Posts Tagged ‘Courts’
Former ComEd CEO sentenced to 2 years for bribery scheme targeted at Madigan
Former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore has been sentenced to two years in prison for her role in bribing ex-Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.
The post Former ComEd CEO sentenced to 2 years for bribery scheme targeted at Madigan appeared first on Capitol News Illinois
Feds seek nearly 6 years in prison for Madigan confidant Mike McClain
Capitol News Illinois
Article Summary
Longtime Springfield lobbyist Mike McClain, who spent decades as a close friend and advisor to former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, is scheduled for sentencing later this month as part of separate hearings for the “ComEd Four” beginning next week.
McClain and his co-defendants were convicted in 2023 for their roles in bribing Madigan with jobs and contracts for his political allies at electric utility Commonwealth Edison while the company was pushing for legislation in Springfield.
Federal prosecutors are asking a judge to sentence McClain to 70 months in prison, while the ex-lobbyist is asking for probation.
This summary was written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story.
CHICAGO — Federal prosecutors are recommending nearly six years in prison for ex-Springfield lobbyist Mike McClain, the longtime friend and advisor of former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.
McClain was the marquee defendant in the 2023 “ComEd Four” trial, which ended in across-the-board bribery convictions for former lobbyists and executives of electric utility Commonwealth Edison. The four were found guilty orchestrating a yearslong bribery scheme targeted at Madigan, in which the powerful speaker’s allies got jobs and contracts at ComEd while the utility pushed for favorable legislation in Springfield.
Read more: ‘ComEd Four’ found guilty on all counts in bribery trial tied to ex-Speaker Madigan
For more than two years, McClain and his co-defendants have been awaiting sentencing, delayed by concerns of possible impact from a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the death of the judge who oversaw the ComEd Four case, and Madigan’s own lengthy trial, in which McClain was also a defendant.
But after a jury in February delivered a split verdict in Madigan’s case, including deadlocking on all six corruption counts McClain was also charged with, sentencing hearings for the ComEd Four were scheduled for July. And on Thursday, prosecutors asked a federal judge to give McClain 70 months — nearly six years — in prison.
Read more: Madigan guilty of bribery as split verdict punctuates ex-speaker’s fall
“McClain’s plan was illegal to its core,” prosecutors wrote in their 48-page sentencing memo Thursday. “In securing benefits for both Madigan and ComEd, McClain corrupted the legislative process and the internal control processes of a large, regulated utility.”
The feds also pointed to “McClain’s repeated overstepping of legal lines,” which they characterized as “stunning” and “egregious” — especially when it came to the $1.3 million ComEd paid out in contracts to a handful of Madigan allies who did little to no work for the company. Prosecutors referred to the no-work contractors as the former speaker’s “cronies” and accused McClain of knowing the contracts were a quid pro quo.
But in a competing filing Thursday, McClain’s attorneys asked for probation for the ex-lobbyist, citing his health and warning that a long sentence could mean he’d “die alone in prison.” His lawyers also reiterated their longtime argument that McClain’s efforts to get jobs and contracts for those in Madigan’s orbit was merely “legal and constitutionally protected lobbying.”
“Simply put, over almost a decade, Mr. McClain passed along and advocated for a handful of job recommendations from Madigan because of Madigan’s position both as an influential member of the General Assembly and, in no small measure, because Madigan was Mr. McClain’s old and close friend,” McClain’s attorneys wrote.
Surrounded by media, former Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan, the longest-serving legislative leader in U.S. history, departs the Dirksen Federal Courthouse on June 13, 2015, after receiving a 7 ½-year prison sentence on corruption charges. He was also fined $2.5 million. (Capitol News Illinois photo by Andrew Adams)
Madigan last month was sentenced to 90 months in prison and a $2.5 million fine for his guilty convictions, the majority of which stemmed from the same ComEd scheme.
Read more: Ex-Speaker Madigan sentenced to 7 ½ years in prison for bribery, corruption
Starting in 2011, ComEd notched several big legislative wins in Springfield, turning the tide of Madigan’s longtime opposition to bills pushed by utility companies. The General Assembly’s actions were worth millions of dollars to ComEd and its parent company Exelon.
During trial, McClain and his other co-defendants pointed to ComEd’s sophisticated — and expensive — multi-year lobbying strategy as the reason for the company’s luck changing in Springfield. But jurors sided with prosecutors’ theory that the company effectively bribed Madigan, showering the powerful speaker with a “stream of benefits” in the form of jobs and contracts, which greased the wheels of the legislative process.
In their filing, the feds characterized McClain as “politically savvy,” glossing through his decades in Springfield, which included 10 years as a Democratic member of the Illinois House, where he first met Madigan in the early 1970s.
“McClain’s tight connection with Madigan translated into McClain, without hesitation, making demand after demand of ComEd to fulfill Madigan’s directives, for which, in return, McClain expected ComEd would get the legislation it wanted,” prosecutors wrote. “McClain dealt with both Madigan and ComEd with eyes wide open and with full knowledge of the mutually beneficial, and wholly illegal, arrangement he helped to bestow on each of them.”
In addition to the no-work contractors, the alleged scheme also included ComEd’s multi-year contract with a law firm co-owned by Democratic fundraiser and Madigan ally Victor Reyes. Madigan also pushed for the appointment of Juan Ochoa to ComEd’s board, and prosecutors outlined several other jobs and internships at the utility that originated from Madigan.
But McClain’s attorneys insisted McClain simply took “into account” the fact that Madigan was an influential public official and treated his requests with more attention than those “from a less influential official.”
“That, too, is not only legal and rational lobbying but is true of any request for a favor anyone gets from anyone: the more important the relationship, the more effort will be spent to try to accommodate the request,” McClain’s lawyers wrote.
Though U.S. District Judge Manish Shah granted a partial retrial in March after throwing out some bribery counts, prosecutors instead asked to forge ahead with sentencing.
Read more: Judge grants retrial on most bribery counts in ‘ComEd 4’ case nearly 2 years post-verdict
The feds earlier this week also recommended a 70-month sentence for former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore, who testified in her own defense at trial. And last week, prosecutors asked that former ComEd exec John Hooker be sentenced to 56 months in prison. Both instead asked for probation. Sentencing recommendations have not yet been filed for ComEd lobbyist Jay Doherty, whose Aug. 5 hearing will be the last of the ComEd Four.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
The post Feds seek nearly 6 years in prison for Madigan confidant Mike McClain appeared first on Capitol News Illinois.
Attorney General Raoul joins lawsuit challenging Trump’s termination of federal grants
Capitol News Illinois
SPRINGFIELD – Attorney General Kwame Raoul announced this week he has joined another multistate lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s decision to withhold billions of dollars in federal funds that had previously been approved for states and other grantees.
The complaint, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, challenges several actions the administration has taken since Trump returned to office Jan. 20 that involved terminating federal grants that had previously been approved by various agencies.
Each of those actions, the lawsuit argues, were based on a misuse of a single clause in one regulation under the federal Office of Management and Budget. That clause allows agencies to terminate a grant if the agency determines the award “no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities.”
“The Trump Administration has claimed that five words in this Clause — ‘no longer effectuates . . . agency priorities’ — provide federal agencies with virtually unfettered authority to withhold federal funding any time they no longer wish to support the programs for which Congress has appropriated funding,” the lawsuit alleges.
The suit is one of more than a dozen Raoul has joined as part of a coalition of Democratic attorneys general who have been battling the administration since Trump’s second inauguration in January.
Speaking Monday to a congressional panel made up of Democratic members of the U.S. House and Senate judiciary committees, Raoul joined three other members of that coalition to explain their litigation campaign.
“Whether or not I disagree with President Trump on his policy agenda, he must act in a lawful way that is consistent with the Constitution and the laws that Congress has enacted,” Raoul said. “Unfortunately, the president and his administration have chosen, with many of their actions, to ignore the Constitution and federal law. And when constitutional guarantees are ignored, all Americans are at risk.”
Grants affected by cuts
The lawsuit challenges three specific funding cuts that have directly affected the state of Illinois. Those include:
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s decision in March to halt reimbursements under the Local Food Purchase Assistance Program, which provided funding for nonprofit organizations to buy locally grown food products from farmers for free distribution to vulnerable communities.
A decision by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to terminate two Shelter and Services Program Grant awards to the Illinois Department of Human Services totaling $29 million. The money was intended to reimburse Illinois for the cost of providing food, shelter and medical care to migrants whom the U.S. Department of Homeland Security had released to relieve overcrowding at federal detention facilities.
And a decision in May by the U.S. Department of Labor to terminate grants totaling $28.8 million to the Illinois Department of Employment Security for modernization of the state’s unemployment insurance system.
According to the lawsuit, OMB first adopted the regulation in 2020, near the end of the first Trump administration. At the time, according to the Federal Register, the agency said the clause was intended to allow agencies to end a grant program under specific conditions, but that it was not intended to let them terminate grants “arbitrarily.”
The clause was later updated to include its current wording in 2024, near the end of Joe Biden’s administration. However, according to the complaint, “OMB never suggested, in either the 2020 or 2024 rulemaking, that a grant could be terminated even though the grant was continuing to serve the very goals for which the monies had initially been awarded, merely because the agency’s priorities shifted midway during the use of the grant—let alone with no advance notice.”
As of Wednesday, the case had not yet been scheduled for a hearing.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
The post Attorney General Raoul joins lawsuit challenging Trump’s termination of federal grants appeared first on Capitol News Illinois.
GOP lawsuit seeks to end ‘gut-and-replace’ legislation
Capitol News Illinois
SPRINGFIELD — A group of Republican lawmakers filed a lawsuit this week that seeks to nullify legislation they say would indelibly alter both the business and legal landscape of Illinois.
Senate Bill 328 would amend a key provision of Illinois civil law by allowing, in certain kinds of cases, any company authorized to do business in the state to be sued in Illinois courts, even if the underlying claims and the parties have no connection to the state.
As written, the bill would apply only in cases filed under the Uniform Hazardous Substances Act in which the plaintiff claims an injury or illness resulting from exposure to a toxic substance.
What is unique about the GOP lawsuit, however, is that it doesn’t just seek to nullify the legislation before Gov. JB Pritzker signs it. It also asks the court to bar the legislature from using a procedure that has become common in the General Assembly known as “gut-and-replace.” This effectively allows lawmakers to sidestep the Illinois Constitution’s requirement that every bill be read, by title, three times on three different days in each chamber before it is passed because amendments are not required to be read on three different days in each chamber.
That procedure is used frequently for major legislation passed in the final days of a legislative session, including budget bills.
“Illinois’ reputation as one of the most corrupt states in the nation and one of the worst states in the nation for business go hand in hand,” Senate Republican Leader John Curran, R-Downers Grove, said during a virtual news conference Wednesday. “Allowing legislators to disregard the Constitution and good government transparency processes to make laws that are bad for our state is the root cause of both narratives.”
The proposal stems from a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court case, Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., in which the court upheld a Pennsylvania law that requires out-of-state corporations to agree to allow Pennsylvania courts to exercise “general personal jurisdiction” over them, just as those courts exercise over domestic corporations.
“This is legalized litigation tourism,” said Sen. Jason Plummer, R-Edwardsville. “And it further damages Illinois’ reputation as a state that’s hostile to businesses and job creators.”
SB 328 began as what’s known in the General Assembly as a “shell bill” — one that has a title and a bill number but no substantive content. In this case, the original language called for making a technical change in one sentence in the Code of Civil Procedure, deleting the word “and” and replacing it with the word “and.”
Each session, lawmakers in both chambers introduce hundreds of such bills, most of which are never acted upon. But they are often amended into substantive legislation later in the session, especially after deadlines for introducing new bills or passing bills out of committees have passed.
That is what happened with SB 328, which began as a shell bill but was amended in the Senate to make a technical change to the way court clerks handle electronically filed documents. It passed out of the Senate on April 10 by a vote of 56-0 and was sent to the House.
In the House, it was read for the first time on April 11 and was assigned to a committee, which voted April 30 to recommend it be passed. It was read a second time on May 13.
On May 30, the next-to-last day of the session, Rep. Jay Hoffman, D-Swansea, introduced a “gut-and-replace” amendment that removed the language about electronic court filings and replaced it with the new language allowing out-of-state corporations to be sued in Illinois courts over acts that may have occurred elsewhere.
House Republican Leader Tony McCombie, left, and Senate GOP Leader John Curran speak to reporters about their lawsuit challenging passage of a controversial bill regarding corporate liability during a virtual news conference Wednesday, June 18. (Credit: Zoom.us)
That amendment was never sent to a substantive committee but instead was debated on the floor of the House where it passed the night of May 31 by a partisan vote of 77-40. That vote also counted as the third reading of the bill in the House, meaning the bill number had now been read on three different days in each chamber. It was then sent back to the Senate, which voted 37-19 shortly after midnight on June 1 to concur in the House amendment.
“We have long discussed with our partners, members and constituents filing suit on this issue, even prior to me being in leadership this year,” House Republican Leader Tony McCombie, of Savanna, said during the news conference. “The caucus members brought forward this egregious example of SB 328, and said let’s move forward.”
The lawsuit was filed in circuit court in Sangamon County. It lists 47 Republican lawmakers as plaintiffs. House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch and Senate President Don Harmon are named as defendants.
Harmon, D-Oak Park, who sponsored the amended bill in the Senate, did not immediately respond Wednesday to a request for comment.
Separately, the Illinois Freedom Caucus has also filed a lawsuit in Sangamon County alleging the state’s budget bill did not satisfy the three readings requirement for similar reasons. A hearing in the case is scheduled for July 3.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
The post GOP lawsuit seeks to end ‘gut-and-replace’ legislation appeared first on Capitol News Illinois.
Parents of 10-year-old girl file federal lawsuit against Taylorville School District for alleged assault
Capitol News Illinois
SPRINGFIELD — The parents of a 10-year-old girl who allegedly was assaulted repeatedly by a 14-year-old student in the Taylorville School District have filed a federal lawsuit against the school district and the school bus company.
The lawsuit, filed by a Chicago law firm, contains five counts against the Taylorville School District and Durham School Services, including violations of the victim’s Title IX rights, of her right to bodily integrity under the 14th Amendment, willful and wanton negligence, and infliction of emotional distress.
The victim is identified in the suit as Jane Doe, a minor. Her parents are named in the suit, but Capitol News Illinois is not using their names because it would identify the girl.
The victim’s mother said that over the course of a week between late January and early February 2024, her daughter was sexually assaulted by an older student on her daughter’s school bus and at her bus stop. The court filing alleges that the assaults ranged in severity from fondling to digital penetration, most often taking place on the school bus where the perpetrator cornered the girl.
On three separate instances, the perpetrator chased the girl away from a bus stop, held her down, and covered her mouth while he sexually assaulted her, according to the suit.
The lawsuit also alleged that the perpetrator told the girl that he would harm her and her family if she reported the abuse, and that “the perpetrator admitted that he did not even know (her) name when he repeatedly assaulted her.”
The girl is a special needs student living with autism and ADHD, according to the suit.
“We are talking about one of the most vulnerable members of our society — a young, 10-year-old, special needs girl,” the lead attorney on the case, Cass Casper, said during a news conference about the lawsuit Tuesday. “This young child was so confused and distraught by what was occurring that she did not even understand what was occurring.”A spokesman for the school district did not respond to a request for comment by CNI.
After reporting the incident, the mother said she obtained an emergency order of protection for her daughter and brought it to the principal of Taylorville Junior High School, who made a “safety plan” for her daughter. She said the plan prohibited the accused student from coming into contact with her daughter at school, which the order of protection already called for, and simply relocated him to another part of the school building.
“This safety plan was shared with the bus company, my daughter’s fifth grade teacher and office staff,” the mother said during a news conference in the Statehouse in January. “No one else knew of the assaults. No one else knew of the safety plan.”
During that news conference, Peden also said that after several meetings with the school board and multiple court orders, the student was removed from her daughter’s school and sent to an alternative school for the rest of the spring semester. However, in August, she received a phone call about the student’s reentry into her daughter’s school and again asked the school to remove her daughter’s perpetrator.
“We have laws where a student gets expelled for bringing a weapon on school grounds, but what about cases like this, when the student’s body is the weapon?” the mother said.
Casper said the school district conducted what he called a “radically deficient” Title IX investigation. He alleged the school district was “more concerned with absolving the school district of responsibility” than of fleshing out what events took place when and where.
Title IX is a federal law enacted in 1972 that prohibits sexual discrimination in any education program or activity.
The court filing alleged that once the assaults were reported, the parents were informed about several other young victims in the community that the perpetrator had previously inappropriately touched.
“We do have specific information from three other sources that there were similar, not the same, but similar acts that should have raised questions within the community and within the school officials,” Casper said.
The lawsuits also mentions a previous Illinois court case decision, which ruled that a school district is responsible for child abuse occurring on a school bus, alongside the section in the Taylorville School District’s Student Disciple Code that says student conduct on school buses, at extra-curricular activities, on any property within 1,000 feet of school grounds, and “prohibited conduct that is plainly visible to a person situated on school grounds even if the misconduct occurs off of school property” is enforceable.
The lawsuit also seeks compensatory damages for the cost of the girl’s psychological treatment and for her emotional distress, as well as the implementation of new policies that will “prevent future harassment and abuse.”
“Most of what the family has pursued in Taylorville has fallen on deaf ears,” Casper said.
During the news conference, Sen. Steve McClure, R-Springfield, spoke about the failure of a bill he sponsored seeking to expel students who sexually assault another student at school. That bill had 31 co-sponsors in the Senate, 13 of whom were Democrats.
“There are legislators that do not believe that there should be any expulsion or even suspension for any student at all,” McClure said. “There’s a focus too much with some legislators on the perpetrator, we got to look after the perpetrator. What about the victim who can’t even go to school without seeing someone that attacked them on a daily basis?”
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
The post Parents of 10-year-old girl file federal lawsuit against Taylorville School District for alleged assault appeared first on Capitol News Illinois.
Ex-Speaker Madigan sentenced to 7 ½ years in prison for bribery, corruption
Capitol News Illinois
UPDATED: This story has been updated with a historical overview of Illinois corruption cases, new character letter details, and photos.
CHICAGO — The number of years former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan spent in Springfield has often been used as shorthand to explain his outsized impact on state government and politics. His political career spanned 50 years in the General Assembly, 23 years chairing the Democratic Party of Illinois, and 36 years as House speaker — the longest tenure of any state or federal legislative leader in U.S. history.
But on Friday, a new term was added to the former speaker’s list of legacy-defining terms when U.S. District Judge John Blakey sentenced Madigan to 90 months, or 7 ½ years, in federal prison.
The sentence, which also includes three years’ probation after his prison term and a $2.5 million fine, follows a jury’s split verdict in February. After a marathon two weeks of deliberation, jurors convicted him on 10 of 23 corruption charges, including bribery, but acquitted him on seven and deadlocked over another six.
Read more: Madigan guilty of bribery as split verdict punctuates ex-speaker’s fall | Madigan Trial in Review | Michael Madigan: The Rise and Fall
As Friday afternoon’s hearing passed the three-hour mark, Madigan accepted Blakey’s invitation to make a statement to the court. After taking a drink of water, putting on his glasses and blowing his nose as he approached the bench, the former speaker addressed the judge for less than two minutes, reading from a prepared script.
“I’m truly sorry for putting the people of the state of Illinois through this,” he began, noting that he “tried my best” to serve the people of Illinois. “I am not perfect.”
Later, when explaining how he was weighing Madigan’s continued insistence in his innocence, Blakey repeated Madigan’s words.
“The defendant says he’s sorry for putting the people of Illinois through this,” the judge said. “I guess that’s as close as we’ll get to remorse.”
Blakey spent a long time audibly weighing what he called “a tale of two different Mike Madigans,” calling the former speaker “a dedicated public servant” and “a good and decent person.”
“He had no reason to commit these crimes,” the judge said. “But he chose to do so.”
Blakey took particular umbrage with Madigan’s performance on the witness stand in January after he made the stunning decision to testify in his own defense. In siding with the government’s argument that the former speaker’s sentence should take into account his perjury on the witness stand, Blakey cited several examples of times Madigan’s statements conflicted with either evidence, the sworn testimony of others, or even his own testimony.
Read more: Madigan takes witness stand, denying he traded ‘public office’ for ‘private gain’
“The defendant’s testimony was littered with obstruction of justice and it was hard to watch,” Blakey said. “To put it bluntly, it was a nauseating display. … You lied, sir. You lied. You did not have to.”
Madigan, who was described by many witnesses throughout his four-month trial as difficult to read — and who attempted to explain the familial origins of his reserved personality as a defense while on the witness stand — was characteristically stoic as Blakey handed down his sentence.
After conferring with his attorney, he hugged and kissed his adult children in the front row of the courtroom gallery. A few minutes later, he and his entourage of lawyers and family quickly made their way out of the Dirksen Federal Courthouse, trailed by cameras.
True to form, the former speaker also made no statement to reporters, though he smiled slightly before getting on the elevator down to the courthouse lobby. Across the street, a man yelled to Madigan and his group, “You going to jail, buddy?”
Madigan was ordered to report to a yet-to-be-named federal prison on Oct. 13.
Madigan’s attorneys told the court he would seek a bond pending his appeal, which would allow him to remain free pending resolution of the appeal.
Prosecutors had urged a 12 ½-year sentence and a $1.5 million fine, while Madigan’s lawyers asked for five years’ probation, the first on home detention. After hearing arguments from attorneys earlier in the week, Blakey calculated the sentencing guidelines for Madigan’s convictions and other factors would dictate a prison term of 105 years, but the judge was under no obligation to follow that directive.
Read more: Prosecutors ask judge to sentence ex-Speaker Madigan to 12 ½ years in prison
‘I’m not a target of anything”
One of the last times the famously media-averse Madigan ever deigned to answer questions from journalists was in the fall of 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic afforded the speaker an even larger buffer than usual from those outside his closed circle of staff and advisors.
The previous several months had yielded near-weekly developments in the public’s understanding of an unfolding federal corruption probe, including revelations about FBI searches executed on the homes of close Madigan allies. The intrigue only intensified after the indictment and midday FBI raids on two different Democratic state senators and the arrest of a member of Madigan’s own House Democratic leadership team on a charge that he bribed another Democratic senator, who happened to be cooperating with the feds.
Despite his name showing up on subpoenas for some of those search warrants, Madigan made a bold declaration that he was not in the feds’ crosshairs.
“No, I’m not a target of anything,” he told a gaggle of reporters in a crowded and noisy hallway of the state Capitol in Springfield in late October 2019.
Within the year, however, Madigan would be proven wrong as prosecutors filed the first in a series of bombshell charges alleging the longtime speaker had been the beneficiary of a yearslong bribery scheme from electric utility Commonwealth Edison. Prosecutors alleged ComEd officials agreed to hire Madigan allies, including a handful on no-work contracts, to grease the wheels at key times when the company was pushing for big and ultimately lucrative legislation in Springfield.
Read more: Madigan Trial in Review
In that July 2020 filing, Madigan’s status as a target of the feds’ widespread corruption investigation was marked by a new moniker: “Public Official A.”
But it wasn’t until March 2022 — more than a year after Madigan resigned from his biggest public roles after pressure from within the Democratic power structures he’d built over decades — that the former speaker was indicted.
Receiving top billing among the original 22 counts in the indictment, which was later bumped to 23, was racketeering. Prosecutors accused Madigan of using his positions as House speaker, chair of the state’s Democratic Party and as partner in his real estate law firm as a “criminal enterprise” meant to maintain and increase his power while enriching his allies.
Read more: ‘The Madigan Enterprise:’ Inside the federal indictment of the state’s former speaker
The indictment rehashed what had been already made public in July 2020 and again several months later when four former ComEd executives and lobbyists were charged with orchestrating the utility’s bribery scheme aimed at Madigan.
But it also revealed that former Chicago Ald. Danny Solis had worn a wire on the speaker and alleged the speaker had agreed to get him appointed to a lucrative state board position in exchange for introductions to real estate developers to woo them as potential clients of Madigan’s firm.
A final charge added later in 2022 alleged a tacit bribery agreement between Madigan and telecommunications giant AT&T Illinois like the ComEd scheme, albeit smaller — involving one no-work contractor hired in the months before AT&T-backed legislation passed in Springfield.
Jury delivers a split verdict
On the witness stand, Madigan repeatedly claimed that he was ignorant of the fact that the collective $1.3 million his allies earned from their ComEd contracts was for performing no work. Instead, the former speaker and his lawyers framed those contracts as the result of mere job recommendations, which they argued was a component of Madigan’s job as speaker.
Read more: ‘They were being paid as a favor to Mike Madigan’: Feds’ star witness takes stand | ‘Make it a federal court suit’: Jurors hear wiretap of McClain describing subcontracts alleged to be bribes | Madigan ally testifies he was rewarded with no-work contracts as ‘good soldier’ for speaker
Madigan’s attorneys, along with some of the government’s own witnesses, argued the ComEd-backed legislation passed after years of strategic and expensive lobbying efforts, and not because the speaker’s allies had gotten jobs and contracts with the utility.
But after a slew of witnesses, including a ComEd exec-turned-FBI cooperator and one of the former contractors, in addition to secretly recorded videos and wiretapped phone calls shown at trial, the jury was ultimately convinced on most ComEd-related charges. Madigan was convicted on seven of those charges, including four counts of bribery and conspiracy, though he was acquitted on two charges related to an effort to get his ally appointed to the utility’s board.
Watch/listen: View key secretly recorded videos admitted as evidence in Madigan’s trial | Listen to key wiretapped phone calls from the Madigan trial
The so-called “ComEd Four” were convicted in their own trial in 2023 and are scheduled to be sentenced this summer. They include Madigan’s formerly close friend and longtime Springfield lobbyist Mike McClain, who was also the speaker’s codefendant in the most recent trial. But after roughly 65 hours of deliberations over two weeks beginning in late January, the jury deadlocked on all six charges that named both the former speaker and McClain, including the feds’ marquee racketeering allegation.
The jury also deadlocked on the single count alleging Madigan’s participation in the alleged bribery scheme with AT&T, forcing Blakey to declare a mistrial on that count.
It was the second time in five months that charges alleging a bribe between AT&T and Madigan resulted in a hung jury; weeks before Madigan’s trial began, former AT&T Illinois President Paul La Schiazza’s bribery case ended in a mistrial on all five counts against him. He faces retrial in January 2026.
Read more: Jury deadlocks, mistrial declared in case of ex-AT&T boss accused of bribing Madigan | Judge won’t acquit former AT&T Illinois boss in Madigan bribery case after hung jury
Charges involving Solis, the former Chicago alderman, ended in a mix of convictions, acquittals and deadlock from the jury. While jurors convicted the former speaker on wire fraud and Travel Act violation counts related to the alleged scheme to help get Solis appointed to a state board, they acquitted him of the bribery charge pertaining to the same alleged scheme. As laid out in trial, Madigan never ended up recommending Solis to newly elected Gov. JB Pritzker.
The former speaker was also acquitted of attempted extortion and three related counts related to a real estate developer to whom Madigan wanted an introduction from Solis, who served as chair of the Chicago City Council’s powerful Zoning Board. Prosecutors alleged Madigan understood and tacitly approved of Solis’ made-up story that he’d condition the approval of a zoning change sought by the developer on whether it agreed to hire the speaker’s law firm.
At the FBI’s direction, Solis told the speaker ahead of the July 2017 introduction meeting that the developer understood “how this works, you know, the quid pro quo” — insinuating the company was under the impression that it would not get the zoning approvals it needed unless it hired the speaker’s law firm, though it wasn’t true.
A few weeks later, Madigan admonished Solis before the developer meeting, telling the alderman, “You shouldn’t be talking like that.”
The feds argued Madigan was urging Solis to not speak so brazenly about their alleged bribery agreement. But on the witness stand, the former speaker said the alderman’s use of the term “quid pro quo” caused him “a great deal of surprise and concern” to the point that he decided he needed to confront Solis about it face-to-face.
In Madigan’s contentious cross-examination, the lead prosecutor attempted to poke holes in the former speaker’s explanation of that key moment, but Madigan maintained Solis seemed to have recognized he’d “made a serious mistake” and that he considered the matter settled because “I was not going to connect a request for an introduction with anything else.”
Read more: In contentious cross-examination, prosecutor accuses Madigan of not telling ‘the whole truth’ | Madigan leaves witness stand expressing regret for ‘any time spent with Danny Solis’
The jury also deadlocked on four other bribery, wire fraud and Travel Act charges concerning a plan to get state-owned land in Chicago’s Chinatown neighborhood transferred to the city for eventual development into a mixed-use apartment building.
Read more: ‘There’s something fishy here, don’t you think?’: Wiretapped calls detail Madigan confidant’s confoundment over land deal
Prosecutors alleged Madigan intended to have his firm contract with the Chinatown developer in accordance with hints Solis had dropped on secret recordings. But Madigan’s former law partner and testimony from two former top lawyers in the speaker’s office indicated the law firm had strict conflict-of-interest rules that would have prohibited the developer from ever becoming a client.
Read more: Former Madigan aide testifies speaker had conflict of interest protocols
Sentencing factors
In the four months post-verdict, a period nearly as long as the grueling trial itself, Madigan turned 83 — a mitigating factor his defense attorneys noted in a pre-sentencing memo late last month, which asked for five years’ probation, including one on home confinement.
In another filing last week, Madigan’s lawyers painted a bleak picture of the sentence sought by prosecutors, accusing them of arguing in bad faith that ComEd’s investor profits should be considered as part of sentencing.
“The government seeks to condemn an 83-year-old man to die behind bars for crimes that enriched him not one penny,” defense attorneys wrote. “They demand that Mike Madigan spend his final years in a cell, though he spent decades as the consumers’ shield against ComEd’s predations.”
But much more emphasized was his role as caretaker to his wife, Shirley, who suffers from “a severe lung disease,” per a letter filed with the court last month from Madigan’s daughter, former Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan.
Instead of writing a letter, Shirley Madigan recorded a video pleading for leniency in sentencing. Clad in purple latex gloves with a medical mask hanging from her neck, Shirley praised her husband’s character as a father and grandfather but also detailed how Madigan has become her caretaker, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic hit.
“I really don’t exist without him,” she told the camera as B-roll of Madigan helping her up from a couch played over her testimonial. “I don’t know what I would do without Michael. I would probably have to find some place to live, and I’d probably have to find care.”
The former speaker and his lawyers echoed Shirley’s pleas Friday, with attorney Dan Collins telling Blakey that for Madigan, “mercy is justice,” and Madigan himself asking the judge that “you let me take care of Shirley and that you let me spend my final days with my family.”
Blakey said Madigan’s age was a factor, but said arguments that “any sentence” for an older defendant is tantamount to a life sentence are “not particularly helpful.”
But the judge said he carefully considered the nearly 250 character reference letters filed on Madigan’s behalf late last month, saying he “placed significant weight” on the support of the former speaker’s family and friends.
He even got emotional when discussing Madigan’s role as a husband, father and grandfather.
“Whatever his crimes — and he did do things wrong — but his relationship to his family? He got that right,” Blakey said, echoing words the former speaker told Solis during a secretly recorded meeting between the two in 2018.
Aside from family, faith leaders, longtime constituents and 40 former staffers, other notable letter-writers on Madigan’s behalf included prominent labor leaders and three dozen former elected officials, among them several Republicans like former Gov. Jim Edgar. Attorneys also included an op-ed in support of Madigan penned by former GOP Gov. Jim Thompson before his death in 2020.
Aside from family, other notable letter-writers on Madigan’s behalf included former U.S. Sen. Carol Moseley Braun; former Illinois Supreme Court Justice Tom Kilbride; Democratic mega-fundraisers Michael Sacks and Fred Eychaner, and Chicago Bulls and White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf. While many former Democratic allies of Madigan penned appeals to Judge Blakey, only a few currently hold office — among them state Reps. Marcus Evans, D-Chicago, and Curtis Tarver, D-Chicago, along with Auditor General Frank Mautino.
In determining sentencing guidelines, Blakey agreed with prosecutors’ contention that the value of the ComEd bribes should be based on testimony from utility leader Scott Vogt during trial. Vogt cited projections that the continuation of the “formula rate” contained in the first piece of ComEd-backed legislation passed during the eight-year bribery scheme was worth $400 million in increased shareholder value for the company.
The judge also agreed with smaller sentencing enhancements, for defendants who orchestrate bribery schemes, and for lying under oath while testifying in their own defense.
Blakey gave several examples of times in which Madigan perjured himself during his four days on the witness stand, including the former speaker’s attempt to “falsely minimize the close and regular relationship he had with McClain.”
Read more: McClain lawyer calls star witnesses liars as trial nears conclusion
“Other witnesses testified to their unique and close relationship, which spanned decades,” Blakey said. “In short, the evidence produced at trial showed McClain was one of Madigan’s most-trusted operatives, not merely one of many, as he falsely testified.”
Ultimately, though, the judge’s ruling in favor of sentencing enhancements for perjury and other factors is mostly symbolic, as the parties already agreed to a sentence far below the complicated calculation that would advise a 105-year prison sentence.
Sentences handed down to other convicted politicians in Illinois’ long history of elected officials caught up in corruption have varied widely.
Last year, a federal judge sentenced Madigan’s pseudo-counterpart in the Chicago City Council, five-decade Ald. Ed Burke, to two years in prison after his bribery conviction that also involved Solis’ FBI cooperation in bringing potential clients to Burke’s real estate law firm. The judge noted the number of character letters she received on the former alderman’s behalf were a strong mitigating factor in her sentencing decision.
On the other end of the spectrum, Gov. Rod Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years in prison after his 2011 bribery convictions related to attempting to sell then-President-elect Barack Obama’s soon-to-be-vacated U.S. Senate seat in 2008. President Donald Trump commuted his sentence in 2020, and in February pardoned him completely — just two days before Madigan’s conviction.
Read more: Trump pardons Blagojevich 5 years after commutation cut prison time short | Little support in Springfield for Trump’s Blagojevich commutation
Illinois’ history of corruption
The long list of Illinois political figures who’ve been convicted on corruption charges in the last century was referenced more than once during Friday’s sentencing hearing, but Blagojevich was the only politician mentioned by name.
Blakey pointed to the former governor’s case when explaining his authority to enhance Madigan’s sentence for a bribe that wasn’t fully carried out. In Blagojevich’s case, “no one turned out to be willing or able to pay a bribe the defendant demanded,” the judge said of the U.S. Senate seat sale. In Madigan’s case, the former speaker never ended up recommending Solis for a state board position, but he and Solis discussed the $93,000-per-year pay for some of the appointments.
But Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah Streicker’s reference to Blagojevich in her sentencing arguments went beyond pointing to legal precedent, making a direct — and deeply unflattering — comparison between the ex-governor and Madigan. During Blagojevich’s six years in office, he and Madigan were constantly at war with one another.
Streicker quoted the late U.S. District Judge James Zagel as he sentenced Blagojevich in 2011: “When it is the governor who goes bad, the fabric of Illinois is torn, disfigured and not easily repaired,” Zagel said. “You did that damage.”
The prosecutor posited that the damage from Madigan’s crimes may have been worse due to his longevity at the “highest levels of power” in state government.
“Governors? They came and went over the years,” Streicker said. “But Madigan? He stayed. His power and his presence remained constant. He had every opportunity to set the standard for honest government in this state. Instead, he fit right into the mold of yet another corrupt leader in Illinois.”
But while Blakey cited deterrence as a factor in deciding Madigan’s punishment, he said the former speaker “can only be sentenced for his crimes, not anyone else’s.”
“You can’t sentence a social problem and there’s no point in trying to do that,” the judge said. “Defendant is responsible for his public corruption, not public corruption in the state of Illinois.”
Blakey also responded to Collins’ arguments that the judge base his sentence not on the “myth” of Madigan — which he said included the feds’ contention that the former speaker was driven by greed — but on “the reality of Mike,” who has “lived a frugal life” and “takes care of his wife.”
The judge assured Collins he didn’t buy into the myth of Madigan as “The Velvet Hammer” or the “Wizard of Springfield,” references to a decades-old nickname for the former speaker and a sign that once sat on the desk of Madigan’s longtime chief of staff, who is himself serving prison time on convictions related to his ex-boss.
Read more: Ex-Madigan aide sentenced to 30 months in prison for obstruction of justice attempt, perjury | Jury convicts Madigan’s longtime chief of staff on perjury, obstruction of justice charges
“Working in the legal sausage factory in Springfield is a full-contact sport and people lie about you all the time,” Blakey said, promising he wasn’t taking into account “all that nonsense.”
In Springfield, Madigan’s name is still invoked during debates on the Illinois House floor, but the last 4 ½ years since his resignation from the legislature have seen significant turnover in the body he ruled over for all but one term, from 1983 to 2021. The political effectiveness tying Illinois Democrats to Madigan — a longtime tactic from Republicans who hold super minority status in the General Assembly — has also waned significantly since the former speaker’s departure from public office.
On one of the final days of the spring legislative session last month, a longtime GOP critic of Madigan even credited the former speaker as he was denouncing Madigan’s successor, Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch, for his approach to big bills.
But U.S. Attorney Anthony Boutros still claimed Madigan’s sentence as a victory for cleaning up corruption in Springfield.
“Corruption at the highest level of the state legislature tears at the fabric of a vital governing body,” he said in a statement Friday evening.
Boutros credited former Assistant U.S. Attorney Amarjeet Bhachu for leading the yearslong investigation and criminal case against Madigan and others in his inner circle, which “allowed this case to reach a jury and send a clear message that the criminal conduct by former Speaker Madigan was unacceptable.”
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
The post Ex-Speaker Madigan sentenced to 7 ½ years in prison for bribery, corruption appeared first on Capitol News Illinois.
Prosecutors ask judge to sentence ex-Speaker Madigan to 12 ½ years in prison
Capitol News Illinois
CHICAGO — Federal prosecutors are asking for a lengthy 12 ½-year prison sentence for former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, calling the longtime Democratic power broker “steeped in corruption” and alleging he lied on the witness stand when he testified in his own defense earlier this year.
In their 72-page filing Friday evening, prosecutors also called for a $1.5 million fine in addition to prison time for the 10 corruption charges — including bribery — on which Madigan was convicted in February.
Read more: Madigan guilty of bribery as split verdict punctuates ex-speaker’s fall
“The crimes charged and proven at trial demonstrate that Madigan engaged in corrupt activity at the highest level of state government for nearly a decade,” prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memorandum. “Time after time, Madigan exploited his immense power for his own personal benefit by trading his public office for private gain for himself and his associates, all the while carefully and deliberately concealing his conduct from detection.”
But in a competing filing published to the court docket two hours later, Madigan’s attorneys argued the former speaker should only serve five years’ probation, including a year of home detention followed by community service.
Madigan is scheduled to be sentenced June 13.
Along with Madigan’s legal arguments for no prison time, his attorneys also filed hundreds of pages of character letters asking U.S. District Judge John Blakey for leniency in sentencing, upon which Madigan’s lawyers bolstered their request.
“Throughout his 83-year life, Mike quite literally changed the lives of tens of thousands of people in his district on the south side of Chicago,” Madigan’s filing stated. “He positively impacted millions of people throughout the State of Illinois. The more than 200 letters submitted on Mike’s behalf demonstrate that this is not hyperbole.”
Madigan, who stepped away from public life in early 2021 as the feds’ investigation swirled around his inner circle, spent five decades in the Illinois House, including 36 as House speaker — the longest tenure of any legislative leader in the country. He also spent 23 years as head of the state’s Democratic Party, granting him even more power over Illinois’ political landscape.
Split verdict
After three months of testimony from more than 60 witnesses and dozens of hours of secretly recorded audio and video, a jury convicted Madigan on 10 of 23 counts he was facing. But jurors acquitted the former speaker on seven counts and deadlocked on another six, including an overarching racketeering charge.
The former speaker’s convictions involved alleged bribery from electric utility Commonwealth Edison, which hired five of the speaker’s allies on no-work contracts at various times from 2011 and 2019 — an eight-year period during which ComEd was pushing for major legislation in the General Assembly. The jury also convicted Madigan on supporting counts related to an alleged scheme to help get Chicago alderman-turned-FBI mole Danny Solis appointed to a lucrative state board position, though he was acquitted of the bribery charge pertaining to the same alleged scheme.
Read more: Madigan Trial in Review
Some of the trial’s most dramatic moments came in January, when Madigan made the stunning decision to testify in his own defense. The high-risk move opened him up to blistering cross-examination from lead prosecutor Amarjeet Bhachu, who left the U.S. Attorney’s office in March and isn’t a party to sentencing recommendations.
Over two days, Bhachu sparred with the former speaker, and weeks later he and his colleagues quoted Madigan’s testimony back to the jury during closing arguments in an attempt to prove he’d lied on the witness stand.
Read more: In contentious cross-examination, prosecutor accuses Madigan of not telling ‘the whole truth’ | Prosecutor calls Madigan, McClain ‘grand masters of corruption’ as case goes to jury
Prosecutors leaned on that alleged perjury once more in Friday’s sentencing memorandum, counting his “obstructive conduct” as a key justification for their sentencing recommendation.
“Madigan has expressed no remorse for his crimes, nor has he acknowledged the damage wrought by his conduct,” prosecutors wrote. “Indeed, Madigan went so far as to commit perjury at trial in an effort to avoid accountability, and he persists in framing his actions as nothing more than helping people.”
Madigan repeatedly claimed — and his attorneys repeatedly argued — that he was ignorant of the fact that the collective $1.3 million his allies earned from their ComEd contracts was for performing no work. Instead, the former speaker and his lawyers framed those contracts as the result of mere job recommendations, which they argued was a core component of Madigan’s job as speaker.
But as a result of Madigan’s testimony, U.S. District Judge John Blakey reversed a pre-trial decision and allowed prosecutors to play a damning wiretapped phone call for the jury in which Madigan laughed about ComEd contractors having “made out like bandits.” In the call, the former speaker’s co-defendant, longtime Springfield lobbyist Mike McClain, laughed, too, replying, “for very little work.”
Read more: Jurors to hear tape of Madigan saying ComEd contractors ‘made out like bandits’
Prosecutors cited that call in its Friday filing as evidence the former speaker wasn’t forthcoming when he “testified that McClain never said he believed or suspected that any of the people that Madigan had referred to ComEd were not working.”
“This testimony was a lie,” the feds wrote in their filing.
Prosecutors also ripped Madigan’s attempts on the witness stand to distance himself from McClain, his longtime close friend and advisor, which the feds said “completely undermined” the former speaker’s “credibility as a witness.”
“The multitude of recorded conversations, emails, and documents presented at trial established a uniquely close and longstanding relationship of mutual dependence between Madigan and McClain and demonstrated that Madigan was lying when he tried to distance himself from his key operative,” prosecutors wrote.
“Madigan assigned McClain, and only McClain, to carry out the most sensitive assignments and requests and to engage in the most potentially politically explosive conversations when Madigan wanted bad news delivered, including to legislators who served under Madigan.”
Read more: ‘My client is the speaker’: Jury hears wiretapped calls of Madigan co-defendant, longtime friend | ComEd execs joked Madigan co-defendant was ‘double agent,’ utility’s former top lawyer testifies | Madigan co-defendant had unparalleled access to speaker, ex-top aide testifies
The jury in February deadlocked on all six counts pertaining to McClain, but he faces his own sentencing in July on charges related to the ComEd bribery scheme after a jury in May 2023 convicted him and three other ex-utility executives and lobbyists for their roles.
Plea for leniency
Of the more than 200 letters filed Friday with Madigan’s legal arguments for a non-custodial sentence, many came from former constituents or other Illinoisans who wrote about how the former speaker helped them in some way.
Letters also came from prominent faith leaders across the state, 40 former staffers, prominent labor leaders and three dozen former elected officials, among them several Republicans like former Gov. Jim Edgar. Attorneys also included an op-ed in support of Madigan penned by former GOP Gov. Jim Thompson before his death in 2020.
All four of Madigan’s children wrote lengthy letters, including former Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, whom the former speaker adopted after marrying her mother Shirley in 1976. In addition to writing about how Madigan operated in the world of Illinois government and politics that her adoptive father introduced her to, Lisa Madigan’s letter highlighted what the former speaker’s attorneys called “a key consideration” for Madigan’s sentencing: his wife’s health.
“Mike keeps my mother alive,” Lisa Madigan wrote in her letter, which said Shirley Madigan suffers from “a severe lung disease” and has “rarely been well enough to leave the house” in the last five years since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, as she’s “extremely susceptible to infections” and has been hospitalized three times.
“She is able to remain in their house primarily because of the care my father provides,” Lisa Madigan wrote. “He shops for groceries, brings her food (as you heard during the trial), does laundry, and generally takes care of her and their house.”
Lisa Madigan was referring to a lighthearted moment on one of the wiretapped calls played for the jury in which the then-speaker read a menu of soup options to his wife over the phone.
Madigan’s attorneys wrote that even “one day of imprisonment” for Madigan “will upend her (Shirley’s) entire life.”
“Mike presence is medically necessary to provide the direct assistance, supervision, and emotional support required to maintain Shirley’s well-being in a familiar home environment, which is paramount for patients with Shirley’s conditions,” the filing said, going on to refer to Madigan as Shirley’s “caretaker.”
The former speaker’s lawyers also referred to Madigan’s own age as a mitigating factor for sentencing, though leaned more heavily on kneecapping prosecutors’ arguments that a 12 ½-year sentence would serve as a deterrent.
“The defendant respectfully submits that a sentence of imprisonment would be greater than necessary to protect the public or deter him from criminal conduct,” the filing read. “Mike does not pose a risk of committing new crimes. He will never hold public office again.”
Madigan’s attorneys went on to detail “intense public embarrassment for (the former speaker) and his family,” which they argued “is a significant punishment in and of itself.” They also claimed the former speaker’s grandchildren “are teased at school” because of Madigan’s criminal case.
“As one example, Mike was publicly compared to a mob boss,” Madigan’s filing read. “Politicians also continue to use Mike as a cheap political shot, without any regard for his history of good works and positive impact on Illinois. … He will also live the rest of his years as a felon.”
Other notable letter-writers on Madigan’s behalf included former U.S. Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, former Illinois Supreme Court Justice Tom Kilbride, Democratic mega- fundraisers Michael Sacks and Fred Eychaner and Chicago Bulls and White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf. While many former Democratic allies of Madigan penned appeals to Judge Blakey, only a few currently hold office — among them state Reps. Marcus Evans, D-Chicago, and Curtis Tarver, D-Chicago, along with Auditor General Frank Mautino.
Several authors of Madigan’s character letters had testified in trial, including his former law partner Vincent “Bud” Getzendanner, whose time on the witness stand was spent trying to explain the ethical firewall the Madigan & Getzendanner real estate law firm had with official state business.
In his letter, Getzendanner joked that he was “pretty sure” Madigan was “only human” and also poked a hole in the longtime Springfield mythology Madigan’s daily lunchtime apple, which he said demonstrated the former speaker’s “famous willpower.”
“Strangely enough, on many occasions I subsequently found an unexplained residue of chocolate chip cookie crumbs on his plate,” Getzendanner wrote, later apologizing to the judge for his sense of humor.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
The post Prosecutors ask judge to sentence ex-Speaker Madigan to 12 ½ years in prison appeared first on Capitol News Illinois.
Illinois criminal justice advocates tout ‘Clean Slate’ legislation as ‘economic boon’
Capitol News Illinois
SPRINGFIELD — Criminal justice reform advocates say legislation to seal criminal records for certain nonviolent crimes, which passed Friday in the House, would unlock economic opportunity for thousands of Illinoisans.
The so-called Clean Slate Act has failed twice before, but activists see renewed fiscal messaging as the key to reinvigorating the campaign. This time, the bill’s sponsor points to a “diverse coalition of stakeholders” and backing from business groups as signs Illinois could become the 13th state to enact similar legislation.
“This is something I’ve worked on for six long years, and now we have law enforcement and the business community — folks like the Illinois Retail Merchants Association, the Illinois Manufacturers Association — all on board,” Rep. Jehan Gordon-Booth, D-Peoria, said in an interview. “Not as a neutral party, but they are proponents. They want to see this bill passed.”
Like earlier proposals, Senate Bill 1784 would require law enforcement agencies to automatically seal records for nonviolent criminal convictions twice a year — Jan. 1 and July 1. The records would no longer be public, although law enforcement and state’s attorneys would retain access.
Gordon-Booth has sponsored Clean Slate legislation twice before — once in 2021 and again in 2023 — but neither bill progressed past committee.
Just a few days before the 2025 legislative session concludes, she filed it again. Within two days, it passed the House mostly along partisan lines, and is headed for debate on the Senate floor.
The session ends at midnight Saturday, although the bill could still pass after that deadline.
People convicted of certain violent offenses — including sex crimes against minors, DUI, reckless driving and violent offenses that require sex offender registration — would be ineligible to have their records sealed.
“I want to make this very, very clear: Serious criminal records are not eligible for automated sealing,” Gordon-Booth said during floor debate.
Gordon-Booth argued that conviction records trap formerly incarcerated individuals in a state of perpetual punishment, eclipsing access to employment, housing and educational opportunities. She said Clean Slate would remove these barriers, helping system-impacted people reintegrate into society instead of recidivating.
Paul Rothschild, managing director of operations for the Illinois Coalition to End Permanent Punishment — a group that advocates for the rights of people with criminal records — said he agrees. He said the justice system fails to follow through on its own promise: Once someone has served their time, they are entitled to a second chance.
“We believe that people should be accountable for the crimes that they commit. But we also believe there is an implied covenant that when they finish, they’re supposed to be returned to the world made whole, and that covenant is not being kept by society. They’re being forever subjugated in that lower caste, that lower class,” Rothschild said.
More than 3 million Illinoisans have arrest or conviction records, and an estimated 921,000 people are eligible for “sealing relief” — but only about 10% actually petition to have their records cleared, according to statistics from Live Free Illinois, a grassroots organization aimed at reforming the state criminal justice system and part of the Clean Slate Illinois steering committee, which coordinates the campaign’s messaging and advocacy efforts.
The bill would automate the process for individuals with nonviolent convictions to have their records sealed, once they have served their sentences, completed probation, and remained crime-free.
Many eligible individuals are deterred by steep fines, complex paperwork and long waiting periods, Gordon-Booth said. The “burdensome” process has contributed to massive court backlogs, according to Clean Slate Illinois.
“It’s going to automate the process, so this way we don’t have to go through that whole trying to get the paperwork, trying to go through all the rigmarole,” said Chauncy Stockdale, who was formerly incarcerated and is now a member of the Live Free Illinois Fellowship, a reentry program that supports returning citizens.
The measure passed the House 81-28, with five Republicans joining Democrats in support of the measure. No Democrats voted against the bill.
During debate on the House floor, Minority Floor Leader Rep. Patrick Windhorst, R-Metropolis, voiced concerns about the tentative $18 million price tag, and whether the state is capable of fully funding the policy in the years ahead, leaving counties to cover the cost.
“If this isn’t funded, we’re either going to be sending a large unfunded mandate to our counties, or we’re making a promise to 2.1 million people that will not be fulfilled without any funding,” he said.
Gordon-Booth detailed a three year “implementation ramp,” which would give the state time to identify funding sources for the local circuit clerks. She also said the Illinois State Police would absorb the initial costs and emphasized the state’s commitment to supporting circuit clerks in the rollout phase.
“It is our full intention to provide clerks with all that they need to implement this,” she said. “We are not going to send an unfunded mandate to our local governments.”
‘Workforce and economic policy’
On April 10, nearly 300 members, supporters and advocates from Live Free Illinois chapters gathered in front of the Abraham Lincoln monument in Springfield for Advocacy Day, calling on lawmakers to introduce the Clean Slate Act.
Live Free Illinois — a faith-based nonprofit focused on ending gun violence and mass incarceration — organizes Black congregations to push for systemic change. The organization is involved in the broad-based Clean Slate steering committee, which also includes the Fully Free Campaign, the Illinois Coalition to End Permanent Punishments, and Impact for Equity.
The day before, Muslim leaders also advocated for Clean Slate legislation at Illinois Muslim Action Day.
Beyond criminal justice reform, advocates pushed a new messaging angle this year to usher the legislation across the finish line: Clean Slate could boost Illinois’ economy.
As of April, Illinois has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, at 4.8% — above the national average of 4.2%, according to the data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Jerika Richardson, senior vice president for equitable justice and strategic initiatives at the National Urban League, said the act would open doors for thousands of people who have been barred from work because of background checks.
“There are so many employers and businesses across this country who are struggling to find the workers that they need, and part of the reason is because these records are barriers,” Richardson said. “If Illinois passes the Clean Slate Act, you won’t have to worry about businesses going to another state or leaving the country.”
An amendment to the Illinois Human Rights Act, signed by Gov. JB Pritzker in 2021, expanded legal protections for state workers by prohibiting discrimination based on criminal convictions, in addition to arrest records. Yet many say they continue to face employment hurdles despite the law.
People with conviction histories earn an average of 25% less than those with clean records — a gap the National Urban League says costs the state billions of dollars in lost wages. According to a news release from the National Urban League, the Clean Slate Act could generate more than $4.7 billion in lost wages for Illinois, easing economic disparities and addressing labor shortages.
Gordon-Booth echoed Richardson’s point, adding that her office frequently hears from constituents who are missing out on life-changing chances.
“I get calls from people saying, ‘I had an opportunity to get my dream job, and it fell through because of something that I did when I was 18 or 19.’ And we’re talking about folks that are in their 30s,” Gordon-Booth said. “They have not gone through the process of hiring a lawyer, going through the court-mandated process, and folks are losing out.”
Reilly Cook is a graduate student in journalism with Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications, and a fellow in its Medill Illinois News Bureau working in partnership with Capitol News Illinois.
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
The post Illinois criminal justice advocates tout ‘Clean Slate’ legislation as ‘economic boon’ appeared first on Capitol News Illinois.