Michigan voters face a legal puzzle in the Attorney General race

Michigan voters heading to the polls in November face an unusual question regarding the state’s top law enforcement official. The Libertarian Party has nominated Jason Dye for attorney general, a position that has traditionally been held by licensed lawyers. Dye, the founder of the online platform We The People News, does not hold a law degree or a Michigan bar license. His candidacy forces a confrontation between the ballot and a century-old judicial precedent.

State law does not explicitly require the attorney general to be a member of the bar. A spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s office confirmed via email that neither the Michigan Constitution nor election law mandates a legal license for the role. Consequently, Dye’s name appears on the ballot. However, legal scholars note that a 1937 decision by the Michigan Supreme Court in Attorney General ex Rel Cook v. O'Neill suggests the qualification is implied by the name and nature of the office itself.

Dye defended his candidacy during an interview with Michigan Public, citing the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. He argued that state courts are bound by federal law and that the Michigan Bar Association does not possess constitutional authority to dictate qualifications. Dye stated his goal is to eliminate the Bar Association and qualified immunity, which he described as tools used against the public. He said, "I want to get rid of the Bar Association, too. I also want to get rid of qualified immunity."

Aman McLeod, a law professor at the University of Detroit Mercy, explained the practical implications of the 1937 ruling. McLeod said a court would likely rule that only an attorney could serve in the role. If Dye wins and takes office, the path forward involves a quo warranto suit, a legal challenge to his qualifications. McLeod noted that if a court finds him unqualified, the office would be vacated. In that scenario, the governor would appoint a successor, or the candidate with the second-most votes would assume the role.

Dye plans to rely on his assistant attorney general, Michael Komorn of Southfield, to represent the state in court if he takes office. Dye described Komorn as the individual who would handle legal proceedings while Dye focuses on policy priorities such as opposing data centers and Flock cameras. Dye also mentioned his connection to Thomas Howell, a Libertarian candidate for the state Supreme Court who is also not a bar attorney. Howell’s campaign faces a similar, though more explicit, statutory requirement for legal licensure.

The current attorney general, Dana Nessel, is term-limited and will not seek re-election. The election will determine whether Michigan follows the 1937 precedent or allows a non-attorney to serve in the executive branch. Voters will cast their ballots in November, with the legal question likely to be resolved in the courts after the results are certified.