Latest news with #DepartmentofAttorneyGeneral
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
One-man grand jury process could be banned under Michigan House bill
State Rep. Luke Meerman (R-Coopersville) on the House floor, Dec. 10, 2024. Meerman is the sponsor of legislation to get rid of Michigan's one-man grand jury process. | Photo: Anna Liz Nichols A Republican lawmaker is trying to strike the state's one-man grand jury process from law, a move that would prevent local prosecutors and the Department of Attorney General from bringing criminal charges against defendants with just one judge as the sole juror. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Luke Meerman (R-Coopersville), would repeal several sections of the Code of Criminal Procedure allowing just one judge to review evidence and greenlight charges as a grand juror. The process was ruled unconstitutional by the Michigan Supreme Court during the failed Flint water criminal prosecution against former Governor Rick Snyder and several other members of his administration. The court specifically called out the prosecutorial team – led by Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy and former Michigan Solicitor General Fadwa Hammoud – for engaging in a type of 'Star Chamber,' a reference to the corrupt backroom English courts of the late 15th Century. That doomed the prosecution and the court eventually dismissed the charges. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Meerman's bill was up for testimony on Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee. He said the grand jury was a hallmark of the judicial process, one that helps decide probable cause of a crime, but the difference with a one-man grand jury is that it is not composed of several citizens or local officials, but rather one judge. 'A one-man grand jury violates due process, as evidence in these proceedings is not made available to the defense,' Meerman said, who also claimed that Michigan was one of the only states that maintains a one-man grand jury process under law. 'The use of this legal maneuver erodes public trust and confidence in the impartiality of the justice system.' Touching on the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling, Meerman said the main takeaway was that a single judge cannot currently issue an indictment authorizing charges against a defendant. His bill would remove the portion of the criminal code that allows for a one-man grand jury, preventing it from being reactivated if the high court somehow overturns its precedent founded in the Flint water cases. Laws that remain on the books even though there is a court precedent deeming them unconstitutional or void are sometimes referred to as zombie laws. Rep. Brian BeGole (R-Perry) and Rep. Kelly Breen (D-Novi) both asked how often this process was used and in what kinds of cases, and how widely it was utilized by prosecutors across the state. Meerman indicated that it happens infrequently. Although prosecutors did not give testimony before the committee on Wednesday, Meerman said it was his understanding through conversations with prosecutors that they would still like to keep it in their tool box, even though those prosecutors couldn't use it anyway, given the Supreme Court's ruling in 2022. Rep. Sarah Lightner (R-Springport), chair of the House Judiciary Committee, said it was her understanding that the process was mostly used in sensitive felony cases. Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan said it supported the bill but did not wish to speak during committee. A spokesperson for the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan told Michigan Advance that it does not have a stance on the bill, and that the only county that had been using the law in any capacity was Wayne County. As it stands, it does not appear that the bill is a priority for PAAM to weigh in on, support or oppose. A spokesperson with Worthy's office deferred comment on the bill to PAAM. The office did not respond to additional questions posed by Michigan Advance regarding how often the county used the process prior to the Supreme Court's ruling or how difficult it is for the county to navigate complex cases without the use of a one-man grand jury.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
AG: Benson gubernatorial announcement in public building violated campaign finance act
Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson speaks to reporters after launching her campaign for governor in Lansing, Mich., on Jan. 22, 2025. (Photo by Andrew Roth/Michigan Advance) The secretary of state's use of a government building – one that houses the department she oversees – to announce her candidacy for governor violated Michigan's campaign finance laws, the Department of Attorney General said Monday. That said, the department noted it did not have the authority to impose any civil penalties against Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, nor any criminal penalties outlined in the law. Benson jumped into the 2026 gubernatorial ring on January 22 with a press conference held in the lobby of the Austin building. Benson said then that the announcement was being held inside the building due to the cold weather. Reporters at the event questioned whether other candidates could also use the lobby for similar announcements, with some noting that other candidates had not been allowed to do so in the past. Benson says she's focused on 'efficiency and transparency' in Michigan governor campaign Benson told reporters that other candidates could use the lobby if they'd like to announce their campaigns – which led to complaints from Republicans. In a letter sent to Benson on Monday, Joshua Booth, chief of the opinions division with the Department of Attorney General, said the secretary of state had violated a portion of the Michigan Campaign Finance Act. That said, Booth wrote that the Jocelyn Benson for Governor campaign committee had not violated the law because it was not a public body and because there was no allegation that the campaign committee was acting on behalf of a government body. The act prohibits candidates from using public funds, personnel, office space, equipment and other property paid for by public resources. In that regard, Booth said Benson herself violated the act. 'Secretary Benson invited members of the press inside the Austin Building and then conducted a press conference, professionally dressed, during the day, in the lobby of the building that houses her office,' Booth wrote. 'She gave no indication that would lead a reasonable person viewing the press conference to believe that she was there on her 'personal time.' Instead, the circumstances would lead a reasonable person to believe that Secretary Benson was acting as secretary of state with the authority of the Department of State, which is a 'public body,' to invite members of the press inside her office building and use the lobby for the press conference.' As to Benson's belief that other candidates could also use the Austin building to announce their candidacy, the law does allow for the use of public buildings for campaign events or candidate announcements. But Booth said her belief was misplaced because the Department of Technology, Management and Budget oversees the building, and therefore, the facility was not one that any candidate or committee had an equal opportunity to use. Benson's committee also raised First Amendment concerns, and argued that any violation of the act enforced against it would in turn violate her constitutional rights. But Booth said limiting candidates from using the building was a legitimate purpose because such a gathering could interfere with the entering, exiting and the general business of those working inside the building. A violation of the act carries a civil penalty of a fine not more than $1,000 imposed by the Department of State and a conciliation process helps determine the amount of the fine. If an agreement cannot be reached, the Department of State can refer the matter to the attorney general's office. The act is, however, silent on how the Department of Attorney General should resolve a complaint against the Secretary of State if it's determined that a violation occurred. Booth said there are no provisions establishing a conciliation process, other informal method of resolving the complaint, or giving authority to the attorney general's office to order a hearing or issue a civil fine following a hearing. There is also no provision allowing the secretary of state to appeal a fine imposed by the Department of Attorney General. The same goes for criminal penalties, Booth said. The act states that anyone in violation of Michigan campaign finance law is guilty of a misdemeanor, but because the complaint was referred to the attorney general by the secretary of state, the attorney general's office lacks the authority to charge Benson with a misdemeanor. Booth said that it may sound odd and seem unfair that Benson is subject to the Campaign Finance Act's rules but none of its penalties, but the Legislature never expressly gave the attorney general the authority to enforce the law against a secretary of state. 'Consequently, the attorney general is left with no choice but to simply identify the violation, remind the secretary of state of her obligations under the MCFA, and warn her against violating them in the future,' Booth wrote. 'That said, it is by no means unusual for the Secretary of State to resolve campaign finance complaints with a similar reminder and warning. … Under the circumstances, resolving these complaints with a reminder and warning is the appropriate sanction, but it is also important to take this opportunity to point out the lack of enforcement options available to the attorney general under the current language of the MCFA.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nessel urges appropriate funding for AG's office and county prosecutors amid Michigan budget talks
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel gives a presentation on her office's work to the Michigan House Judiciary Committee on April 16, 2025 | Screenshot For every dollar the State of Michigan puts in the budget for the Department of Attorney General, it earns $4 back for the state, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel told lawmakers in the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday. As Michigan House Republicans propose a budget that allocates no funding to the Office of Attorney General, as well as several government agencies in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 budget, Nessel said the result of such a decision would be disastrous. 'Let me tell you why that's a bad idea. Our state would go bankrupt literally within weeks if that were that to happen,' Nessel said. 'We defend all lawsuits against the state…and we're the only department in the state that contributes revenue to the state that is not a tax or a fee.' Operating on approximately one third of a percent of the state budget's General Fund, about $120 million, Nessel said in 2024 the department won more than $500 million in court for Michiganders. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Nessel went on to say her office has obtained 11 settlements over her six-and-a-half-year tenure in its efforts to hold the pharmaceutical industry accountable for the opioid epidemic, which has resulted in thousands of overdoses in Michigan since 2000. These settlements have awarded $1.64 billion to the state to be distributed through local government and statewide government programs. While there's a lot of negative commentary regarding government employees, Nessel said, alluding to President Donald Trump's executive actions to trim down the federal workforce and eliminate 'bloat', Nessel said her staff work tirelessly to improve the lives of Michiganders. From educating elderly Michiganders on scams to investigating long-overlooked cases of missing and murdered indigenous residents, Nessel touted the work her office has done, including facilitating 315 individuals to enroll in the state's Address Confidentiality Program to shield the addresses of those who have experienced domestic and sexual violence and stalking. But it's not just the Attorney General's Office that is charged with helping Michiganders find justice, Nessel said, noting that county prosecutors play an instrumental role in the state's justice system as the state faces a shortage of prosecutors amid staffing shortages and underfunding. And now county prosecutor's offices across Michigan face the task of reviewing hundreds of murder cases in a 180 day window after the Michigan Supreme Court eliminated mandatory life sentences without parole for 19- and 20-year-olds last week. The time schedule prescribed by the state court is 'insanely short' Nessel said and will take an immense amount of effort from prosecutors to handle resentencings. House Appropriations Committee Chair Ann Bollin (R-Brighton Twp.) has proposed cutbacks in the state budget for the Michigan Supreme Court and the State Court Administrative Office to invest into county prosecutors' offices to address the workload. 'If the Michigan Supreme Court wants to upend the justice system and force communities to relive horrific crimes, they're going to have to tighten their budget,' Bollin said in a news release Monday. 'I'm going to make sure the people doing the real work — our local prosecutors — have the resources they need to keep dangerous criminals behind bars and fight for justice on behalf of victims and their families.' It's hard to explain the breadth of what the Supreme Court's decision will mean for Michiganders, Nessel said. Beyond the 'excruciating' experience for families of deceased victims during resentencing, cases will have to be revisited from decades ago and the effort it takes to rebuild a file will consume prosecutors' offices. 'I hope when you're formulating your budget, you just keep that in mind as to just how much work goes into that and how important it is for these types of cases, the most important kinds of cases where a person lost their life, so my hope is that you will consider that,' Nessel said.
Yahoo
07-04-2025
- Yahoo
Attorney general seeking attorneys to hold PCB manufacturers accountable
Dana Nessel | Ken Coleman Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel on Monday announced her office is seeking proposals from attorneys and law firms to serve as special attorney generals and seek damages from polychlorinated biphenyls — or PCB — manufacturers for the impact these chemicals have had on the environment. PCBs are a group of man-made chemicals that were previously used in manufacturing products ranging from coolants and lubricants to caulks, paper products, sealants and electrical equipment. They were banned as the chemicals are toxic and can accumulate in organisms, building up in living things over time and passing up through the food chain as other organisms consume contaminated plants and animals. 'While PCBs are thankfully no longer manufactured in the United States, their harmful effects continue to contaminate our natural resources, wildlife, and communities,' Nessel said in a statement. 'The manufacturers responsible for this damage should be held accountable, not Michigan taxpayers. Pursuing this litigation will ensure that those who profited from the manufacture and sale of these chemicals and who hid the known toxicity and negative impacts of their use are held liable for the lasting damage they caused.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The state has pursued and secured remediation and restoration work at sites where PCBs were used and released into the environment at unsafe levels, and issues Eat Safe Fish guidelines to help protect Michiganders from exposure to PCBs and other chemicals. However, Nessel's office said there are areas where too little work — or no work at all — is being done to clean up PCB contamination and restore the state's resources. The Department of Attorney General is seeking proposals from attorneys and law firms with experience and interest in pursuing constitutional, statutory, tort and other applicable common law claims against manufacturers of toxic chemicals that ended up in the environment. Contracts will be awarded based on the best value to the state, considering qualifications, experience, abilities, capacity and cost-effectiveness. Nessel will make the final decision based on recommendations from department staff in order to ensure an objective selection process and maintain bidder anonymity. The Department of Attorney General will post a notice to its website when the selection has been made. The selected law firms will be compensated on a contingency basis. More information on how to submit a proposal is available at the Department of Attorney General's website. The deadline for submissions is May 5, 2025.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
AG Nessel concerned over potential data breach amid 23andMe bankruptcy
LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) — Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel urges account holders to take action to protect their personal and sensitive information. This announcement comes after the filing of genetic testing company 23andMe on Sunday, March 23. The Department of Attorney General says that 23andMe is a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company that collects and analyzes genetic code information to provide ancestry composition data, probable genetic health risks and other personalized genetic reports. 23andMe also uses consumer data, with permission, for medical research and shares this information with pharmaceutical companies. The department says 23andMe has stated that it will continue operating as usual and that there are no changes to how it stores and protects personal data. However, Attorney General Dana Nessel recommends that Michiganders cancel their accounts and request the destruction of any data or genetic samples maintained by the company. The department reports it has been monitoring the company as part of an investigation into a data breach at 23andMe reported in October 2023 that exposed the personal information of nearly seven million Americans. How to Delete Genetic Data from 23andMe: Log in to your 23andMe account on the website. Go to the 'Settings' section of your profile. Scroll to a section labeled '23andMe Data' at the bottom of the page. Click 'View' next to '23andMe Data' Scroll to the 'Delete Data' section. Click 'Permanently Delete Data' Confirm your request; you'll receive an email from 23andMe; follow the link in the email to confirm your deletion request. How to Revoke Permission for Your Genetic Data to be Used for Research: You can withdraw consent, even if you have permitted 23andMe and third-party researchers to use your genetic data and sample for research, by accessing the account settings page under 'Research and Product Consents.' Customers can find additional information on the 23andMe website. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
