Michigan House Bill HB4433

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/19/23
• Refer: 4/19/23
• Report Pass: 12/3/24

Caption

Criminal procedure: sentencing guidelines; sentencing guidelines for crime of sodomy between consenting adults; eliminate. Amends sec. 9, ch. VI & sec. 16i, ch. XVII of 1927 PA 175 (MCL 766.9 & 777.16i).

Impact

If enacted, HB4433 would make significant changes to the state laws concerning sexual conduct. The removal of sentencing guidelines for sodomy between consenting adults reflects a broader shift towards an acknowledgment of personal freedoms and privacy rights. This bill stands to impact ongoing legal interpretations of similar cases, potentially leading to an increase in personal liberties regarding sexual conduct in private settings. This legislative change may also have implications for related laws governing consent and sexual activities, contributing to a more progressive legal landscape in Michigan.

Summary

House Bill 4433 seeks to amend the 1927 PA 175, specifically focusing on the statutes related to sentencing guidelines for the crime of sodomy between consenting adults. The bill proposes the elimination of specific sentencing guidelines associated with this crime, effectively decriminalizing sodomy when consent is present. Supporters of the bill argue that it aligns with evolving societal norms and the recognition of the rights of adults to engage in private consensual activities without facing legal repercussions.

Contention

The discussion surrounding HB4433 is expected to involve various points of contention. Opponents of the bill may argue that the elimination of these guidelines could undermine legal protections against sexual misconduct and lead to potential abuses, questioning the risks associated with removing legal consequences for such behavior. Supporters, on the other hand, view it as necessary to eliminate outdated and discriminatory laws, advocating for the rights of individuals to engage in consensual activities without fear of criminal prosecution. This tension reflects a broader societal debate on personal freedoms versus regulatory oversight.