Bill aimed at bolstering county public defender system moves forward in Springfield
SPRINGFIELD — In 1963, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Gideon v. Wainwright that every person has a constitutional right to free legal representation in criminal cases, including poor people who are unable to afford a private attorney.
On Tuesday, the 62nd anniversary of the landmark court decision, an Illinois House committee approved by a 10-5 vote a measure that would create a statewide public defender's office to assist under-resourced county public defenders throughout Illinois.
It's the first time the bill, dubbed by advocates as the Funded Advocacy & Independent Representation bill, or FAIR Act, has moved forward since a version was introduced last year by Democratic Senate President Don Harmon of Oak Park. But lawmakers in favor of the bill, which is primarily geared toward rural counties, acknowledged it still needs some changes before advancing through the legislative process.
Advocates point to multiple reports from 2019 to 2023 that show about 60% of Illinois counties have no government office of public defense, and instead contract with private attorneys, often part time.
The bill also seeks to address disparities between county public defender's offices and state's attorney's offices. For example, Cook County's 2024 budget provided about $102 million for its public defender's office, and about $205 million for its state's attorney's office. Also, while Illinois has no statewide office to provide public defenders where they're needed, its attorney general's office provides prosecutors around the state as necessary.
'A courtroom is kind of a three-legged stool. You have a state's attorney, you have a judge, and you have the PD (public defender). And for a long time, the PD was understaffed, underfunded and just in a position that they just, it wasn't fair,' state Rep. Dave Vella, a Rockford Democrat who is sponsoring the bill, said during Tuesday's House Judiciary Criminal Committee hearing. 'So a lot of times, defendants weren't getting the defense they needed or deserved.'
'Let's say you're in an extremely southern, rural county. And you have a 15-person drug case. You've only got one public defender. You're going to need some help, so this statewide public defender will send some attorneys down there to help with the case,' said Vella, a former Winnebago County assistant public defender.
The bill also calls for the office to establish a recruitment and retention plan to ensure 'a skilled and diverse workforce is available to serve clients in every part of the state.' The office would also provide funding 'to improve, increase access to, and advance the cause of indigent defense,' the bill says.
After Tuesday's hearing, Vella pegged the annual cost of operating the state public defender's office at $1 million or less. If the bill were to pass immediately, those costs wouldn't kick in for about two or three years while the office gets organized. Vella said the money could come from the state Supreme Court's budget.
Under the bill, the initial state public defender would be nominated by the Illinois Public Defender Association, a nonprofit educational organization for public defenders, and appointed to a two-year term by a majority vote of the state Supreme Court. Each subsequent state public defender would be appointed to a six-year term by a newly-formed, 11-member state public defender commission.
The state public defender's office would provide training to county public defenders and maintain a panel of private attorneys available to serve as counsel on a case-by-case basis. The office would also provide county public defenders with expert witnesses, investigators, administrative staff and social service staff.
In her testimony before the committee, Stephanie Kollmann, an attorney with Northwestern University's Child and Family Justice Center, cited research by her office showing large caseloads for public defenders throughout the state that are 'unacceptable' under the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees the right to an attorney for people accused of crimes.
'I work in a law school. Our students really want to go into public defense, many of them,' Kollmann said. 'But they can't enter a profession that doesn't have jobs open, that doesn't openly advertise jobs when they are open, that doesn't train them effectively or have enough space, time and money to do that.'
One goal of the bill, according to Vella, would be to make public defenders more autonomous from the judiciary. Chief judges appoint and remove most county chief defenders, although not in Cook County. Under the legislation, when a vacancy occurs in the position of chief county public defender, the state public defender would nominate a candidate and the state public defender commission would make an appointment through a selection process.
Sharlyn Grace, representing the Illinois Public Defender Association, told the committee she spoke with a chief public defender who is supportive of the legislation but feels they can't be open about that in the legislative process because they're afraid their of retribution from their chief judge, who is responsible for their appointment.
'When we have this system that prevents our public defenders from engaging in this conversation about how we can improve public defense and ensure that the state of Illinois meets its Sixth Amendment obligations, that's something we have a duty to rectify,' said Grace, who works for the Cook County public defender's office.
State Rep. Patrick Windhorst, the Republican spokesperson for the committee and a former state's attorney for downstate Massac County, noted several public defenders are opposed to the legislation. Vella responded that 'there are a lot of different counties, a lot of different circuits, a lot of different public defenders with ideas about how to get autonomy' from judges.
John Rekowski, a retired public defender from downstate Madison County, agreed that it's important to insulate public defenders from retribution from the judges they appear in front of but said it's also important for chief judges to have a working relationship with public defenders, since the judges generally have a good grasp of the legal landscape in the areas they oversee.
He testified the bill should allow for the current system of having the chief judges, in consultation with circuit judges, appoint the county public defenders, while taking away the judges' power to reappoint them and remove them for cause. That function, Rekowski said, should be reserved for the statewide office.
'That guarantees that the advocate in front of the judge isn't talking to the person who can fire him,' he testified.
An attorney representing the Illinois State Bar Association testified that while the group supports much of the bill, particularly the provisions where the bill provides more resources and more public defenders, it's against the judicial appointment power being taken away.
'We just believe that they're certain parts of the state that are different than the collars and Cook and that need that type of specific judicial involvement with the public defenders,' said the lawyer, David Eldridge.
So far, the bill has three Democratic co-sponsors, Chicago state Reps. Kevin Olickal, Lindsey LaPointe and Kelly Cassidy, who is vice chair of the House Judiciary Criminal Committee.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Nassau DA warns of Albany push to approve early parole for violent convicts
The Democratic-run New York state legislature could rush through a series of bills to give convicts early parole and prevent law enforcement from keeping dangerous criminals off the streets, Nassau County District Attorney Anne Donnelly warned Sunday. In recent years, Democrats clawed back controversial cashless bail and discovery laws after serial criminals were let loose, triggering massive political blowback. 'These bills undercut everything we work for every day — building strong cases, securing convictions, and ensuring justice is served,' Donnelly, a Republican up for re-election this fall, told The Post. Advertisement 3 Nassau County District Attorney Anne Donnelly. Brigitte Stelzer 'When prosecutors do the hard work of putting violent offenders behind bars, we should be backed by laws that protect that progress — not laws that allow those same criminals to return to our communities years before their sentences are complete,' added Donnelly, who is holding a press conference Monday announcing her opposition to the bills. Among the bills drawing concern is the Elder Parole bill — which would require inmates aged 55 and older who have served at least 15 years of their sentence to be considered for early release, regardless of the seriousness of the crime committed. Advertisement The measure is sponsored by Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal (D-Manhattan) and Assemblywoman Maritza Davila (D-Brooklyn). Another bill, the Earned Time Act, would make most violent felons eligible for time allowance credits, potentially slashing their prison sentences in half, Donnelly said. The earned time bill is sponsored by Sen. Jeremy Cooney (D-Rochester) and Assemblywoman Anna Kelles (D-Ithaca). 3 Madeline Brame's son, Hason Correa, was murdered in a scuffle outside a Harlem apartment building seven years ago. Steven Hirsch Advertisement A third bill — the Second Look Act — would permit prisoners to petition the courts for a sentence reduction after serving 10 years, including inmates convicted of violent crimes. The legislation is promoted by Sen. Julia Salazar (D-Brooklyn) and Assemblywoman Latrice Walker (D-Brooklyn). GOP Long Island lawmakers oppose the early parole bills, including Assemblyman Edward Ra and Sen. Jack Martins. 3 The New York State Capitol building. Hans Pennink for the NY Post Advertisement Crime victims' advocate Madeline Brame, whose Army Sergeant son Hason Correa was murdered in a scuffle outside a Harlem apartment building seven years ago, expressed outrage at the proposals to give violent cons a break. 'These proposals completely disregard the pain and effort that go into holding criminals accountable,' she said. 'We need to help prosecutors put violent offenders behind bars — not give criminals new ways to get out early.' Gov. Kathy Hochul toyed with early release proposals in April as a way to try to alleviate the prison population amid an illegal prison guard strike and a staffing shortage. She was forced to bring in the National Guard to staff the prisons. She proposed opening eligibility for merit time in the state budget, then backed down after it was revealed doing so could lead to people who were in for violent crimes to be released early. Donnelly was among those who raised the alarm. Inmate advocates have pushed for early parole and other reforms after prisoners were allegedly killed at the hands of guards over the past year.
Black America Web
2 hours ago
- Black America Web
Redistricting: Majority Black Voting Maps Rejected In Louisiana
Source: Mario Tama / Getty One of the most innocuous yet insidious ways voter suppression rears its head is through redistricting, a process by which a state legislature draws up voting maps along political lines. Despite a federal judge finding that their current legislative map violates the Voting Rights Act, Louisiana lawmakers have rejected a new map that would've included eight new, majority Black districts. The Louisiana Illuminator reports that Bill 487 and Bill 488, which would've redrawn the legislative maps for the Senate and House of Representatives, respectively, were struck down in a 9-6 and 9-5 vote that fell along party lines. The current maps were drawn in 2022 and utilized census data from 2010, despite the fact that the state's Black population has only increased over the last decade. Black voters make up a third of Louisiana's population, but the current voting maps only have one majority Black district. Rep. Edmond Jordan (D-Baton Rouge), ithe chairman of the Louisiana Legislative Black Caucus, authored both bills. He explained the changes were necessary to address a ruling by a federal judge last year that found the current map disenfranchised Black voters. 'By us not upholding our obligation and redrawing these maps … I think it sends a signal that we are unwilling to do so,' Jordan told his fellow legislators. 'Rather than wait on the court to come up with a decision, I think it's incumbent upon us to get ahead of that and maybe draw these maps and show the court that we're willing to comply with Section 2' of the Voting Rights Act. The Republican opposition explained that they didn't feel the need to update the maps as the ruling is currently under appeal, and they believe that the courts will rule in their favor. They also brought up concerns that the new district lines would require current elected officials to move in order to still represent their district or possibly have to run against another incumbent to maintain their seat in the legislature. Jordan understood those concerns but stated his priority was giving Black voters an equal voice in determining who represents them. 'What we're trying to do is attempt to unpack and uncrack these districts so that they would comply with Section 2,' Jordan said. Source: Juan Silva / Getty From the Louisiana Illuminator: Packing is a type of gerrymandering that forces a large number of voters from one group into a single or small number of districts to weaken their power in other districts. Cracking dilutes the power of those voters into many districts. Jordan's plan would have added new majority Black House districts in Natchitoches, Lake Charles, Shreveport and Baton Rouge, and Black Senate districts in Baton Rouge, Shreveport and Jefferson Parish. In what can only be described as saying the quiet part out loud, state Republicans added that they found Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to be outdated. For clarity, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prevents any voting law or measure 'which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.' Considering that they're actively using legislative districts to curb the power of Black votes, it's clear Section 2 is still a necessity to maintain voting rights within majority Black communities. Redistricting is always a partisan affair, with the legislative map being drawn by whatever party has power. Far too often, though, the redistricting efforts by state Republicans are largely built around minimizing Black voting power to keep Republicans in office. This isn't only an issue in Louisiana, as several states have drawn legislative maps that explicitly undermine Black votes. Redistricting plans in the state of Texas are also facing legal challenges due to allegations of racism. There's an ongoing fight in Texas's Tarrant County over redistricting plans that several state legislators believe violate the Voting Rights Act, and there's currently a federal case underway against the Texas state government over its 2021 voting map that was believed to have 'diluted the power of minority voters.' One of the worst offenders is Alabama, whose redistricting efforts have been deemed racist by federal judges several times. State Republicans have said that if they don't receive a favorable ruling in their appeal on the decision, they won't update the voting map until 2030 to avoid federal oversight. There is nothing more on brand for the modern GOP than having a temper tantrum when being told to be less racist. If anything, this is a reminder that in America, the boring, procedural racism is often the worst kind. SEE ALSO: Poll Shows Companies Maintaing DEI Intiatives Have Better Reputations MIT Becomes Latest University To Back Away From DEI Initiatives SEE ALSO Redistricting: Majority Black Voting Maps Rejected In Louisiana was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's tax bill has a long way to go in the Senate as Republicans mull major changes
Republican leaders spent months carefully crafting the 1,038-page megabill advancing President Donald Trump's agenda, engaging in grueling negotiations and backroom dealings to unite competing GOP factions just enough to squeeze the package through the House. Now, several of those provisions that ensured its passage could be on the chopping block. The Senate is set to begin consideration of Trump's 'big beautiful bill' as Republican leaders scramble to finalize the massive budget framework before the Fourth of July. But Republican senators — including Utah Sens. Mike Lee and John Curtis — are unsure about some of the contents, warning some provisions go too far while others don't go far enough to reduce the nation's deficit. 'There are solid victories in the bill,' Lee said in a statement to the Deseret News. 'But in its current form, the (Big Beautiful Bill Act) won't pass the Senate. It simply doesn't do enough to address the government's spending crisis. But we can make it better.' One of the most controversial provisions tucked into the budget resolution is language repealing clean energy tax credits that were passed in the Inflation Reduction Act under the Biden administration with only Democratic support. That language was demanded by a group of fiscal conservatives in the House who threatened to vote against the full package if it was not included. However, some Republicans have been wary to fully repeal the green energy tax incentives, arguing it could raise utility costs for all Americans. Curtis is among those pushing to preserve some of those clean energy policies, particularly those dealing with nuclear energy, net-zero emissions, battery storage and more. The first-term senator has long centered his climate policies on clean energy solutions, suggesting earlier this week he will push for those changes as the Senate considers the bill. 'My friends in the House kind of called me up to say, 'Listen, we're counting on you to fix it,'' Curtis said at an event in Tooele last week. 'So I think even many of them knew that what they sent over did need some work, and that's now our job in the Senate to put our stamp on that and have it speak for our will.' 'And I think if I have anything to say about it,' he added, 'I'll make sure that we're taking into account our energy future.' On the other hand, Lee has previously suggested he wants a comprehensive repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act, telling the Deseret News it should be overhauled 'lock, stock, and barrel.' 'There are some simple ways we can improve the bill,' Lee said. One way is to 'end Biden's politically motivated subsidies under the so-called 'Inflation Reduction Act' and end the Green New Scam once and for all.' While the two Utah senators have competing visions for the future of green energy tax credits, the pair have similar views on how to address proposals paring back government spending to reduce the deficit. Both Curtis and Lee have pushed for deeper spending cuts and reforms to certain government programs. While Republicans have vowed not to slash necessary benefits under Medicaid and other welfare programs, Curtis has repeatedly urged lawmakers to engage in conversations about reining in fraudulent spending. If not, the senator has warned, drastic cuts will be necessary in the future. Lee has also been vocal about searching for deeper spending cuts in the budget framework, arguing it does not go far enough to reduce the deficit. Those calls have been echoed by some fiscal hawks in the House, who say they are counting on the Senate to implement deeper spending cuts they couldn't secure with their slim majority. Another key deal that was made in the reconciliation package is an expansion of federal deductions for state and local taxes paid, also known as SALT. That provision was demanded by blue-state Republicans who threatened tanking the package if it wasn't included. Republican leaders offered to increase the current deduction cap to $40,000 — up from the current $10,000 limit — for individuals who make $500,000 or less a year. That cap would then increase by 1% every year over the next decade and remain permanent after that period. However, that increase may not be met with open arms in the Senate — and Lee is already hinting at its removal. 'Right now, it unfortunately contains big SALT cap increases, which are basically subsidies for high-tax blue states paid for by hardworking families in Utah and the rest of the country,' Lee said. Another provision that could find itself on the cutting room floor: a debt ceiling increase. The debt limit is the total amount of money the federal government is authorized to borrow in order to pay off existing obligations, tax refunds, interest on the national debt and other payments, according to the Treasury Department. House Republicans tucked a $4 trillion debt ceiling increase into the budget resolution to avoid a default later this summer, arguing that by doing so, they would strip Democrats of the chance to use the impending deadline as leverage to attach some of their own policies. However, some Republicans are staunchly opposed to a debt limit increase in any fashion. 'I think the problem for conservatives is they lose their high moral ground. These will be their deficits,' said Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who is currently opposed to the package. 'These will be GOP spending bills, GOP deficits, and there is no change in the direction of the country.' House GOP leaders are pleading with their counterparts in the Senate not to make changes to the massive reconciliation package, warning any edits could tank the megabill before it even makes it to Trump's desk. Meanwhile, the president is telling the Senate to 'make the changes they want' — sending mixed messages as Republicans consider alterations to the budget framework advancing policies on the border, energy, national defense and tax reform. Some of the hard-to-convince lawmakers hope their stubbornness will ward off any of their Senate colleagues from making drastic changes, noting the drawn-out process in the House should deter them from doing so. 'I think after seeing how painful of a process this is and how difficult it is to get anything through this side, I think that will send a strong message in the Senate that you can't really change it,' Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., a member of the Freedom Caucus, told the Deseret News.
