McHenry County’s chief prosecutor has joined his name to the growing list of Illinois state’s attorneys suing to block the so-called SAFE-T Act from taking effect on Jan. 1, saying the end of cash bail under the law violates the rights of crime victims within the Illinois state constitution, as well as other state constitutional provisions.
On Sept. 19, McHenry County State’s Attorney Patrick D. Kenneally filed suit in McHenry County Circuit Court against Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, as the state’s representatives.
The lawsuit takes aim at the sweeping criminal justice reform measure, dubbed by its supporters as the SAFE-T Act.
In the lawsuit, Kenneally asserts the measure is not only unconstitutional, but was enacted purely to satisfy the interests of anti-police progressive activists and politicians, who took advantage of political weakness on the part of former House Speaker Michael Madigan to ramrod through political priorities that had previously been only a dream.
“The entire process of enacting (the SAFE-T Act) was plotted to mute to the maximum extent procedurally possible transparency, compromise, and any meaningful deliberation,” Kenneally wrote in his complaint.
"To many in law enforcement and many Illinoisans, the sudden and unexpected enactment of (the SAFE-T Act) was a political ambush. An ambush orchestrated by a dogmatic group of legislators in league with equally dogmatic and PR savvy NGOs (non-governmental organizations) dedicated to the well-being of one constituency – criminal defendants.”
The 764-page SAFE-T Act was passed by the Democratic supermajority in the Illinois General Assembly within hours of its introduction in the wee hours of the morning in January 2021. It was then swiftly signed into law by Pritzker, who hailed its passage and has continued to defend the law in the months since.
The law alters virtually every aspect of policing and criminal justice in Illinois. However, the law principally abolishes Illinois’ centuries old cash bail system.
Further, Kenneally notes the law expands the list of offenses for which no one can be detained before their trial to include a long list of potentially violent and destructive crimes, including second-degree murder, involuntary manslaughter, drug-induced homicide, fentanyl trafficking, DUI causing death, residentially burglary, aggravated battery to senior citizens, aggravated battery to a child, robbery, witness intimidation, carjacking and many others.
Further, Kenneally asserts people charged with those crimes cannot even be arrested if they fail to show up to court or violate any other terms of their release.
In recent weeks, the SAFE-T Act and its potential effects have dominated headlines in Illinois, particularly in political campaigns, such as the race for Illinois governor between Pritzker, a Democrat, and Republican nominee Darren Bailey.
Bailey has likened the effects of the SAFE-T Act after Jan. 1 to the horror film, “The Purge,” in which criminals are allowed one night per year to wreak havoc in the streets.
Pritzker has responded by calling such allegations “misinformation.” He said the law would still allow judges to order violent defendants who pose threats to specific people to be locked in jail as they wait months or years to stand trial.
Pritzker and other supporters of the SAFE-T Act have said the law was needed to remedy so-called systemic racism they said has resulted in poor and predominantly Black and Latino defendants to remain in jail unfairly, simply because they could not pay bail. Pritzker noted the law, for instance, would prevent a mother from being locked up for months awaiting trial for stealing diapers.
Kenneally, in turn, labeled that scenario as “misinformation,” saying it is “impossible” for such a mother to “be held pretrial for six months under current bail laws.”
“This type of misinformation appealing to emotion, the ongoing campaign to smear law enforcement and prosecutors, and the sometimes tragic way business is conducted in Springfield is what gave rise to (the SAFE-T Act) in the first place,” Kenneally said.
In his complaint, Kenneally asserts the SAFE-T Act violates provisions of the Illinois state constitution.
By abolishing the cash bail system, Kenneally notes the law violates language in the state constitution which explicitly requires judges to set bail or to determine if bail should be denied, and if a person’s criminal history, or the serious of the criminal charge, should require them to remain in custody until they can stand trial.
In so doing, the SAFE-T Act unconstitutionally trespasses on powers granted by the state constitution to the state’s courts.
Further, Kenneally said the abolition of cash bail violates the rights of crime victims, also spelled out in the state constitution.
He notes the state constitution explicitly provides crime victims with the following rights: The right to be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity and privacy and to be free from harassment intimidation, and abuse throughout the justice process;
The right to be reasonably protected from the accused throughout the criminal justice process; and
The right to have the safety of the victim and the victim’s family considered in denying or fixing the amount of bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction.
Kenneally said the new law fails to take any of those rights into account, instead creating a sweeping presumption that criminal defendants must be released, unless prosecutors can persuade a judge the person presents a serious threat to specific people.
Finally, Kenneally alleged the SAFE-T Act violated the Illinois constitution’s so-called Single Subject Clause, which prohibits state lawmakers from passing legislation that deals with more than one subject at a time.
Kenneally pointed to the procedural history of the law, noting the law was passed before sunrise of a special session of the Illinois General Assembly, mere hours after it was introduced by Democratic State Sen. Elgie Sims, of Chicago.
Kenneally said he believes the passage of the bill was allowed under a deal between the state’s legislative Black Caucus and former House Speaker Michael Madigan, in a bid by Madigan to retain the speakership when a group of Democratic state representatives rebelled against his leadership in light of federal prosecutors’ allegations that Madigan’s allies played a leading role in the ComEd bribery scandal.
Madigan was ultimately forced out of the Speaker’s chair, and later indicted in connection with the scandal.
Kenneally noted the sprawling legislation, in addition to ending cash bail, also addresses such diverse subjects as prisoner voting rights, police residency requirements, the composition of the state police disciplinary board, and expanding the powers of the Illinois Attorney General, among other subjects.
The single subject rule also has served as a principle allegation in lawsuits brought by other Illinois state’s attorneys against the SAFE-T Act, including Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow.
Those other lawsuits, filed in other county courts, also ask judges to strike down the law as unconstitutional.