Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 722.688 (2026)

Exceptions.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

DISSEMINATING, EXHIBITING, OR DISPLAYING SEXUALLY EXPLICIT MATTER TO MINORS


Act 33 of 1978


722.688 Exceptions.

Sec. 18.

    Section 17 does not apply to the dissemination of an ultra-violent explicit video game to a minor by any of the following:

    (a) A parent or guardian who disseminates an ultra-violent explicit video game to his or her child or ward.

    (b) An immediate family member of the minor who disseminates an ultra-violent explicit video game to the minor in the immediate family member's residence or the minor's residence.

    (c) An individual who disseminates an ultra-violent video game to a minor who is a guest in the individual's residence.

    (d) An individual who disseminates an ultra-violent explicit video game for a legitimate medical, scientific, governmental, or judicial purpose.

History: Add. 2005, Act 108, Eff. Dec. 1, 2005

Constitutionality Notes:

    In Entertainment Software Association v Granholm, F Supp (2006), the United States district court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, permanently enjoined enforcement of an act regulating sexually explicit and ultra-violent video games as violating free speech rights and the due process requirement that a law be sufficiently definite to provide notice of the conduct prohibited that are granted in the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2013–2013 · leading case: Rebecca Jasinski v. Sheri Tyler, 729 F.3d 531 (6th Cir. 2013).
Rebecca Jasinski v. Sheri Tyler, 729 F.3d 531 (6th Cir. 2013). “Count I is captioned “Gross Negligence Against Defendants [Sheri] Tyler, Som-mers, Lovelace and Dietrich,” and alleges Sheri Tyler, Sommers, Lovelace, and Dietrich failed to properly investigate the complaints of abuse under the Michigan Child Protection Law, Mich. Comp. Laws §…”
Suzanne Langdon v. Patricia Skelding, 524 F. App'x 172 (6th Cir. 2013). “3 The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Calista’s substantive and procedural due process rights by “fail[ing] to properly investigate the complaints of abuse and failing] to follow the mandates of the clearly established law, including MCL 722.688 of the Child…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.