Responding to Crosetti Brand case, lawmakers pass bill emphasizing domestic violence training for Prisoner Review Board
The Democratic-led House passed the legislation Tuesday by a near party-line vote of 74-37 and it now heads to Gov. JB Pritzker, who a spokesperson said Wednesday intends to sign the bill into law. The bill passed in the Senate last month, with three moderate Democrats joining Republicans in voting against it: Patrick Joyce of Reddick, Meg Loughran Cappel of Shorewood and Suzy Glowiak Hilton of Western Springs.
The bill's passage came 14 months after authorities say Crosetti Brand broke into his ex-girlfriend's apartment on Chicago's North Side and attacked her before fatally stabbing her son, 11-year-old Jayden Perkins, when the boy tried to come to her rescue. The 39-year-old Brand is on trial for the attack and Jayden's family has filed a lawsuit against the review board alleging negligence in the case.
The case became a political challenge for Pritzker as the review board had been criticized a couple of years before the attack by state legislative Republicans for authorizing the early release of people convicted of killing police officers, children and committing mass murder.
In light of Jayden's case, two review board members, including the chairman, resigned. The crime also led to the appointment of an executive director for the board. Pritzker was also critical of how Brand's case was handled.
'It is clear that evidence in this case was not given the careful consideration that victims of domestic violence deserve and I am committed to ensuring additional safeguards and training are in place to prevent tragedies like this from happening again,' the governor said last year.
Since then, there have been at least two efforts to reform the review board but those have failed to get through the General Assembly.
State Rep. Kelly Cassidy, a Chicago Democrat and a leader of the reform efforts, said a version of the bill that failed to pass during the lame-duck session in early January didn't do enough to address domestic violence issues, which is why she especially welcomed the passage of the revamped bill.
'This is everything that I worked on with the advocates,' Cassidy, who worked on the bill with Chicago Democratic Rep. Will Guzzardi, said Tuesday. 'In the lame-duck version, absolutely none of the domestic violence advocates' materials were included. It just was simply omitted.'
Under the bill sent to Pritzker, the review board is required to run a Law Enforcement Agencies Data System, or LEADS, report, which typically has information about a person's criminal history including orders of protection filed against them, before making a decision on whether to revoke someone's parole or mandatory supervised release.
The board within 60 days must also publish on its website its decision and the name and identification number of individuals accused of violating their terms of release.
Board members currently must have five years of experience in corrections, law enforcement, law, education, sociology, social work, medicine, psychology or other behavioral sciences. The bill would expand those requirements to include 'advocacy for victims of crime and their families, advocacy for survivors of domestic violence, sexual violence, or intimate partner violence.'
In addition, the bill would require seven of the board's maximum 15 members to have at least five years of experience as a law enforcement officer, parole officer, prosecutor, criminal defense lawyer or judge. Board members are appointed by the governor with consent of the Senate.
The legislation would require board members to participate annually in 20 hours of training on topics including domestic violence, restorative justice, racial bias, mental health and trauma. They would also be required to be trained on lethality of domestic violence and gender-based violence.
Republican lawmakers supported an earlier version of the bill that included a requirement that recordings of much of the board's hearings be made public. The GOP also raised concerns about why the terms of the board members were extended from six years to eight years, arguing that could limit the Senate's consent role in appointments.
'My concern is that you've got these members who are now going to be in office for eight years and they are going to have less accountability than they had before and that's not a good thing,' said Sen. Steve McClure, a Republican from Springfield and an ardent critic of the Pritzker administration's handling of the review board. 'That's a public safety issue. And this is all in light of the fact that we lost a brave hero in our state, Jayden Perkins, who was trying to defend his mother last year.'
Democrats, including Senate President Don Harmon of Oak Park, who sponsored the bill in the Senate, contended the eight-year terms would help board members be more effective.
'I think with an eight-year term, members will be less concerned about being reappointed and will serve their term and do the best work that they can do,' Harmon said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
a minute ago
- USA Today
California lawmakers approve Newsom's redistricting plan to counter Texas Republicans
California lawmakers approved Democratic-led redistricting maps for voters to decide in a special election, a day after Texas House Republicans passed new redistricting plans. The California Legislature on Aug. 21 approved Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's proposal on a ballot measure to suspend the state's current congressional districts, drawn by an independent commission, and replace them with maps that could give Democrats five U.S. House seats. The redistricting effort in California is in response to Texas, where Republican lawmakers are pushing new redistricting maps at President Donald Trump's request. The Texas Senate could pass its new redistricting plans on Aug. 21, which Republicans hope will give the state GOP an additional five U.S. House seats. But Newsom said Texas "fired the first shot," and that California is "neutralizing" what happened and giving American voters "a fair chance." "We got here because the President of the United States is struggling, we got here because the President of the United States is one of the most unpopular presidents in US history, we got here because he recognizes that he will lose the election," Newsom said before signing his redistricting plan into law. "He's trying to rig the elections. He's trying to set up the conditions where he can claim that the elections were not won fair and square. Open your eyes to what is going on in the United States of America in 2025." Meanwhile, California Republican Party chairwoman Corrin Rankin called Newsom's actions gerrymandering, adding that her party will fight the "corruption" in court and at the ballot box. "Governor Newsom has signed into law a blatant power grab, rushed through in secret by Democrats in the very kind of backroom process Californians voted to abolish when they created the independent Citizens Redistricting Commission," Rankin said in a statement. "Voters established the Commission to guarantee fairness and transparency, and Democrats just shredded it to protect their own power." California wants to thwart Trump, Texas' efforts California Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas said after the vote that Trump doesn't believe in the nation's democratic system. "And it's clear that he will do whatever it takes to hold on to power," Rivas said. "Donald Trump and Republicans don't want to be held accountable by voters. Not in California, not anywhere, actually, in this country." California's proposed redistricting would be temporary as the ballot measure going before voters during a special election on Nov. 4 requires the state to return to nonpartisan map-drawing following the 2030 U.S. Census. But while the Texas redistricting map will take effect once Gov. Greg Abbott signs the bill into law, the proposed California maps could still be rejected by voters. "This special election will waste hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on a rushed special election at a time when Californians are struggling with the cost of living, crime, and homelessness," Rankin, the California GOP chair, said. "It's an abuse of taxpayer money and a direct attack on democracy in our state." But Newsom is confident that California voters can help level the playing field. Currently, California Democrats hold 43 of the state's 52 congressional seats. The Newsom-backed maps would convert five Republican seats into districts that would heavily favor Democrats. "When all things are equal and we're all playing by the same set of rules, there's no question that the Republican party will be the minority party in the House of Representatives next year," Newsom said. "I couldn't be more proud of the extraordinary leaders who are standing up for the rule of law by standing up for the principles and the enduring values of the Founding Fathers."


Los Angeles Times
a minute ago
- Los Angeles Times
California voters will decide redistricting in November
California voters will be asked in a Nov. 4 special election to waive the state's independent redistricting process and approve new partisan congressional maps that favor Democrats. California's ballot measure is the latest volley in a national political brawl that could alter the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections and the balance of power in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Los Angeles Times
a minute ago
- Los Angeles Times
Judge says former Trump lawyer Alina Habba has been unlawfully serving as U.S. attorney in New Jersey
WILLIAMSPORT, Pa. — A federal judge ruled Thursday that President Trump's former lawyer, Alina Habba, has been unlawfully serving as the the top federal prosecutor in New Jersey. The court, saying the administration used 'a novel series of legal and personnel moves,' held that Habba's term as the interim U.S. attorney ended in July, and the Trump administration's maneuvers to keep her in the role without getting confirmation from the U.S. Senate didn't follow procedures required by federal law. 'Faced with the question of whether Ms. Habba is lawfully performing the functions and duties of the office of the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, I conclude that she is not,' Chief U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann wrote. The opinion says that Habba's actions since July 'may be declared void.' Brann, a President Obama appointee, said he's putting his order on hold pending an appeal. It wasn't immediately clear if that meant Habba would remain in charge of the U.S. attorney's office. A message seeking comment was sent to Habba's office Thursday. The Justice Department said it intends to appeal the ruling. Brann's decision comes in response to a filing on behalf of New Jersey defendants challenging Habba's tenure and the charges she was prosecuting against them. They sought to block the charges against them, arguing that Habba didn't have the authority to prosecute the case after her 120-day term as interim U.S. attorney expired in July. The defendants' motion to block Habba, a onetime White House advisor to President Trump and his former personal defense attorney, is another high-profile chapter in her short tenure. She made headlines when Trump named her U.S. attorney for New Jersey in March. She said the state could 'turn red,' a rare, overt political expression from a prosecutor, and said she planned to investigate the state's Democratic governor and attorney general. She then brought a trespassing charge, which was eventually dropped, against Newark Mayor Ras Baraka stemming from his visit to a federal immigration detention center. Habba later charged Democratic Rep. LaMonica McIver with assault stemming from the same incident, a rare federal criminal case against a sitting member of Congress other than for corruption. She denies the charges and has pleaded not guilty. Volatility over her tenure unfolded in late July when the four-month temporary appointment was coming to a close and it became clear that she would not get support from home state Sens. Cory Booker and Andy Kim, both Democrats, effectively torpedoing her chances of Senate approval. The president withdrew her nomination. Around the same time, federal judges in New Jersey exercised their power under the law to replace Habba with a career prosecutor when Habba's temporary appointment lapsed, but Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi fired that prosecutor and renamed Habba as acting U.S. attorney. In his opinion, Brann questioned the legal moves the administration conducted to keep Habba in place. 'Taken to the extreme, the President could use this method to staff the United States Attorney's office with individuals of his personal choice for an entire term without seeking the Senate's advice and consent,' he wrote. The Justice Department has said in filings that the judges acted prematurely and that the executive has the authority to appoint his preferred candidate to enforce federal laws in the state. Trump had formally nominated Habba as his pick for U.S. attorney on July 1, but Booker and Kim's opposition meant that under long-standing Senate practice known as senatorial courtesy, the nomination would stall out. A handful of other Trump picks for U.S. attorney are facing a similar circumstance. Catalini writes for the Associated Press.