Why Larry Nassar and 20,000 Others Were Removed From Michigan’s Sex Offender Registry

Larry Nassar, the former USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University physician convicted of sexually abusing girls and young women, is among more than 20,000 people removed from Michigan’s sex offender registrySex Offender Registry and Sex Offender Registration LawsA sex offender registry is a government system that requires people convicted of specified sex offenses to provide identifying and other information to authorities, with some information often made publicly available. Federal and state law governs registration requirements, which can differ significantly by jurisdiction.Read more → after the state Supreme Court ruled that newer registration requirements cannot be imposed retroactively for crimes committed before July 1, 2011.

The decision does not overturn Nassar’s convictions, shorten his prison sentences, or clear his criminal record. He remains incarcerated under lengthy state and federal sentences, including a 60-year federal sentence for child pornography and obstruction offenses. What changed is his obligation to remain on Michigan’s sex offender registry under the state’s current law.

The Michigan Supreme Court’s September 9 ruling in People v. Smith applies far beyond Nassar. At the time of the decision, approximately 43,000 people were actively registered or required to register in Michigan, and within two days state police had removed more than 20,000 of them.

The reason lies in one of the Constitution’s oldest protections against retroactive punishment. The U.S. Constitution and the Michigan Constitution both prohibit ex post factoEx Post Facto Clause and Retroactive LawThe Ex Post Facto Clause prohibits federal and state governments from retroactively creating criminal liability or increasing punishment for conduct after it occurred. A retroactive law changes the legal consequences of earlier conduct or events, but not every retroactive law is an unconstitutional ex post facto law.Read more → laws, which generally prevent the government from increasing punishment for conduct after the crime has been committed.

For years, a central question in sex offender registry cases has been whether registration is actually punishment. States have often described those systems as civil public-safety measures designed to inform communities and help law enforcement rather than as additional criminal penalties.

Michigan’s Supreme Court reached a different conclusion about the state’s current law. In its 2025 decision in People v. Kardasz, the court held that Michigan’s 2021 Sex Offender Registration Act is punitive in nature because of its lengthy or lifetime registration periods, extensive reporting duties, public disclosure of personal information, and lack of individualized review for many registrants.

The court did not find the 2021 law unconstitutional in every circumstance. In Kardasz, it held that the registry amounted to punishment but was not inherently cruel or unusual punishment for a Tier III offender convicted of a serious sexual offense.

That finding became critical in People v. Smith. Eddie Smith had committed registrable offenses in 1995 and 2010 but was being required to comply with the much newer 2021 version of Michigan’s registry law. Once the court had classified the modern registry as punishment, applying those later requirements to Smith’s older crimes created an ex post facto problem.

The Michigan Supreme Court concluded that people whose qualifying conduct occurred before July 1, 2011, cannot be subjected to the current registration system based solely on those earlier offenses. That date matters because Michigan significantly expanded its Sex Offender Registration Act through amendments that took effect in 2011, while later changes in 2021 attempted to address earlier constitutional challenges and retained a tiered system with substantial reporting and public-notification requirements.

The ruling turns on the date of the conduct, not the date a defendant was eventually convicted or sentenced. That is why Nassar is covered even though his most prominent convictions came years after 2011, because prosecutors have said the conduct underlying his Michigan registration occurred before the July 2011 cutoff.

Nassar pleaded guilty in Michigan to multiple counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and received sentences of 40 to 175 years in Ingham County and 40 to 125 years in Eaton County. He separately received a 60-year federal sentence after pleading guilty to child pornography and obstruction charges.

His federal judgment also requires him to register as a sex offender if he is ever released and places him on lifetime federal supervised release. The Michigan Supreme Court ruling does not alter that separate federal judgment.

The scope of the Michigan decision is broader than simply removing names from a public website. Michigan State Police has instructed law enforcement that people affected by Smith are being permanently removed from both the public registry and the nonpublic sex offender database used by law enforcement, ending their Michigan obligation to register, report changes in residence or employment, or periodically verify their information based on the affected pre-2011 offenses.

That result may surprise readers because Michigan had older versions of its sex offender registry before the 2011 amendments. The state Supreme Court did not simply return affected registrants to an earlier version with fewer requirements, and Michigan State Police says the court determined that reviving or severing those earlier versions was not appropriate.

The ruling applies regardless of the seriousness of the underlying offense or the length of the registration requirement originally imposed. That has prompted criticism from prosecutors and concern from some victims, particularly because the consequences extend to people convicted of serious and repeated sex crimes.

Michigan State Police has also warned that some plea agreements may have been reached with the expectation that sex offender registration would remain part of the outcome. The agency has instructed officers to direct victims with questions about possible remedies to prosecutors, victim advocates or private attorneys because the ruling may prevent enforcement of a registration term that once formed part of a plea agreement.

The constitutional protection involved does not depend on how serious or disturbing a crime was. Once Michigan’s highest court classified the modern registry as punishment, the state could not reach backward and impose that newer punishment on earlier conduct without running into the Ex Post Facto Clause.

That distinction explains why a result involving Nassar can be legally consistent even while generating a strong public reaction. Michigan’s registry was created to provide information intended to help the public protect against future sexual offenses, and public entries can include photographs, home and work addresses, physical descriptions, conviction information, and other identifying details.

The Supreme Court’s ruling does not prevent Michigan from maintaining that system for people whose qualifying offenses occurred on or after July 1, 2011. Those registrants remain subject to the current law unless another court decision changes their obligations.

The decision also affects people convicted outside Michigan. State police says someone required to register in another state solely because of conduct committed before July 1, 2011 may move, work, or attend school in Michigan without becoming subject to the current Michigan registration system, even if that person remains a lifetime registrant elsewhere.

Michigan’s registry may also face additional changes through a separate federal class action now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Oral arguments were held July 21 in Does v. Whitmer, which raises constitutional challenges affecting provisions of the registry beyond the pre-2011 population covered by Smith.

A Sixth Circuit ruling could determine whether additional portions of the law can continue to be enforced against people whose offenses occurred after the July 2011 cutoff. That means Michigan’s registry may still undergo further changes even after the state Supreme Court’s sweeping decision.

For now, the effect of Smith is unusually broad. More than 20,000 people who were previously required to appear on the state’s registry have been removed, and Michigan State Police says the total could continue to change as officials finish reviewing records.

Nassar’s inclusion makes the ruling especially visible, but his case is not why the court changed the law’s application. He is one of thousands affected by a constitutional rule that turns on when the underlying offense occurred and whether Michigan later increased the punishment attached to it.

The Michigan Supreme Court did not erase those crimes or the convictions that followed them. It concluded that once the state’s modern sex offender registry became punitive enough to count as punishment, Michigan could not retroactively impose that newer punishment on conduct committed before the law took effect.