Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said that a recent review of Michigan motor vehicle records compared to voting records found only 15 cases of non-U.S. citizens attempting to vote in the 2024 general election. Thirteen of those cases have been referred to Attorney General Dana Nessel.
Photo courtesy State of Michigan
The Michigan Department of State has released the results of a review of Michigan motor vehicle records compared to voting records in the state’s Qualified Voter File (QVF), confirming that credible cases of noncitizens casting a ballot in Michigan elections are extremely rare.
The review, which began in December 2024, identified 15 people who appear to be non-U.S. citizens and cast a ballot in the 2024 General Election. Of these 15, 13 were referred to the Michigan Attorney General for potential criminal charges, one apparent noncitizen voter has since died, and one case is still being investigated by the MDOS Office of Investigative Services.
These cases, along with the single case identified in October 2024 of a Chinese national who allegedly voted illegally, represent 0.00028 percent of the more than 5.7 million votes cast by Michiganders in the presidential election.
“This is a serious issue, one we must address with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer,” Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said. “Only U.S. citizens can legally register and vote in our elections. Our careful review confirms what we already knew – that this illegal activity is very rare. While we take all violations of election law very seriously, this tiny fraction of potential cases in Michigan and at the national level do not justify recent efforts to pass laws we know would block tens of thousands of Michigan citizens from voting in future elections.
“Instead of those failed policies, we will continue to work with lawmakers on reasonable, data-driven efforts to improve security while ensuring that eligible citizens can always make their voice heard.”
This initial review compared more than 7.9 million active driving records for Michiganders of voting age to over 7.2 million active registered voters in the QVF. MDOS has established an ongoing review process to identify possible cases of noncitizens improperly registered to vote so those records can be cancelled in accordance with the National Voter Registration Act.
In February, Benson announced she is working with partners in the Michigan Legislature to introduce the Michigan Election Security Act, a plan which would codify this review procedure for all future administrations and provide additional tools to help election officials more effectively identify and remove ineligible voter registrations from the voter file.
For more information on election security, or how voter rolls are maintained in Michigan, visit Michigan.gov/ElectionSecurity.
The review, which began in December 2024, identified 15 people who appear to be non-U.S. citizens and cast a ballot in the 2024 General Election. Of these 15, 13 were referred to the Michigan Attorney General for potential criminal charges, one apparent noncitizen voter has since died, and one case is still being investigated by the MDOS Office of Investigative Services.
These cases, along with the single case identified in October 2024 of a Chinese national who allegedly voted illegally, represent 0.00028 percent of the more than 5.7 million votes cast by Michiganders in the presidential election.
“This is a serious issue, one we must address with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer,” Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said. “Only U.S. citizens can legally register and vote in our elections. Our careful review confirms what we already knew – that this illegal activity is very rare. While we take all violations of election law very seriously, this tiny fraction of potential cases in Michigan and at the national level do not justify recent efforts to pass laws we know would block tens of thousands of Michigan citizens from voting in future elections.
“Instead of those failed policies, we will continue to work with lawmakers on reasonable, data-driven efforts to improve security while ensuring that eligible citizens can always make their voice heard.”
This initial review compared more than 7.9 million active driving records for Michiganders of voting age to over 7.2 million active registered voters in the QVF. MDOS has established an ongoing review process to identify possible cases of noncitizens improperly registered to vote so those records can be cancelled in accordance with the National Voter Registration Act.
In February, Benson announced she is working with partners in the Michigan Legislature to introduce the Michigan Election Security Act, a plan which would codify this review procedure for all future administrations and provide additional tools to help election officials more effectively identify and remove ineligible voter registrations from the voter file.
For more information on election security, or how voter rolls are maintained in Michigan, visit Michigan.gov/ElectionSecurity.
Nessel Issues Consumer Alert on Genetic Testing Service
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has issued a consumer alert on genetic testing services. The new alert comes as Nessel is urging 23andMe customers to consider deleting their accounts to protect their sensitive personal data following the genetic testing company’s bankruptcy.
Nessel emphasized in her alert the difference between genetic testing conducted for medical purposes by health care providers and testing performed by private direct-to-consumer genetic testing services.
“While DNA testing conducted for medical purposes by a health care provider is strongly protected by federal privacy laws, results from private direct-to-consumer genetic services are not considered medical records and lack these legal protections,” Nessel said. “Amid the 23andMe bankruptcy, consumers should be mindful of the potential risks of these private services and take steps to protect their data.”
After creating an account and receiving their report, some commercial genetic testing customers may have no more use for the service. They should consider deleting their accounts. Then they should request the destruction of any stored data.
To prevent unauthorized access or misuse of their data, account holders should:
• Take steps to delete their account from the company’s website.
• Request the destruction of their genetic data.
• Revoke permission for genetic data to be used in research, if applicable.
Most genetic testing services should have instructions for completing the above actions on their website.
Consumers who suspect their genetic data has been compromised can report their concerns to the Michigan Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Team at P.O. Box 30213, Lansing, MI 48909, by calling (517) 335-7599 or toll-free (877-765-8388), or filing a complaint online at secure.ag.state.mi.us/complaints/consumer.aspx.
Nessel emphasized in her alert the difference between genetic testing conducted for medical purposes by health care providers and testing performed by private direct-to-consumer genetic testing services.
“While DNA testing conducted for medical purposes by a health care provider is strongly protected by federal privacy laws, results from private direct-to-consumer genetic services are not considered medical records and lack these legal protections,” Nessel said. “Amid the 23andMe bankruptcy, consumers should be mindful of the potential risks of these private services and take steps to protect their data.”
After creating an account and receiving their report, some commercial genetic testing customers may have no more use for the service. They should consider deleting their accounts. Then they should request the destruction of any stored data.
To prevent unauthorized access or misuse of their data, account holders should:
• Take steps to delete their account from the company’s website.
• Request the destruction of their genetic data.
• Revoke permission for genetic data to be used in research, if applicable.
Most genetic testing services should have instructions for completing the above actions on their website.
Consumers who suspect their genetic data has been compromised can report their concerns to the Michigan Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Team at P.O. Box 30213, Lansing, MI 48909, by calling (517) 335-7599 or toll-free (877-765-8388), or filing a complaint online at secure.ag.state.mi.us/complaints/consumer.aspx.
Huizenga Named Most Effective Member of Michigan Delegation
By Greg Chandler
Zeeland Record
U.S. Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Zeeland, was named the most effective member of the Michigan delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives in a recently-released study.
The Center for Effective Lawmaking, a partnership of the University of Virginia and Vanderbilt (Tenn.) University, released an analysis of the 118th Congress. That analysis also found during divided government in the last Congress, Huizenga exceeded expectations by outperforming the established benchmark by more than 60 percent. Huizenga scored in the top 8 percent of all House members for the 118th Congress.
In a statement from Huizenga’s office, the congressman said it was an honor to receive the most effective recognition.
“My top priority continues to be serving the residents of Southwest Michigan in the most efficient and effective way possible,” Huizenga said. “While there is still much work to be done, I look forward to continuing to deliver on legislative solutions that make Southwest Michigan an even better place to live, work, and raise a family.”
Each Congress, The Center for Effective Lawmaking ranks lawmakers according to their effectiveness using a combination of 15 metrics on the bills they sponsor, how far they move through the legislative process, and how substantial their policy proposals are. Lawmakers are then assigned a Legislative Effectiveness Score (LES).
The study provides evidence on how effective lawmaking continued to occur despite divided government and internal struggles within closely divided chambers of Congress. The average score in both the House and the Senate was normalized to 1.0. Additionally, CEL establishes a benchmark for each member which is their expected LES based on their party, seniority, and committee position.
Huizenga was given a benchmark of 1.481 but earned a score of 2.383 and was labeled as “exceed expectations.” Lawmakers “exceed expectations” when they outperform the benchmark by 50 percent or more.
Zeeland Record
U.S. Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Zeeland, was named the most effective member of the Michigan delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives in a recently-released study.
The Center for Effective Lawmaking, a partnership of the University of Virginia and Vanderbilt (Tenn.) University, released an analysis of the 118th Congress. That analysis also found during divided government in the last Congress, Huizenga exceeded expectations by outperforming the established benchmark by more than 60 percent. Huizenga scored in the top 8 percent of all House members for the 118th Congress.
In a statement from Huizenga’s office, the congressman said it was an honor to receive the most effective recognition.
“My top priority continues to be serving the residents of Southwest Michigan in the most efficient and effective way possible,” Huizenga said. “While there is still much work to be done, I look forward to continuing to deliver on legislative solutions that make Southwest Michigan an even better place to live, work, and raise a family.”
Each Congress, The Center for Effective Lawmaking ranks lawmakers according to their effectiveness using a combination of 15 metrics on the bills they sponsor, how far they move through the legislative process, and how substantial their policy proposals are. Lawmakers are then assigned a Legislative Effectiveness Score (LES).
The study provides evidence on how effective lawmaking continued to occur despite divided government and internal struggles within closely divided chambers of Congress. The average score in both the House and the Senate was normalized to 1.0. Additionally, CEL establishes a benchmark for each member which is their expected LES based on their party, seniority, and committee position.
Huizenga was given a benchmark of 1.481 but earned a score of 2.383 and was labeled as “exceed expectations.” Lawmakers “exceed expectations” when they outperform the benchmark by 50 percent or more.
BBB Announces Statewide Merger
The Better Business Bureau has announced an important milestone for businesses and consumers across the state.
BBB of Detroit and Eastern Michigan and BBB of Western Michigan have merged to become the Better Business Bureau of Michigan, impacting thousands of Michigan businesses and approximately 10 million Michigan consumers.
With this merger, BBB of Michigan is now one of the largest bureaus in North America.
This strategic unification will allow BBB to provide enhanced programs, expanded resources, and a stronger network of support for businesses and consumers throughout the state. By combining forces, BBB of Michigan will streamline operations, increase accessibility, and continue its mission of fostering marketplace trust and integrity.
The merger will also allow the BBB Educational Foundation to expand programs and educate more businesses and consumers.
Lisa Frohnapfel, who took the reins of BBB Serving Western Michigan in 2021, now expands her leadership role to cover the entire combined service area as president and chief executive officer of the newly formed BBB of Michigan.
“Our goal is to provide a more efficient and effective BBB experience for all of Michigan,” Frohnapfel said. “By uniting our efforts, we will be better positioned to support businesses, educate consumers, and promote trust throughout the state.”
—————
What This Means for Michigan:
• Greater Statewide Support – Businesses and consumers will have access to a unified BBB, ensuring more seamless assistance across Michigan.
• Expanded Programs & Services – BBB will continue to offer accreditation, dispute resolution, scam tracking, and business and consumer education while enhancing its reach.
• Stronger Marketplace Trust – The merger reinforces BBB’s commitment to ethical business practices, consumer protection, and community engagement.
BBB of Michigan will continue operations at both of its offices, located in Metro Detroit and Grand Rapids.
Visit BBB.org/mi for more information.
BBB of Detroit and Eastern Michigan and BBB of Western Michigan have merged to become the Better Business Bureau of Michigan, impacting thousands of Michigan businesses and approximately 10 million Michigan consumers.
With this merger, BBB of Michigan is now one of the largest bureaus in North America.
This strategic unification will allow BBB to provide enhanced programs, expanded resources, and a stronger network of support for businesses and consumers throughout the state. By combining forces, BBB of Michigan will streamline operations, increase accessibility, and continue its mission of fostering marketplace trust and integrity.
The merger will also allow the BBB Educational Foundation to expand programs and educate more businesses and consumers.
Lisa Frohnapfel, who took the reins of BBB Serving Western Michigan in 2021, now expands her leadership role to cover the entire combined service area as president and chief executive officer of the newly formed BBB of Michigan.
“Our goal is to provide a more efficient and effective BBB experience for all of Michigan,” Frohnapfel said. “By uniting our efforts, we will be better positioned to support businesses, educate consumers, and promote trust throughout the state.”
—————
What This Means for Michigan:
• Greater Statewide Support – Businesses and consumers will have access to a unified BBB, ensuring more seamless assistance across Michigan.
• Expanded Programs & Services – BBB will continue to offer accreditation, dispute resolution, scam tracking, and business and consumer education while enhancing its reach.
• Stronger Marketplace Trust – The merger reinforces BBB’s commitment to ethical business practices, consumer protection, and community engagement.
BBB of Michigan will continue operations at both of its offices, located in Metro Detroit and Grand Rapids.
Visit BBB.org/mi for more information.
Federal Court Asked to Strike Down Wetlands Law for Violating U.S. Constitution
By Scott McClallen
Michigan Capitol Confidential
Two Michigan men have asked a federal judge to strike down as unconstitutional a state law that restricts the way property owners may manage 6.5 million acres of land.
The men, Joshua Wenzlick of Freeland and Paul Satkowiak of Bay County, are represented by attorney Philip Ellison from the law firm Outside Legal Counsel in Hemlock.
The lawsuit names Phillip Roos, the director of the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, Attorney General Dana Nessel and state inspector Brian Marshall as defendants.
Paul Satkowiak’s 15-acre property in Bay County is 10 miles away from any large body of water. State officials, though, say he violated wetland protection laws when he placed dirt on his Mount Forest Township property and built a barn there to store his excavation equipment.
State employees abuse the vague wetland statute that requires a permit if a property has a “bog, swamp, or marsh, inundated or saturated by water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support, hydric soils and a predominance of wetland vegetation or aquatic life,” Ellison told Michigan Capitol Confidential in a phone conversation.
Ellison first filed the lawsuit Feb. 10 and on March 23 he added Wenzlick, a man whom the environmental agency could fine up to $1.7 million for expanding a separate pond, CapCon reported in January.
The lawsuit, filed with the U.S District Court in Lansing, asks federal Chief Judge Hala Y. Jarbou to strike down certain provisions of Part 303 of Michigan’s Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act for violating the U.S. Constitution.
Satkowiak’s “property is not on any body of water, or adjacent to, or nearby any body of water,” Ellison told CapCon. Yet, state regulators claim it’s a wetland.
The suit alleges that Michigan's wetlands laws triggering fines of up to $25,000 daily violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on excessive fines, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment.
The lawsuit asks for Satkowiak’s case to be heard by a jury instead of a judge, a right the Sixth Amendment guarantees to individuals alleged to have committed a crime.
“Juries allow the average, everyday person to be a check on not just the government bringing the case, but the judge on the case too,” Ellison said. “Because the judge isn’t the one who makes the ultimate decision. It’s the citizenry.”
Part 303 of the Michigan law allows the environmental agency to hear complaints in an administrative court in Lansing or the local jurisdiction. The agency usually chooses Lansing.
The attorney said that he’s challenging the authority of state employees to enter private property without a warrant.
In March, a federal judge ruled that a separate lawsuit against environmental quality analyst Justin Smith and inspector Brian Marshall could proceed. The lawsuit accused Smith and Marshall of violating Satkowiak’s Fourth Amendment rights in March 2024 by trespassing on a separate piece of property he owns along M-13 just south of Pinconning.
“My office has sued six different EGLE officials for violating the Fourth Amendment over the last two years,” Ellison said.
The state had 20 days from March 23, the date the lawsuit was amended, to respond to the allegations.
Michigan Capitol Confidential
Two Michigan men have asked a federal judge to strike down as unconstitutional a state law that restricts the way property owners may manage 6.5 million acres of land.
The men, Joshua Wenzlick of Freeland and Paul Satkowiak of Bay County, are represented by attorney Philip Ellison from the law firm Outside Legal Counsel in Hemlock.
The lawsuit names Phillip Roos, the director of the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, Attorney General Dana Nessel and state inspector Brian Marshall as defendants.
Paul Satkowiak’s 15-acre property in Bay County is 10 miles away from any large body of water. State officials, though, say he violated wetland protection laws when he placed dirt on his Mount Forest Township property and built a barn there to store his excavation equipment.
State employees abuse the vague wetland statute that requires a permit if a property has a “bog, swamp, or marsh, inundated or saturated by water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support, hydric soils and a predominance of wetland vegetation or aquatic life,” Ellison told Michigan Capitol Confidential in a phone conversation.
Ellison first filed the lawsuit Feb. 10 and on March 23 he added Wenzlick, a man whom the environmental agency could fine up to $1.7 million for expanding a separate pond, CapCon reported in January.
The lawsuit, filed with the U.S District Court in Lansing, asks federal Chief Judge Hala Y. Jarbou to strike down certain provisions of Part 303 of Michigan’s Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act for violating the U.S. Constitution.
Satkowiak’s “property is not on any body of water, or adjacent to, or nearby any body of water,” Ellison told CapCon. Yet, state regulators claim it’s a wetland.
The suit alleges that Michigan's wetlands laws triggering fines of up to $25,000 daily violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on excessive fines, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment.
The lawsuit asks for Satkowiak’s case to be heard by a jury instead of a judge, a right the Sixth Amendment guarantees to individuals alleged to have committed a crime.
“Juries allow the average, everyday person to be a check on not just the government bringing the case, but the judge on the case too,” Ellison said. “Because the judge isn’t the one who makes the ultimate decision. It’s the citizenry.”
Part 303 of the Michigan law allows the environmental agency to hear complaints in an administrative court in Lansing or the local jurisdiction. The agency usually chooses Lansing.
The attorney said that he’s challenging the authority of state employees to enter private property without a warrant.
In March, a federal judge ruled that a separate lawsuit against environmental quality analyst Justin Smith and inspector Brian Marshall could proceed. The lawsuit accused Smith and Marshall of violating Satkowiak’s Fourth Amendment rights in March 2024 by trespassing on a separate piece of property he owns along M-13 just south of Pinconning.
“My office has sued six different EGLE officials for violating the Fourth Amendment over the last two years,” Ellison said.
The state had 20 days from March 23, the date the lawsuit was amended, to respond to the allegations.
