Michigan Senate Bill SB0342

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/29/25
• Refer: 5/29/25

Caption

Law enforcement: other; disclosures by law enforcement officers act; modify definition of involuntary statement. Amend sec. 1 of 2006 PA 563 (MCL 15.391).

Summary

SB 342 would amend Michigan’s law governing the use and disclosure of certain statements made by law enforcement officers by revising key definitions in the act. The bill keeps the basic concept of an “involuntary statement” as information an officer is compelled to provide under threat of dismissal or another employment sanction, but clarifies that the term does not include knowingly and intentionally false or misleading statements about a material fact. It also updates the definition of “law enforcement officer” to use “individual” instead of “person” for officers trained and licensed or certified under the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards Act. The bill further expands the scope of covered personnel by expressly including local corrections officers and emergency dispatch workers employed by a law enforcement agency. The definition of “law enforcement agency” remains broad, covering state police, the Department of Natural Resources, and local public agencies such as county, township, city, village, airport authority, community college, and university police agencies. If enacted, the changes would take effect 90 days after enactment.

Impact

SB 342 would amend section 1 of 2006 PA 563, codified at MCL 15.391, and would change who is covered by Michigan’s protections and restrictions on compelled statements from law enforcement personnel. By adding local corrections officers and emergency dispatch workers, the bill would extend the statute’s application to additional public safety employees who may be subject to internal investigations or compelled disclosures. The bill would not appear to alter the core prohibition itself, but it would broaden the statute’s reach and clarify the definition of involuntary statements for purposes of the act.

Sentiment

Based on the available record, the bill appears to be a technical or clarifying amendment rather than a highly controversial policy change. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the materials supplied. The bill caption and text suggest a generally administrative purpose: refining definitions and extending coverage to additional categories of public safety workers.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the expansion of the term “law enforcement officer” to include local corrections officers and emergency dispatch workers, which could broaden the reach of the statute beyond traditional sworn police personnel. Another possible issue is the continued treatment of compelled statements under threat of discipline, since the bill preserves the underlying framework governing when such statements are considered involuntary. However, no specific objections, amendments, or opposing viewpoints are documented in the provided materials.