before briefing on that issue was due, President Trump voluntarily dismissed his claims and entered into a “settlement” agreement with the Department of Justice (DOJ), granting President Trump and his family immunity from all investigations and prosecutions related to past conduct and requiring the DOJ to establish a $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization” fund.
In the brief, Attorney General Nessel and the coalition argue that the lawsuit and subsequent settlement are nothing more than a collusive fraud engineered to violate the constitutional limits on presidential authority under the veneer of a settlement.
“This so-called settlement is a blatant scheme cooked up by Donald Trump that shields his family from accountability and would enrich his friends and political allies at the expense of the American taxpayers he is meant to serve,” said Attorney General Nessel. “Rather than defend against the lawsuit, the DOJ chose to defraud the Court by entering into a collusive agreement with the President. This case must be reopened to protect the rule of law”
Prior to President Trump’s abrupt dismissal of the lawsuit, the District Court recognized that there was a threshold jurisdictional question posed by the complaint, which the President brought against agencies whose leadership serves at his pleasure. The Court ordered the parties to brief the question of whether a case or controversy existed. Following the “settlement” and dismissal, the District Court is now considering reopening the case under Rule 60, which permits a court to set aside a judgment and reopen a case on the basis that there was fraud or deception perpetrated by parties upon the court. In the amicus brief, Attorney General Nessel and the coalition offer their perspective as the chief law officers of their states, highlighting that the self-dealing and corrupt nature of this settlement agreement is antithetical to the responsibilities of attorneys general and the rule of law.
The coalition argues that the timing of the dismissal of President Trump’s claims and the irregularities of the settlement itself indicate that this case was collusive and an attempted end-run around constitutional limits on Executive Branch authority. The coalition highlights that the settlement contravenes basic principles of contract and settlement law, is untethered to the value of President Trump’s claims – which suffer from fatal legal deficiencies – and may transgress legal and policy limits on DOJ’s settlement authority. The coalition emphasizes that this kind of collusion between a President and a Department he oversees undermines the separation of powers, public confidence in the court system, the powers exercised by state attorneys general, and the rule of law.
###
Media Contact: