John Doe v. Snyder et al
Filing
91
INTERIM ORDER DELAYING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT, PRELIMINARILY ENJOINING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, AND DIRECTING PUBLICATION (See Order for Details). Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JOHN DOE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Case No. 16-13137
RICHARD SNYDER, et al.,
Defendants.
/
INTERIM ORDER DELAYING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT, PRELIMINARILY
ENJOINING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, AND DIRECTING PUBLICATION
The court enters this Interim Order after consultation with counsel to provide
direction to registrants and law enforcement while the coronavirus (COVID-19)
pandemic state of emergency continues and renders effectively impossible the entry of
a final order providing complete relief.
As explained herein, the relief provided in this Order is temporary and specifically
tied to the state of emergency declarations, state and federal.
This Interim Order does not constitute a final judgment in this case.
WHEREAS on February 14, 2020, this court granted Plaintiffs’ motions for
summary judgment as to Counts I – IV of the second amended complaint and entered
declaratory and injunctive relief on all of Plaintiffs’ claims, including ordering that
Michigan’s Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA), Mich. Comp. Laws § 28.721 et
seq., is null and void as to pre-2011 registrants, and
WHEREAS, after consultation and guidance from counsel, the court delayed the
effective date of its decision until 60 days after the entry of the final judgment in order
(1) to “allow time for the legislature to craft and enact a new statute,” and (2) to ensure
that registrants, prosecutors’ offices, and law enforcement would likewise receive notice
of the order before the injunctive relief took effect (ECF No. 84, PageID.1805), and
WHEREAS after further consultation with counsel, the court granted the parties’
joint request for an extension until March 20, 2020 to submit a proposed judgment (as
well as proposed notices and a description of when and how they would be served)
intended to permit reasonably swift enforcement of the judgment, and
WHEREAS by March 20, 2020, the global pandemic caused by the COVID-19
virus had emerged and substantially disrupted all aspects of everyday life, severely
restricting the abilities of government and making it virtually impossible for the Michigan
State Police (MSP) Sex Offender Registration (SOR) Unit to complete the steps
necessary to implement a final judgment, and
WHEREAS counsel for Defendants report that the MSP has not yet identified the
members of the ex post facto subclasses and cannot say when it will be able to
determine which registrants belong to those subclasses (and are therefore entitled to
relief under Count IV), which is necessary in order to identify which registrants will no
longer be subject to SORA, and which registrants will be subject to a more limited
SORA, and
WHEREAS counsel for Defendants further report that it would be effectively
impossible for the MSP SOR Unit to mail the 44,000 individual notices to class
members within the time frames originally contemplated because MSP SOR Unit
employees are required to work from home, and lack access to certain computing
2
infrastructure and input from senior decision-makers and state employees in other
departments (e.g., Technology, Management and Budget) necessary to implement the
court’s order, and
WHEREAS the parties report that although remedial legislation has been
proposed, the state legislature is not meeting in regular session, and committee
hearings have been cancelled or postponed bringing legislative processes to a nearstandstill, and
WHEREAS the parties report that numerous registrants attempting to report in
person have been turned away based on a February 21, 2020 memorandum from the
MSP sent to law enforcement agencies instructing them not to take actions such as
verifying registration unless the agency could confirm that the registrant’s offense
occurred after April 11, 2011 (ECF No. 89-2, PageID.1836), and
WHEREAS the widespread closure of police stations to the public in response to
the COVID-19 pandemic makes in-person compliance with SORA effectively impossible
for registrants, and would in any event be inconsistent with current physical isolation
directives,
NOW THEREFORE,
IT IS ORDERED that any final judgment is hereby SUSPENDED for the duration
of the current COVID-19 crisis. The “current COVID-19 crisis” shall be considered
ended:
(a) when there is no longer an operative federal or state executive order or
legislative act declaring a state of emergency, or
3
(b) when the Court determines that the conditions giving rise to the need for this
Interim Order no longer apply.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants and their agents are
PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED from enforcing registration, verification, school zone, and
fee violations of SORA that occurred or may occur from February 14, 2020, until the
current crisis has ended, and thereafter until registrants are notified of what duties they
have under SORA going forward. 1 This interim injunctive relief conforms with and
implements this court’s order that registrants cannot be held strictly liable for SORA
violations. (ECF No. 84, PageID.31.)
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Interim Injunction takes effect
IMMEDIATELY and applies to the primary class.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that during this interim period the parties will
CONTINUE to prepare the form of a Final Judgment, notices, and a plan of when and
how the notices will be served. Counsel are expected to be prepared to submit the
jointly-proposed Final Judgment not later than 14 days after the current crisis ends.
Pursuant to the court’s opinion and order of February 14, 2020, the Final Judgment
shall take effect 60 days after the date it is entered.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within seven days of the entry of this order:
(a) The MSP and Plaintiffs’ counsel shall POST notice of this order, and a copy
1
This interim injunction enjoins only enforcement. It does not bar the defendants
from maintaining the registry, such as inputting information about new registrants or
continuing the Public Sex Offender Registry.
4
of it or link to it, on their websites 2 and/or such other locations as will with reasonable
assurance allow it to be seen widely by class members;
(b) Whereas counsel for Defendants have identified the Prosecuting Attorneys
Coordinating Counsel (PACC) as a suitable state agency for effective communication to
individual Prosecuting Attorneys’ offices, the Executive Director of PACC is DIRECTED
FORTHWITH to provide effective notice of this order, and a copy of it or link to it, by
email to all Michigan Prosecuting Attorneys;
(c) The MSP SOR Unit shall PROVIDE effective notice of this order, and a copy
of it or link to it, by email to the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police and to the
Michigan Sheriffs’ Association, who are expected to transmit the notice to all law
enforcement personnel within those agencies who are responsible for SORA
enforcement matters.
Finally, IT IS ORDERED that parties REPORT to the court by joint memorandum
or telephone conference, at their option, every 30 days on their progress in completing
the tasks set out above and in the Court’s February 14, 2020, Opinion and Order, and
any other matters pertinent to moving this case forward as expeditiously as reasonably
possible in light of the current crisis.
s/Robert H. Cleland
/
ROBERT H. CLELAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: April 6, 2020
2
MSP website: https://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-1878_24961--,00.html; ACLU website: ACLU website: https://www.aclumich.org/en/SORA.
5
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record
on this date, April 6, 2020, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Lisa Wagner
Case Manager and Deputy Clerk
(810) 292-6522
S:\Cleland\Cleland\HEK\Civil\16-13137.DOESII.interim.injunctive.order.HEK.2.RHC.2.docx
6
/
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?