In this Appeal before the Michigan Supreme Court, appellant Betts is challenging the very nature of the Michigan SORA laws as being both ineffective in its stated purpose and unconstitutional at both state and federal levels. It is declared that:
The Attorney General’s primary interest in this case is in protecting our communities from the impact of the recidivism that is more likely to occur due to the punitive nature of Michigan’s Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA),
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN v PAUL J. BETTS
This challenges the effectiveness, constitutionality, and rationality of the Michigan requirements:
SORA’s burdensome requirements, which are divorced from individualized risk assessment, amount to punishment when taken in the aggregate, and it is an ex post facto violation of both the federal and Michigan constitutions to apply the 2006 and 2011 amendments to registrants whose offenses predate those amendments.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN v PAUL J. BETTS
Read this case filing embedded below for a complete reading of this timely sex offender registration topic.
PEOPLE-OF-THE-STATE-OF-MICHIGAN-v-Paul-J.-Betts