Safe & Just Michigan
Criminal Defense Newsletter | March 2026
MDOC sets new legal mail policy for prisons
Most mail that reaches incarcerated individuals is in the form of photocopies. An exception to this in the past was legal mail (also known as special handling mail) from attorneys and courts, that is no longer the case.
On January 5, 2026, the Michigan Department of Corrections instituted a new policy that changes the way it handles legal mail for incarcerated individuals. This process has both an outside and an inside component. Outside the correctional facility, attorneys will have to register with a sender authentication system called Text Behind and receive a code to affix on the mail to be sent to a correctional facility. Once the mail is received at the facility, it is opened in the presence of the incarcerated individual, checked for contraband, and photocopied without being read. The incarcerated individual receives a photocopy of the mail, and the original is destroyed.
The reason for this new policy is to curb the inflow of contraband, particularly drug-soaked paper, into the facility. We acknowledge that mail can be tainted with drugs, but this is not the main route through which illicit drugs get into correctional facilities. The new policy does pose some concerns, including its effects on time-sensitive mail and the potential threat to the attorney-client privilege.
First, it increases the time it takes for legal mail to get to its recipient. Recipients must be called from wherever they are in the facility and brought to a secure location where the inspection and photocopying can be done in their presence. In the case of time-sensitive mail, the recipient has less time to receive and respond to requests from their attorney or the courts, which can make them non-compliant with court processes.
Second, the policy states that the original document must be checked for contraband without being read or skimmed. The new special handling mail process cannot guarantee that the mail is not read or skimmed during contraband checks. A necessary aspect of our judicial system is clear, honest communication between attorneys and their clients. Without this, attorneys cannot effectively represent their clients. The possibility that attorney-client mail may cease to be confidential is a serious threat to effective representation. Our partners at Humanity for Prisoners are leading the monitoring and evaluation of this new policy. Partners and allies who become aware of problems resulting from this policy are encouraged to email brad@humanityforprisoners.org and include the below information:
- Where did the incident occur?
- Date when the incident occurred?
- What type of document was affected (e.g., affidavit, court order, confidential attorney letter)?
- What happened (e.g., mail opened outside of presence, poor copy quality, original destroyed)
Governor issues budget proposal, including finding SADO for juvenile lifer work
Budget negotiations are underway. On February 11, 2026, Director Jen Flood shared Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2027, which covers October 2026 through September 2027. After the executive budget recommendations are released, department budgets follow. This week, the state legislature reviewed the executive budgets for corrections and the judiciary.
It is costly to house and supervise people who have committed crimes in Michigan. $2.2 billion or 3% of the executive proposed budget is allocated to the Department of Corrections for fiscal year 2027. This estimate is 1.3% higher than this year’s budget. Most of the proposed budget, $1.7 billion, is to feed, house, move, and provide healthcare to the 32,411 incarcerated Michiganders. The proposed executive budget also includes:
- an additional $4.2 million to VitalCore to cover increases in healthcare costs due to inflation;
- $1 million for community-based corrections programming/services in counties; and
- $35.4 million for economic adjustments.
The proposed judiciary budget is much smaller than the corrections budget. However, the judiciary budget still covers operating costs for the Michigan Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, the State Appellate Defender Office (SADO), and other judicial agencies.
This year’s budget includes:
- $2.4 million for SADO to support resentencing hearings for individuals who were sentenced to life without parole for crimes they committed at ages 19 and 20;
- $250,000 to support higher than projected costs for newly established alternative court programs for those with drug addictions, mental illness, and veterans;
- $2.0 million to support and maintain the statewide judicial case management system.
Overall, Gov. Whitmer is asking for $88.1 billion to fund the government for fiscal year 2027. She proposes pulling from the state's "rainy day" fund and increasing the tax on tobacco products and vapes to make up for reduced revenue resulting from the federal “Big Beautiful Bill” and increases in spending resulting from last year’s road funding package. This will be hotly contested by the Republican legislative leadership. Last year’s contentious budget negotiation resulted in the government failing to meet their self-imposed budget deadline in July and narrowly missing their constitutional budget deadline in October. This year may unfold similarly if our divided legislature cannot come to consensus on how to fund the government.
To learn more about us, visit www.safeandjustmi.org.
Current Articles
- Work Smarter: AI for Life after Release
- SADO attorney to participate in Michigan Supreme Court's Community Connections Program
- 2025 Project Reentry Workshops
- What sentencing judges think
- New report reviews progress made in the decade since Montgomery v Louisiana
- Ask an appellate attorney: What question do I need to ask in my statement of questions presented?
- Digital Literacy with The Friends U Need Workshop -- Tonight!
- MAACS is hiring a Voucher Review Attorney
- Ask an appellate attorney: Does the prosecutor have to disclose that a witness changed their story before the trial if they have the witness acknowledge the inconsistency at trial?
- Post-Kardasz challenges to Michigan’s sex offender registry
Subscriber Comments