Supporting Members:
Cabrini Green Legal Aid
Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts
Children's Best Interest Project
Illinois Alliance for Reentry and Justice
Institute For Nonviolence Chicago
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Bluhm Legal Clinic - Children and Family Justice Center (CFJC)
Safer Foundation
Sista I Got You
Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities
Women’s Justice Institute
Illinois Justice Project
2024 COOK COUNTY STATE’S ATTORNEY CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE
1. The Cook County State’s Attorney is considered by many to be one of the top law enforcement leaders in Chicago. What role do you believe the State’s Attorney’s office plays in the legal ecosystem? What are your goals for the office and how will you measure success?
The State's Attorney's office plays a crucial role in the legal ecosystem and is responsible for ensuring accountability for alleged offenders while also safeguarding victims’ rights and advocating for public safety. The office upholds the integrity of the legal process and contributes to the overall fairness of the justice system.
As State’s Attorney, my goals are clear: to tackle gun violence by collaborating with authorities and targeting illegal gun sales, establish a Restorative Justice Bureau to address root causes of crime by implementing programs that help people become productive members of society, and rebuild our office through advanced training programs for prosecutors.
Success in the State's Attorney's office can be measured by the reduction of crime rates and recidivism rates within their jurisdiction. By effectively prosecuting cases and implementing rehabilitation programs, they aim to lower both crime rates and repeat offenses, ultimately contributing to a safer and more just community.
2. Eight years ago, for the first time, the Cook County State’s Attorney began releasing data about the cases in the office, their disposition, and other unidentified information. Will you continue to compile and release data? What would you do, if anything, to enhance the transparency of data from the office?
Yes, we will continue to compile and release data with an emphasis on efficiency, accuracy, and comprehensiveness, showcasing numbers of cases and dispositions categorized by type. However, individual case transparency may be limited due to concerns regarding due process, ensuring defendants' rights to a fair trial and impartial judgment. While we prioritize data transparency, cases must not be tried based on public opinion but rather in courts of law to uphold constitutional rights, safeguarding the interests of all parties involved, including victims, witnesses, and defendants.
I also want to expand on this initiative by having more case progress information available to parties. For example, the status of a ballistics report so that progress is knowable and leads to increased transparency.
3. How would you explain Chicago’s formidable gun violence problem and why it has persisted in Chicago for so long? How will the State’s Attorney’s office work with the full range of system and community partners to address it?
Chicago's persistent gun violence problem stems from various factors, including inadequate laws to prevent firearms from reaching individuals who pose a threat, such as those with revoked FOID cards due to mental illness. Years ago I had a mentally ill neighbor who after being released from prison on a drug charge, threatened to kill me. My judicial security officers found out that he had a firearm, and his FOID card had been revoked due to his mental illness but no one had ever confiscated his weapon. It became apparent that the law is inadequate to get and keep guns out of the hands of those who should not have them. Additionally, the lack of action addressing root causes like poverty, addiction, and historic disinvestment in communities exacerbates the issue. As State's Attorney, I will work to transform our criminal justice system by prioritizing the prosecution of gun-related crimes with a highly trained felony prosecution division. Collaborating with federal offices and neighboring states, we will target the illegal flow of firearms and crack down on straw purchasers who supply guns to criminals. By fostering partnerships with a diverse range of system and community stakeholders, we can comprehensively address Chicago's formidable gun violence problem and strive for a safer, more equitable future for all residents.
4. There is a widespread understanding that many people who carry guns in this city do so to protect themselves, especially in some of the more historically underserved and unsafe neighborhoods. Not all have, or plan to acquire, the paperwork required to carry guns. They are also living in communities that already receive a lot of police presence and attention, which increases the opportunity to be targeted for arrest. Given this complicated situation, what is your position on the prosecution of gun possession cases? How will you avoid further criminalization of people who are seeking ways to protect themselves?
While I understand the desire for safety, resorting to illegal possession of firearms as a means of protection is not the solution. Rather than further criminalizing individuals seeking ways to safeguard themselves, it's crucial to address the root causes driving such actions. If we go after the bad actors that have guns, traffic in guns, and use them to terrorize neighborhoods, that alleviates the need for personal protection via illegal means. The State’s Attorney has discretion in specialized cases to ensure fairness and justice in our system. I am not going to treat a senior citizen who is trying to protect herself from gangs the same way I am going to treat a gun trafficker.
5. There is alarm in Cook County about increasing youth involvement in criminal activity. Such fears and alarm, as we have seen in the past, can lead to a more punitive approach to addressing youth involvement in the justice system. To the extent that young people are engaging in criminal behavior, how should the State’s Attorney’s Office address that? How should youth who are arrested be processed? And if a petition is filed in their case, do you support detention for youth in a central facility or community-based supportive services?
In addressing the engagement of young people in criminal activities, the State's Attorney's Office should prioritize a comprehensive strategy involving rehabilitation and community involvement. This entails implementing tailored rehabilitation programs to facilitate personal development and steer youth away from unlawful behavior. Furthermore, investing in community initiatives that offer positive outlets and support networks for at-risk youth can serve as a preventive measure. Additionally, the office must prioritize removing criminals from the streets who negatively influence young individuals to follow that same path. When dealing with arrested youth, the focus should be on restorative justice, offering alternatives like diversion programs, counseling, educational opportunities, job training programs, and any means necessary to keep them out of the criminal justice system. However, if they repeatedly fail to comply with program offerings, then we have to seek penalties that protect citizens.
6. What is your position on deflection and diversion programming? • Do you support the continued use, and potential expansion, of the First Time Weapons Offender Program?
I have said from the beginning of my campaign that I will fashion the most comprehensive and effective Restorative Justice Bureau that any prosecutor’s office in the nation has ever seen. I want to take what works from multiple jurisdictions and cross-pollinate those techniques together with a committed group of attorneys who will work hand in glove with government agencies to get people’s lives back on track. This is going to attract an attorney to this office who might have considered applying with the public defender’s office or social work or some other type of legal job that allows them to make a difference in communities that need it. I believe strongly that this approach, paired with a well-trained felony prosecutor’s division completely redefines what it means to be a State’s Attorney. I will always advocate for programs that prioritize rehabilitation for non-violent offenders, reducing recidivism rates and alleviating strain on the justice system while promoting positive outcomes for individuals and communities.
• For the past several years, Cook County has operated a Deferred Prosecution Program, initiated by the State’s Attorney’s Office. Do you think it has been successful? Should it continue?
I believe that many of the changes made by this administration are good and I plan on building upon them. I’m the only candidate in this race who has served as a prosecutor, defense attorney, and judge and I have seen this issue from all sides of the courtroom. Cook County's Deferred Prosecution Program has had success over the past few years, and I am optimistic about the potential as one of the tools my restorative justice bureau uses. We should use every tool available to us to break the cycle of crime that plagues many lives.
7. What is your position on working with individuals with lived experience to provide diversion programs, as well as using lived experience to inform wider criminal justice policy?
I support individuals with lived experience working as part of the office’s diversion program and think their work can benefit every single person in this restorative justice process. We see strong evidence from programs such as Chicago CRED that incorporating the perspectives of those who have directly experienced crime offers unparalleled insights into the complex realities of the criminal justice system. Empowering formerly incarcerated individuals to contribute to these efforts not only benefits society as a whole but also helps them stay on track in their rehabilitation journey by providing a sense of purpose and agency in effecting positive change.
8. By eliminating the monetary element, the recently implemented Pretrial Fairness Act created a more equitable system of determining whether someone charged with a crime needs to be detained as a threat to public safety or a risk of flight. How successful do you think implementation has been and what is your plan to ensure frontline prosecutors are trained to support continued implementation? Would you work to roll back or change any part of the law?
The implementation of the Pretrial Fairness Act, particularly with the introduction of the SAFE-T Act, has significantly transformed our approach to determining pretrial detention. By shifting the focus away from monetary bonds to assessing whether an individual poses a danger to the community, the system has become more equitable and just. However, the success of this implementation relies heavily on frontline prosecutors being adequately trained to navigate the new procedures and criteria effectively. My plan is to ensure comprehensive training programs are in place to equip prosecutors with the knowledge and skills necessary to support continued implementation. This includes providing education on the intricacies of the new law, emphasizing the importance of fair and unbiased decision-making, and promoting collaboration with other stakeholders in the criminal justice system. While the law represents a significant step towards reform, I would remain open to evaluating its impact and making necessary adjustments to address any unforeseen challenges or areas for improvement. Ultimately, my priority is to uphold the principles of fairness and justice in pretrial detention decisions while ensuring public safety and promoting accountability.
• Many express fears that the release of people pretrial will lead to an increase in crime, though there is no data to support this claim. Do you share these concerns and criticism and how you will address them?
While concerns about the release of individuals pretrial leading to increased crime are frequently voiced, it's crucial to recognize that there is no empirical evidence supporting this claim. My approach is rooted in data-driven decision-making and a steadfast commitment to upholding public safety. I will address these concerns by using my life-long legal experience along with my extensive record of fair and sound judgment, to make important decisions such as pretrial incarceration or release. I will do everything in my power to keep dangerous and violent criminals detained. My criteria for pretrial incarceration will be clear and transparent, informed by data, and rooted in whether or not someone is a danger to the community.
9. We’d like to ask you about another critical stakeholder in the legal system – the Public Defender. There has been at least one sharply critical report about the quality of public defense in Illinois, which concluded, in part, that “the state does not have any oversight structure by which to know whether each county’s indigent defense system has a sufficient number of attorneys with the necessary time, training, and resources to provide effective assistance of counsel at every critical stage of a criminal case for every indigent defendant.” Although the problem is not as acute in Cook County, do you share these concerns about how the state is meeting its obligations?
I share these concerns because the Constitution provides rights to all who are accused that are meaningless if they are not zealously protected by our legal system. I am the only candidate in this race who was a defense attorney and acutely understands the power of the state brought against my client. The PD’s office should be properly resourced to provide equal protection under the law to the accused. As the State’s Attorney in an adversarial legal system, it is our job to zealously represent the people and the victims, but an uneven playing field does not build us the trust we need from communities to keep them safe.
• Do you support increasing resources for public defenders in Illinois? If so, what role would you play in helping to secure necessary resources?
Yes, I support it and would work in concert with advocates to make the point above about an unequal balance in the justice system and how detrimental it would be to the trust the State’s Attorney needs to be effective.
10. The current State's Attorney has created a list of police officers who are barred from testimony because of credibility, evidence of the deep problem this jurisdiction has with officers of the law engaging in prohibited behavior. Will you maintain that list? How will you support the continued identification, investigation, and prosecution of law enforcement criminal behavior?
As State’s Attorney, I will remain committed to upholding accountability and integrity within our law enforcement system. The list of police officers barred from testimony due to credibility issues underscores the importance of addressing prohibited behavior within law enforcement. To achieve this, I propose keeping strict records of officer conduct, implementing stronger ethics and transparency rules, and fostering a closer relationship with the police to ensure efficiency, safety, and justice for all members of our community. By working collaboratively with law enforcement agencies and holding individuals accountable for their actions, we can promote trust and fairness within our criminal justice system.
11. In her tenure, State’s Attorney Kim Foxx has overturned more than 200 cases based on allegations of misconduct or new evidence that cast doubt on convictions. Attorneys who have brought cases say there is much more work to be done. Do you agree? And how will you support that work? Will you continue to operate the Conviction Review Unit?
I am dedicated to the pursuit of justice as I have been my entire career. If our community does not trust that our office is upholding justice, then they won’t work with us to keep people safe. I will maintain a conviction integrity unit that works closely with our training curriculum to ensure that all cases going forward and cases that were under our jurisdiction in the past are held to the highest standards in the country. Conviction Integrity, Post-Conviction, and Appeals should be placed together in one division so that they can combine efforts, resources, and personnel in the most efficient and effective way.
12. What will be your office's approach to restorative justice, including Cook County's existing restorative justice courts? Do you support efforts to transition the restorative justice program to a community-led approach?
Our office's approach to restorative justice will involve establishing a Restorative Justice Bureau, with courts specifically designed for non-violent offenders. These courts, composed of non-violent offenders, address the unique challenges presented by juveniles, veterans, mental illness, or drug use. By focusing on addressing the underlying issues driving criminal behavior rather than detention, these courts collaborate with social service agencies to provide necessary support. I also support transitioning the restorative justice program to a community-led approach, as evidenced by the success of existing courts in significantly reducing repeat offenders. In these courtrooms, judges, prosecutors, public defenders, and social service providers work together to help individuals get back on track through rehabilitation and support rather than punitive measures.
13. Governor Rauner's Bi-partisan commission recommended raising the retail theft threshold, but that was never done by the General Assembly. There is widespread recognition of the need to raise the threshold by many experts and elected officials, to bring Illinois in line with other states. One of Foxx’s first major policy changes was to raise the threshold amount for her office to bring felony charges of retail theft. What will your approach to tackling concerns about retail theft be? Do you support a state-wide change?
As a prosecutor, my job is to prosecute based on the law. I believe the legislature should address questions of public policy and prosecutorial discretion should be used in select cases where the facts dictate it. That doesn’t mean that everyone charged with retail theft deserves to be incarcerated, but there does need to be a consequence. If the legislature believes this threshold should be higher and they pass it, I will enforce the law.
14. What is your position on the State’s Attorney’s role in clemency and parole petitions? Should the office submit recommendations in these cases and how would you direct staff to assess in which cases should be granted?
The State’s Attorney can not advocate for the denial of justice in any form. It robs us of the trust and faith necessary from the community to be their most effective advocate. If justice warrants the opinion of the State’s Attorney in a matter of clemency or parole, then we should speak clearly and convincingly. We often make recommendations to the Court based on the conduct of the accused in a case, so there’s no reason we cannot do so after its conclusion provided it is consistent with the facts and circumstances, respects the jury, and adheres to the law.
15. Specifically, what is your position on filings by criminalized survivors to return to court and be granted sentencing relief, based on a new argument of evidence that they were not able to enter during their criminal proceedings?
While I do believe criminalized survivors should be allowed to file for sentencing relief, I don’t think they should have any more or less rights to petition for relief than any other party. Both prosecution and defense should possess per se rights, ensuring an equal opportunity for both sides to engage, and the prosecution must not assume the responsibilities of the defense for any case or party.