Quantcast

COOK COUNTY RECORD

Tuesday, April 23, 2024

Biden asked to put off replacing Chicago US Atty Lausch, allow Madigan, Burke investigations to continue apace

Hot Topics
Us lausch john

U.S. Attorney John Lausch | Youtube screenshot

For the past three years, few people in Illinois have generated headlines like Chicago’s top federal prosecutor, John Lausch.

Since he was appointed in 2017 by President Donald Trump as the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, Lausch and his team of federal prosecutors have racked up a wide array of high-profile indictments amid several ongoing political corruption investigations.

The names at the center of those investigations include some of the most powerful political figures in the state’s history, including Chicago Ald. Ed Burke and the now-former Illinois Speaker of the House and current chairman of the Illinois Democratic Party, State Rep. Michael J. Madigan.


Patrick Collins | King & Spalding

However, after President Joe Biden called for Lausch's resignation, doubt has fallen on the ability of Lausch’s team to continue those investigations.

Last week, the Biden administration announced the new president had called for the resignation of nearly all U.S. Attorneys appointed by Trump, effective Feb. 28.

The list of Trump-appointed prosecutors for whom resignations had been demanded included only two exceptions: John Durham, in Connecticut, who is continuing to investigate the origins of the Russian collusion claims against Trump and his political affiliates; and David Weiss, U.S. Attorney in Delaware, who is investigating claims against Biden’s son, Hunter Biden. The White House specifically indicated Durham and Weiss would be allowed to continue their investigations.

Across the country, federal prosecutors have begun to acquiesce to Biden’s resignation demands. In Illinois, John Milhiser, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of Illinois, in Springfield, has resigned.

However, Lausch has not tendered his resignation.

This has raised speculation and hope among his supporters that Lausch may yet earn a reprieve.

Illinois politicians and journalists, alike, have issued pleas to the White House to spare Lausch, at least for now. The list of those defending Lausch has included Illinois’ two Democratic U.S. Senators, Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth.

In asking Biden to relent, Lausch’s defenders, including Durbin and Duckworth, have pointed to the U.S. Attorney’s ongoing work in the Madigan and Burke investigations – or, at the least, referring to ongoing “sensitive investigations” being carried out by his office.

“While the President has the right to remove U.S. Attorneys, there is precedent for U.S. Attorneys in the Northern District of Illinois to remain in office to conclude sensitive investigations,” Durbin and Duckworth said in a joint statement issued Feb. 9. “We believe Mr. Lausch should be permitted to continue in his position until his successor is confirmed by the Senate, and we urge the Biden Administration to allow him to do so.”

The senators also noted they had both supported Lausch’s appointment in 2017. Lausch was unanimously confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

Since his appointment, Lausch’s investigations into Illinois’ notorious political corruption have consistently borne fruit.

In January 2020, for instance, Lausch’s work led to a guilty plea from former State Sen. Martin Sandoval, D-Chicago, on charges of accepting bribes in exchange for promoting the approval of red light cameras for vendor Safespeed. Sandoval had been chairman of the state Senate’s Transportation Committee.

That investigation roped in some of the state’s most prominent interests, and the lobbyists who represent them in Springfield and elsewhere.

In 2019, Lausch’s team indicted Ald. Burke on charges of racketeering and extortion, accusing the once-powerful chair of the Chicago City Finance Committee of leveraging his position to shakedown business owners to boost business for his property tax appeal law practice. Burke has contested the charges, and remains on the City Council, as he awaits trial. He was stripped of his top seat on the Finance Committee, however.

But the biggest bombshell to drop came in 2020, as Lausch’s office tore into the Madigan political organization.

Several of Madigan’s top loyalists and associates have been indicted in connection with the alleged ComEd bribery scheme. Prosecutors have accused Madigan’s associates of demanding ComEd hire other Madigan associates to no-work jobs or give them consulting contracts, or appoint Madigan associates to influential positions within the electric utility, in exchange for Madigan’s support for legislation beneficial to ComEd.

Madigan has not been charged. However, prosecutors have identified him in court papers as “Public Official A,” on whose behalf those who have been indicted allegedly sought the alleged patronage bribes.

The revelation of the alleged scheme has also spurred class action lawsuits against ComEd, from consumers, businesses and others who allege the scheme resulted in Illinois residents and businesses paying billions more than they should have for their electricity as a result of the alleged scheme.

Further, the indictments and allegations filed by Lausch’s team prompted a group of at least 19 of Madigan’s fellow Democrats in the state House of Representatives to publicly oppose Madigan’s bid to be reelected Speaker, ending Madigan’s nearly four decades in that office.

While the political corruption investigations may continue should Lausch departs, some of Chicago’s most prominent former federal prosecutors are divided on the question of just how much they may be impacted, should Lausch yet be forced out the door by Biden, the country’s top Democratic politician.

On one hand, former assistant U.S. Attorney Ronald Safer said the investigations will continue, because the prosecutors who worked under Lausch, and have conducted the investigation will remain.

Safer served as assistant U.S. Attorney in the Northern District of Illinois from 1989-1999, serving under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. When he departed for private practice in 1999, Safer held the title of Chief of the Criminal Division in the Northern District office.

Safer said he believes Lausch “has been a great U.S. Attorney” and done a “superb job” leading the office.

However, Safer said he did not believe Lausch’s removal would “affect the Madigan investigation or Burke case in any way.”

“Those cases and investigations are run by an extraordinarily talented and committed team of AUSAs (assistant U.S. Attorneys),” Safer said. “That team will not miss a beat under Acting U.S. Attorney John Kocoras, who is an outstanding prosecutor in his own right, or whomever is appointed as the next U.S. Attorney.

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois has enjoyed an apolitical existence. That will not change under the next U.S. Attorney,” Safer added.

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick Collins agreed with Safer’s assessment of the capabilities and talent of Lausch’s team.

“If the team stays intact, that’s most important, clearly,” said Collins.

He also said he believed there are a number of “highly qualified lawyers” in Chicago who could replace Lausch.

But Collins questioned whether replacing Lausch at this point could slow the investigation at a potentially sensitive and critical juncture.

Collins served as AUSA from 1995-2007 under three U.S. Attorneys, including Jim Burns, Scott Lassar and Pat Fitzgerald, and two presidents, Clinton and George W. Bush. In 2007, Collins helped lead the investigation and prosecution that led to the conviction and imprisonment of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan.

Collins said conducting large, politically sensitive investigations, are “more art, not science.”

Such investigations often “take particular direction from how leaders make decisions.”

Even if the person who replaces Lausch is “smart and good and highly qualified,” they will still handle the investigations differently, Collins said.

Further, he said, it will take time for a new lead prosecutor to both “come to speed” on the investigations, thus far, and gain a handle for the direction those investigations might take. He estimated replacing Lausch could cause the office to “lose” at least a few months that could have spent moving the investigations forward.

Collins said he believed it would be best to allow Lausch to remain in office to complete the investigations, and, at a minimum, maintain public confidence that the outcome of the investigations remained unaffected by the change at the top of the office, and by the change of presidential administrations.

“I’m not one who’s saying, if anybody else comes in, it’s ultimately going to be a problem,” Collins said. “But I’m asking, at this point: Why do we need to swap out right now? Why should we lose anything, when we can just make the same transition a year from now?”

More News