Ex-Speaker Madigan asks to remain free on bond pending appeal
Madigan, 83, was sentenced last month to 7 1/2 years in prison and ordered to report by Oct. 13. But in their 21-page motion, Madigan's attorneys signaled they will file a vigorous appeal, and argued he should not spend time behind bars until after it is resolved — which could take a year or more.
Such requests are fairly common in white collar cases where there were significant legal issues, which Madigan's case certainly contained. But convincing a judge who sentenced a defendant to prison that they should remain free can be challenging, particularly when the same judge already ruled before or during the trial on the issues being raised.
Madigan's defense team acknowledged that U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey already 'resolved the issues discussed' in their motion, but said 'few areas of criminal law are more complex, and more rapidly evolving, than federal bribery law.'
Much of the uncertainty stems from a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that substantially reined in prosecutions under a federal bribery law known as 666, its number in the federal code.
In its decision in the bribery case of former Portage, Indiana, Mayor James Snyder, the high court ruled that 'gratuities' — or gifts given as a thank-you for actions a public official has already taken — are not criminalized under the federal statute, and that prosecutors must prove there was an agreement ahead of time, often referred to by the Latin .
Madigan's motion argued that Blakey's instructions to the jury erred in part by focusing 'on the intent of the bribe-giver, not the recipient,' flipping what prosecutors are actually required by statute to prove.
The judge also incorrectly modified the language in the instructions to say payments to Madigan's associates be 'in connection with … official duties,' the motion stated.
The instructions also were flawed when it came to the 'heavily litigated definition of 'corruptly,'' Madigan's team argued, 'and the crucial instruction on 'stream of benefits,' the motion stated.
The motion also challenges Blakey's decision to admit the now-infamous wiretapped recording of Madigan telling his co-defendant, Michael McClain, that some of their associates had 'made out like bandits.' McClain responded, 'For very little money too.'
The judge initially barred the jury from hearing the conversation, which began with a discussion about a labor consultant who was on ComEd's payroll, not one of the subcontractors that were part of the indictment. But Blakey but let in after Madigan testified he didn't know ComEd was paying his associates for no work.
'The substantial questions, if resolved in Madigan's favor, are likely to result in reversal of all convictions or a new trial,' Madigan's attorneys said.
After a trial that stretched nearly four months, Madigan was convicted by a jury Feb. 12 on bribery conspiracy and other corruption charges. The jury found him guilty on 10 of 23 counts, including a multipronged scheme to accept and solicit payments from ComEd to Madigan associates for do-nothing subcontracts.
Madigan also was convicted on six out of seven counts — including wire fraud and Travel Act violations — regarding a plan to get then-Chicago Ald. Daniel Solis, who testified at length in the trial, appointed to a state board.
The jury acquitted Madigan of several other schemes alleged in the indictment and deadlocked on other counts, including the overarching racketeering charge.
In handing down the 90-month prison term on June 13, Blakey said Madigan's crimes represented 'abuse of power at the highest level' and were aggravated by the fact that Madigan had every advantage in life, including a privileged education and a thriving law practice.
The judge also found that Madigan lied repeatedly and willfully when testifying in his own defense during the trial. Blakey called it 'a nauseating display of perjury and evasion' that was 'hard to watch.'
jmeisner@chicagotribune.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
13 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump claims Democrats are denying Republicans congressional districts in Mass. See the maps for yourself.
But that's not the only way Massachusetts has come into the conversation. Advertisement Amid Texas' ongoing redistricting controversy this week, and plenty of Democratic backlash, Trump Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'If you look at what's going on with the redistricting, or whatever you want to call it, the Democrats have done it long before we started,' he said following an executive order signing Tuesday afternoon. 'I got 40 percent [of the presidential vote] in Massachusetts, and yet they have 100 percent of the vote in terms of Congress. So there's no Republican, there's no anything. So I should, we should, have 40 percent. You know why? They redistricted.' Is there any truth to Trump's claims, and would it even be possible to draw a congressional district in Massachusetts with a Republican majority? In short, not really. Advertisement Trump won 36 percent of the Massachusetts presidential vote in 2024 (about 1.2 million votes), not 40 percent or 41 percent as he claimed Tuesday morning in a Trump did not win the majority of votes as of 2023. Massachusetts has not elected a Republican to the House for 31 years. In that time, the state's congressional districts have been redrawn three times, following the 2000, 2010, and 2020 censuses, as is required of states by the Constitution. The most drastic change to the state's congressional districts occurred following the 2010 census, when Massachusetts lost its 10th district (also a Democratic seat) due to low population growth. The state's current congressional districts were signed into law by Republican former governor Charlie Baker Under federal law, districts within a state must have roughly equal populations. Based on the 2020 census, the average population for each House seat is a little over 760,000 people. Districts must also be one, uninterrupted shape. The federal Voting Rights Act also dictates that congressional districts cannot be drawn with the intent of suppressing the voting rights of people of color. Advertisement In Massachusetts, the majority of registered voters — In 2024, five of Massachusetts' nine House members Though there are plenty of Republican-leaning voters in Massachusetts, it would be practically impossible to create a Republican-controlled congressional district because the state's major population hubs tend to vote Democratic. A red congressional district, no matter how wonkily drawn, would likely lack the required population size to qualify. When Democratic Secretary of State Bill Galvin was asked Tuesday if Massachusetts might draw a new Congressional map before the next census as Texas is attempting to do, Galvin said it is unlikely. 'We have no Republicans to give,' he said. Julian E.J. Sorapuru can be reached at
Atlantic
15 minutes ago
- Atlantic
The Fight to Plan America's Birthday Party
President Trump's attempted takeover of America's 250th-anniversary celebration began this spring when his team drew up a $33 million fundraising plan for a series of events starring the president, including a military parade in Washington. America250 had been founded by Congress as a bipartisan effort, with a mission to engage '350 million Americans for the 250th.' But Trump kicked off the final year of preparations with a political rally at the Iowa State Fairgrounds, attacking Democrats before a crowd that waved America250 signs. 'I hate them,' Trump proclaimed July 3. 'I cannot stand them, because I really believe they hate our country.' Around the same time, Trump's top political appointee at America250, a former Fox News producer named Ariel Abergel, moved to gain greater influence over the bipartisan commission. He called four Republican commissioners, who had been appointed years ago by then–Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and then–Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, with a blunt request: Consider resigning to make way for new appointees. That request was reiterated by current House Speaker Mike Johnson, who applied pressure to one appointee at the request of the White House. But rather than solidify Trump's control over the organization, the calls appear to have backfired, setting off a struggle for control of the organization, according to interviews with eight people briefed on the recent turmoil in the organization, who spoke with me on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The four targeted commissioners ultimately refused to resign, despite two initially signaling their intent to comply. Johnson's office decided to back off, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune has indicated that he seeks no changes to the commission, according to people familiar with their thinking. Then other members of the commission, which Abergel works for, began discussing efforts to push him out of his job, arguing that his decision to ask for the resignations had demonstrated his lack of judgement. 'This position should have been reserved for a much more experienced and substantive candidate,' one of the commissioners told me, reflecting the views expressed by others. 'The 250th is too important as a milestone for our country to jeopardize it with someone who doesn't take it seriously.' T. H. Breen: Trump's un-American parade Abergel defended his actions and argued that he had been acting in concert with the House speaker to request that 'certain inactive members of the commission' resign. 'The speaker has every right to make his own appointments to the commission,' he told me in a statement. 'While some anonymous individuals are focused on lying to the fake news, my focus remains the same: to make America250 the most patriotic celebration in American history.' The nation's leaders have been planning since 2016 for next year's celebrations to mark the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which are expected to involve events in each of the states, including a ball drop in Times Square on July 4, organized in partnership with the commission. The Republican tax bill that Trump signed into law this summer included an additional $150 million for the Department of Interior, which is expected to be spent by the commission in partnership with a new White House task force to celebrate the anniversary, with additional private fundraising from companies such as Coca-Cola and Stellantis. But now, even as the festivities are unfolding, the commission that was established to oversee them is in turmoil. Since winning reelection, Trump has moved swiftly to take control of the federal government's cultural institutions, including the Kennedy Center and National Portrait Gallery. But the United States Semiquincentennial Commission largely answers to the legislative branch, not the White House, and has a sprawling leadership structure that includes sitting senators, members of Congress, and ex officio members such as the secretary of defense and the secretary of state. Ryan Miller: Why I played the Kennedy Center The power to direct the operation resides with an additional 16 'private citizen' commissioners, who are appointed in equal numbers by the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate for lifetime terms until the completion of the celebrations. Under the law, the forcible removal of commissioners requires a two-thirds vote of the commission, and the president's main power is his ability to appoint a chair from among the private citizens already serving. According to four people familiar with the conversations, the four commissioners whom Abergel asked to resign are the Washington and Lee University professor Lucas Morel, the Hillsdale College professor Wilfred M. McClay, the educator Val Crofts, and Tom Walker, the founder of American Village, a historical-replica development in Alabama. Morel and McClay declined to comment. Crofts and Walker could not be reached for comment. Two people familiar with the commission's work described all four as regular participants in America250 oversight. For the moment, there does not appear to be public pressure from Capitol Hill for a shake-up. 'Johnson is not seeking the resignation of any of the speaker's appointees,' said a person familiar with his thinking, who requested anonymity to discuss the sensitive situation. Someone familiar with Thune's thinking gave me a similar response: 'Thune supports his appointees.' People familiar with the White House planning for America250 have argued that the commission needs more commitment of time and energy from its commissioners for the final year before next summer's festivities. They said the attempt to encourage resignations was blocked, ultimately, by commission bylaws that limit the ability of congressional offices to push out a commissioner. And they made clear that efforts to change the commission makeup could continue. 'So far the best work they have done is being part of this loyal cabal,' said one person familiar with the White House thinking on the sitting commission. 'There has been tremendous frustration with the lack of programmatic purpose, planning, and production.' Others involved in the commission say that such arguments are merely a pretext for political control. Some of the people familiar with the discussion suspect that the White House wants to replace the four Republican comissioners—who are largely apolitical historical boosters and academics—with people more directly loyal to the Trump, including one whom the president could then elevate to replace the commission's chairwoman, Rosie Rios, a former U.S. treasurer during the Obama administration. Republican appointees have been targeted, they argue, because Democratic leaders have no say in who would replace them. (Just this week, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer filled two Democratic vacancies on the commission, appointing Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of former President John F. Kennedy, and Paul R. Tetreault, the director of Ford's Theater, according to a person briefed on the appointments.) White House allies contest this argument, saying Trump could elevate an existing Republican commissioner at any time to replace Rios. Rios allowed the White House to appoint Abergel as the executive director this year, according to people familiar with the conversations. The commission's executive committee, a group led by Rios, then approved the use of the America250 brand and nonprofit for this summer's military parade and Trump rallies, allowing Trump's fundraisers to bring in money to fund the events and green-lighting their production by his former campaign team. But since then, a group of Democratic lawmakers on the commission has questioned the arrangement. Rios has signaled that all future programming decisions will be made with the consultation of the full commission. In an email update sent to the commission on Saturday, which I obtained, Rios recounted a recent planning meeting with White House officials, including Vince Haley, director of the Domestic Policy Council, and Brittany Baldwin from TaskForce250, a separate body Trump set up to commemorate the semiquincentennial in concert with the commission. 'I am pleased to report that we are in agreement about the Commission's vision and how to support and amplify other proposed activities,' Rios wrote in the email. 'As I explained at our last Commission meeting, moving forward, my commitment to this Commission is that any proposed changes to our Playbook will come back to the full Commission for approval.' The White House spokesperson Anna Kelly praised the commission when asked for comment for this story. 'The White House is extremely pleased with the America250 Commission, which is doing a great job leading this historic, unifying celebration of our country's 250th anniversary,' she told me in a statement. The power struggle between Abergel and some members of the commission has been building for reasons beyond the Trump events. Abergel has suggested that 'America's Field Trip,' a contest in which students create art celebrating the country, be moved to a Cabinet agency. Commissioners pushed back against that change. A redesign of the website that Abergel directed added photos of Trump along with corporate logos of the companies funding Trump's parade, and removed any mention of the Ambassador Circle, which named people including the musician Lance Bass, the historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, and former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown as representatives of the effort. Some people on the commission were alarmed by a recent Facebook post announcing an America250 partnership with Moms for Liberty, a conservative group that wants to ban certain books from school curricula and opposes the teaching of liberal ideas of race and gender. 'The branding and marketing had turned strongly around President Trump and strongly partisan looking,' said another person familiar with the commission's discussions. 'The commissioners are united in what is best for America and a great celebration.' Four Democrats on the commission, New Hampshire Senator Jeanne Shaheen, California Senator Alex Padilla, Pennsylvania Representative Dwight Evans, and New Jersey Representative Bonnie Watson Coleman, wrote to Rios and Abergel on July 21, asking about the Trump events and requesting assurances that the commission's programming will be implemented. 'The Chair intends that the Commission and Foundation personnel will execute and implement all approved programming,' Rios and Abergel responded yesterday in a letter, which I obtained. Eliot A. Cohen: A parade of ignorance They told the lawmakers in the letter that the commission had paid for logistics and operations support for the early-summer events headlined by Trump. But congressionally appropriated funds were not used through America250 to directly fund the military parade commemorating the Army's 250th anniversary, the Fort Bragg speech, or the July 3 Iowa kickoff rally for the semiquincentennial. To pay for the efforts, Trump's political fundraiser, Meredith O'Rouke, began raising money for America250 Inc., a foundation created at the behest of the commission. Donors were offered a 'dedicated VIP experience' at the events, according to fundraising documents. America250 subsequently announced donations from a list of companies with executives close to Trump who stand to benefit from his presidency, including Oracle, Lockheed Martin, Ultimate Fighting Championship, Coinbase, Palantir and Amazon. A person briefed on the spending said that America250 ultimately budgeted $33 million for the parade, the Fort Bragg rally, the Iowa rally, a West Point speech, and other events. Of that, $20 million was budgeted for the parade. Army officials have separately said the parade cost the military $30 million to stage, including $3 million to prepare street surfaces for heavy vehicles. Trump previously announced that he plans to stage an Ultimate Fighting Championship bout at the White House in honor of the nation's 250th birthday. People familiar with the planning say that the fight is likely to be organized through the White House task force, not the Semiquincentennial Commission.
Atlantic
15 minutes ago
- Atlantic
How Democrats Tied Their Own Hands on Redistricting
As New York Governor Kathy Hochul denounced the GOP's aggressive attempt to gerrymander Democrats into political oblivion this week, she lamented her party's built-in disadvantage. 'I'm tired of fighting this fight with my hand tied behind my back,' she told reporters. As political metaphors go, it's not a bad one. Hochul omitted a key detail, however: Democrats provided the rope themselves. For more than a decade, they've tried to be the party of good government on redistricting. But Democrats' support for letting independent commissions draw legislative maps has cost them seats in key blue states, and their push to ban gerrymandering nationwide flopped in the courts and in Congress. Now that Republicans, at the behest of President Donald Trump, are moving quickly to redraw district lines in Texas and elsewhere in a bid to lock in their tenuous House majority, Democrats want to match them seat for seat in the states that they control. But the knots they've tied are hard to undo. To boost the GOP's chances of winning an additional five House seats in Texas next year, all Governor Greg Abbott had to do was call the state's deeply conservative legislature back to Austin for an emergency session to enact new congressional maps. The proposed changes carve up Democratic seats in Texas's blue urban centers of Dallas, Houston, and Austin, as well as two seats along the U.S.-Mexico border, where Republicans are betting they can retain support among Latino voters who have moved right during the Trump era. Democratic lawmakers are trying to block the move by leaving the state and denying Republicans a required quorum in the legislature. By comparison, Democrats face a much longer and more arduous process to do the same in California and New York. Voters in both states would have to approve constitutional amendments to repeal or circumvent the nonpartisan redistricting commissions that Democrats helped enact. In California, Democrats hope to pass legislation this month that would put the question to voters this November. If the amendment is approved, the legislature could implement the new districts for the 2026 election. In New York, the legislature must pass the change in two separate sessions, meaning that a newly gerrymandered congressional map could not take effect until 2028 at the earliest. By then, some Democrats fear it may be too late. Republicans want to gain seats through mid-decade redistricting not only in Texas but in GOP-controlled states such as Florida, Missouri, Ohio, and Indiana. The GOP goal is to secure enough seats to withstand an electoral backlash to Trump's presidency in next year's midterms. That imbalance has caused Democrats to reassess—and in some cases, abandon altogether—their support for rules they long championed as essential to maintaining a fair playing field on which both parties could compete. 'What is at stake here is nothing less than the potential for permanent one-party control of the House of Representatives, and the threat of that to our democracy absolutely dwarfs any unfortunately quaint notions about the value of independent redistricting,' Micah Lasher, a New York State assembly member who represents Manhattan's Upper West Side, told me. It's a reversal for Lasher, a former Hochul aide who won office last year while endorsing independent redistricting. Lasher is the author of legislation that would allow New York to redraw its congressional maps in the middle of a decade if another state does so first. Lawmakers there could consider the bill when they return to Albany in January. The proposal is limited in scope: It does not throw out the state's decennial post-Census redistricting process and merely creates an exception allowing New York to respond to other states' moves. This is partly due to worries that voters might reject a more aggressive plan; in 2021, New York Democrats and election reformers failed to win approval of a series of statewide referenda aimed at expanding access to voting. (Republicans don't face the same concerns, because voters in red states won't have a direct say in the maps they draw.) Proposals like Lasher's have won the support of Democrats who previously led the fight to ban gerrymandering. On Monday, the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee became the first party organization to formally call for Democrats to redraw congressional maps in states where they have the power to do so. 'We're looking at a country where everything has changed, quite frankly, and the things that you thought could not happen happen,' Andrea Stewart-Cousins, the majority leader of the New York state Senate and the chair of DLCC's board, told me. Even as they pursued a national ban on gerrymandering, Democrats never forswore the practice entirely. Indeed, their ability to respond to Republicans now is constrained in part by the fact that district lines in blue states such as Illinois and Maryland are already skewed heavily in their favor. (Democrats control the legislature and governorships of far fewer states than do Republicans, which further limits their power to match the GOP in gerrymandering.) Yet Republicans' recent moves, aided by a Supreme Court ruling that sidelined federal courts from striking down purely partisan (as opposed to racial) gerrymanders, represent an escalation that has stunned Democrats. I asked Stewart-Cousins whether the party's push to take politics out of redistricting, which has succeeded in protecting one out of five congressional seats from the threat of gerrymandering, was misguided. 'It wasn't a mistake,' she insisted, casting the party's new posture more as a temporary shift than a permanent reorientation. Lasher, however, wasn't so sure. 'It is fair to say that Democrats in New York and around the country vastly underestimated the willingness of the Republican Party to cross every line, break every norm, and do so with enormous speed,' he said. 'We're in a period of adjustment. We better adjust really damn quickly.'
