Pacific Justice Institute Raises First Amendment Concerns in Michigan Criminal Speech Case

Jewish political activist extradited to Michigan has been in jail for more than 800 days awaiting trial over six nonthreatening, nonviolent emails sent to a public official

PONTIAC, Mich. - Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) is participating in a disturbing criminal case in Michigan that tests the boundaries of First Amendment protections and the rights of citizens to criticize government officials.

The case, People of the State of Michigan v. Marc Aisen, stems from a series of emails sent by Aisen to a county official and other public employees containing inflammatory allegations that he wanted to bring to the attention of government authorities.

Following a criminal prosecution in Oakland County, Aisen was convicted under Michigan laws governing electronic communications and the use of a computer to commit a crime.

The defense maintained that the case should never have gone to a jury because it criminalizes First Amendment speech directed toward government officials. The defense further argued that the First Amendment protects criticism of government officials, political speech, and electronic communications, and that such communications can only be criminalized when they contain threats against another person.

Aisen could not find a local civil rights attorney to assist him until one of his advocates contacted Brad Dacus, founder and president of Pacific Justice Institute, who connected the legal team with PJI's Michigan attorney, Dr. David Peters.

The case has drawn attention from civil liberties advocates and legal observers concerned about new interpretations of criminal law that may infringe upon protected speech. The defense maintains that none of the communications contained threats of harm and argues that the conviction raises serious concerns involving free speech and the right to petition the government, both of which are protected by the Constitution.

Brad Dacus emphasized the broader constitutional implications of the case:

"The First Amendment exists to protect speech that may be unpopular, controversial, or critical of those in positions of authority. Courts must carefully distinguish between true threats and constitutionally protected expression. Cases involving communications directed at government officials deserve particularly close scrutiny because political speech lies at the heart of the freedoms protected by our Constitution."

PJI attorney David Peters, who tried the case and will be handling the appeal, added:

"This case involves a person who was taken from his home state, brought to Michigan, and held for more than 800 days before he was even allowed a trial. We believe the trial that was finally held was defective and that the conviction will be overturned. This is a very dangerous precedent. We do not have to agree with someone's speech to understand that it is supposed to be free."

The case remains pending, with sentencing proceedings scheduled for June 2026 and an appeal expected to follow.

Learn more about Pacific Justice Institute: WWW.PJI.ORG.

If your free speech rights are being violated, contact Pacific Justice Institute by completing a GET HELP FORM.

To help support PJI's continued legal advocacy defending religious liberty, parental rights, and constitutional freedoms, we invite you to SUPPORT PJI with a tax-deductible gift.