29 U.S.C. § 1144(a). Under another provision of the act, ERISA benefits provided may not be assigned or alienated. “Each plan shall provide that benefits provided under the plan may not be assigned or alienated.” 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(1). The anti-alienation provision extends to both voluntary and involuntary assignments such as garnishments. Commercial Mortgage Ins. Inc. v. Citizens Nat’l Bank of Dallas, 526 F.Supp. 510 (N.D.Tx.1981). In this case, Plaintiff asserts that the Eaton County Circuit Court Order authorizing his pension benefits to be redirected to his prison account violates the anti-alienation provision of ERISA and is therefore preempted. Plaintiffs assertion is not only accurate but also well supported by the courts. Roberts v. Baugh, 986 F.Supp. 1074 (E.D.Mich.1997)(<HOLDING>); State Treasurer v. Abbott, 468 Mich. 143, 660
holding that a proper waiver of interest by a nonpartieipant in a plan is not preempted by erisas antialienation provisions holding that the scfra provision allowing the state to redirect prisoners pension checks to prison account violated erisas antialienation provision and was therefore preempted by erisa holding that fehbas complete preemption provision closely resembles erisas express preemption provision and precedent interpreting the erisa provision thus provides authority for cases involving the fehba provision holding that the mvra overrides erisas antialienation provision holding that erisas antialienation statute precluded imposition of a constructive trust on pension benefits owed to an individual convicted of embezzlement