SOS Benson's Rule Builds a 20-Year Lag into Voter Roll Cleanup . . . She Calls That Progress

By Patrice Johnson, Chair and Co-Founder, Michigan Fair Elections Institute

April 30, 2026

On April 29, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson announced 600,000 Michigan voter registrations, including those who haven't voted for 20 years or more, have been moved to inactive status. What she did not say was that her own new rule drew a 20-year mark as the starting line before any cleanup clock begins--in conflict with federal law, which starts the clock after two federal elections (four years).

Michigan’s rolls did not accumulate 600,000 ghost registrations despite the system. They are accumulating them because of it.

The rule at the center of the problem

Benson heads the Michigan Department of State (MDOS), and MDOS promulgated Rule Set 2025-13 six weeks after she announced her candidacy for governor. The package, consisting of 12 separate rules, took effect February 23, 2026. Within that set, Rule 168.252 requires a clerk to meet a “reliable information” bar before starting the registration verification process that triggers the federal removal countdown under 52 U.S.C. § 20507. The first example of qualifying as “reliable information” is:

“A voter’s failure to vote for 20 years or more, or for a timeframe as provided in the act.”

R 168.252(2)(a), Rule Set 2025-13 (eff. February 23, 2026).

This rule carries the force of law, but it was not passed by the Michigan Legislature and conflicts directly with federal law.

Four problems

1.    Federal law does not require a 20-year wait.  The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), 52 U.S.C. § 20507(a)(4), requires each state to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters,” but only by reason of death or change of residence. Non-voting alone is not a basis for removal. Under § 20507(b)(2), a voter cannot be removed for failure to vote unless they have also failed to respond to a notice and “has not voted or appeared to vote in 2 or more consecutive general elections for Federal office.”

The secretary’s 20 years stands in stark contrast to the NVRA’s four years. Michigan’s rule imposes a 20-year waiting period through bureaucrat fiat without legislative authorization. A 20-year wait means a registrant who moved out-of-state in 2005 may still be on Michigan’s rolls. Consider also, that on average, 10% of the population moves every year.

2.    The rule contradicts itself.  The same rule that lists 20-year non-voting as reliable information also says that data “pulled from online databases” is not reliable on its own (R 168.252(3)(a)). The Qualified Voter File — the state’s own voter database — is an online database. Citizen analysts are not listed as reliable.

Rule 168.252(4) states: “A clerk is not obligated to begin an investigation” based on that kind of data. Under this rule, clerks have no safe way to act even when a registrant hasn’t been active in two decades.

3.    The “personal knowledge” standard goes beyond what the law allows.  Rule 168.251(f) defines personal knowledge as “direct, firsthand observance.” That requirement does not exist in MCL 168.512, the statute governing voter registration challenges. MFEI’s report Compromised Checkpoints documents how the Legislature never authorized this requirement, making it beyond the agency’s legal authority (ultra vires). See MFEI's 2-page summary here and Abridged 20-page edition here.

4.   An entire group of overseas registrants is shielded from verification and cleanup.  Under Rule 168.253(1)(a), if a registrant currently holds UOCAVA or MOVE Act status, which is valid for 12 months, “the clerk shall not send a notice.”

Once that status expires, the rule contains no mechanism to restart normal verification. The result, as Compromised Checkpoints documents, is “a permanent unverifiable protected class.”

This conflicts with AG Opinion #7322. The opinion, issued May 5, 2023, by AG Dana Nessel (D) at Secretary Benson’s own request, recognized that military and overseas civilian voters are legally distinguishable categories. Overseas civilians do not warrant the same blanket exemptions as active military. The Opinion #7322 was recently removed from state’s websites so is enclosed below.

The real timeline

The process under Federal laws takes roughly four years from notice to removal. Michigan’s rule adds two decades before that clock starts:

•       20 years of non-voting just to reach the “reliable information” bar

•       Plus two full federal election cycles — at least four more years — before removal is lawful under 52 U.S.C. § i20507(2)(b)

•       Plus, a forwardable notice sent by mail, then the 45-day waiting period

This is not a flaw in the design. It is the design. Secretary Benson’s announcement is the first step in that multi-decade voter-roll-bloating process.

How did this rule gain the force of law?

MDOS submitted Rule Set 2025-13 to the Michigan Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules. But MOAHR was created via an executive reorganization office by Governor Whitmer. Executive Reorganization Order 2019-06 had no statutory foundation and was erroneously treated as an office transfer, rather than an office creation. MOAHR, which operates under executve branch control and executive branch budgeting and staffing, approved the Rule Set and sent it to JCAR, the legally authorized legislative review committee.

But JCAR has no power to change or veto rules. It could not convene a quorum to meet, let alone to vote. After 15 session days, rule packages submitted to JCAR go into automatic effect under MCL 24.245a. Neither checkpoint worked — but both performed exactly as designed.

What the SOS announcement should have said

Michigan is beginning the notice process for 600,000 registrations inactive for twenty or more years, as defined by a legally unauthorized threshold the Secretary’s own rule created. Those voters are not likely to be removed until after the 2026 and 2028 federal elections. An unknown number of foreign registrants may be permanently shielded under the UOCAVA exemption and never removed at all.  

That is a very different headline than the one Michigan voters received.

What Michigan voters should know

Michigan voters and legislators have a right to ask specific questions about the 600,000 registrations now in inactive status: When were notices sent? How many were confirmed delivered? What is the projected removal timeline? How many registrations are currently shielded under R 168.253(1)(a) and may never be removed?

The answers are not in the Benson’s press release. MFEI encourages legislators and the public to review the full rulemaking record for all election rule sets promulgated in 2025 and 2026. All these rule sets and their 50-plus rules, according to Compromised Checkpoints, are in apparent conflict with civil rights law, the Michigan Administrative Procedures Act, MCL 168.509aa, MCL 168.512, and 52 U.S.C. § 20507.

Michigan’s voter rolls have degraded to alarming levels over the past four years, and the rulemaking process is currently steamrolling defective and unlawful rules carrying the force of law. The Secretary of State refuses to show the Legislature — even under subpoena — the clerk manual her office is providing to local election officials (House of Representatives v. Benson, Case No. 25-000096-MZ).

A press release announcing the first step toward cleanup is a far cry from masking the new rules and fixing the system that caused the problem.