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.
Michigan law, MCL 14.32, provides that "[i]t shall be the duty of the attorney general, when required, to give his opinion upon all questions of law submitted to him by the legislature, or by either branch thereof, or by the governor, auditor general, treasurer or any other state officer . . . ." Michigan's Supreme Court has recognized that one of the "primary missions" of the Attorney General is to give legal advice to the Legislature, and to departments and agencies of state government. East Grand Rapids School Dist v Kent County Tax Allocation Bd, 415 Mich 381, 394; 330 NW2d 7 (1982). Although not legally required to do so, the Attorney General may respond to opinion requests from individual members of the Legislature. In deciding whether to grant such requests, the Attorney General takes into account the need to allocate limited resources and other long recognized policy considerations outlined below. County prosecutors may also submit opinion requests provided that they are accompanied by a memorandum of law analyzing the legal question.
Consistent with his primary mission, the Attorney General prioritizes opinion requests that affect the operation of state government. Because the Legislature has authorized local units of government to employ their own legal counsel to provide guidance on matters of local concern, the Attorney General typically does not issue opinions concerning the interpretation of local charters, local ordinances, locally negotiated collective bargaining agreements, and other uniquely local issues. Other typical reasons for declining a request are: 1) the requester is not a person authorized to request an opinion under the applicable law; 2) the request seeks an interpretation of proposed legislation that may never become law; 3) the question asked is currently pending before a court or administrative tribunal or likely to be the subject of litigation in the near future; 4) the request involves the operation of the judicial branch of government or a local unit of government; or 5) the request seeks legal advice on behalf of, or involves disputes between, private persons or entities.
If the opinion request is granted, it is assigned to an assistant attorney general having recognized expertise in the relevant area of the law. This attorney is expected to prepare a thoroughly researched and well-written draft. The Assistant Attorney General for Law then reviews the draft to assure it is legally sound and performs any editing that may be needed before sending the draft to the Chief Legal Counsel. The draft also may be circulated to other attorneys within the Department of Attorney General for additional substantive review. Drafts of most formal opinions and some letter opinions are first submitted for consideration and approval by the Attorney General's Opinion Review Board (ORB), before submission to the Attorney General for his review. Given the time and attention accorded these matters, the opinions process may take several months to complete depending upon the complexity of the question presented.