Former Orland Park cops sue village over discrimination claim, alleged unlawful arrest
William Sanchez, a sergeant and 19-year veteran of the force, alleges he was fired in March 2024 after complaining to supervisors and the village's Human Resources Department that he was denied a promotion to lieutenant 'because of his racial identity as a Hispanic Latino.'
Apart from the village, the lawsuit names police Chief Eric Rossi and Brian West, previously deputy chief and now interim village manager, among the defendants.
Sanchez said he also filed charges of discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Illinois Department of Human Rights.
Kenneth Kovac, a retired sergeant, alleges in his lawsuit that there was a conspiracy to violate his constitutional rights, including his First Amendment right to freedom of speech.
The Orland Park resident says he was unlawfully arrested and charged with false personation and disorderly conduct, which he said stemmed from a parody Facebook profile he created aimed at West, at the time deputy police chief. The charges were later dismissed in Cook County court, according to the lawsuit.
The village said it has been made aware of the lawsuits and that the village 'stands by its actions and those of its employees and remains confident that they were appropriate and fully compliant with the law.'
'The Village is committed to maintaining a fair and inclusive workplace, upholding the highest professional standards in our employment and law enforcement practices, and ensuring that all employees are treated with respect and in accordance with the law,' according to the statement. 'We will address these claims through the legal process and remain confident that the village has acted lawfully and appropriately in these matters.'
The law firm Hughes Socol Piers Resnick, & Dym, Ltd. represents both Sanchez and Kovac. The lawsuits were filed March 14.
'Sergeant Sanchez deserves to get his job back, and for Orland Park to take meaningful steps to make sure no one else has to fear for their jobs just because they voice their concerns about potential race discrimination within the police department,' Justin Tresnowski, an attorney with the firm, said in a news release.
Sanchez said he was initially notified in February 2024 he was being suspended without pay for alleged misconduct, then later fired. He said his union, the Orland Park Police Supervisors Association, filed a grievance challenging the firing and demanding arbitration.
An arbitrator ruled in January that Sanchez was not fired for just cause and ordered the village to reinstate him to his former position and 'make him whole for all losses suffered.' The village is appealing the decision.
Sanchez sought reinstatement along with back pay.
At the time of his firing, Sanchez was president of the Orland Park Police Supervisors Association, a bargaining unit separate from patrol officers that represents police sergeants and lieutenants in the department.
Sanchez was hired in 2004 as a patrol officer. He was promoted to sergeant in 2021 and that August was assigned as supervisor of the department's traffic safety unit.
He alleged harassment and racial discrimination on the part of Rossi and West, while Sanchez was alleged to have contributed to creating a hostile work environment for West.
In his lawsuit, Kovac said he created a parody Facebook page, under the profile 'Bryan East,' after he became concerned about 'abuses of power' within the Police Department.
West is a defendant in his lawsuit along with the village and Rossi. It seeks attorney fees, court costs and other unspecified damages.
In his lawsuit, Kovac said that, using the Bryan East name, he posted what he described as innocuous comments on the village's Facebook page. He said he created his Facebook page in January 2024, and deleted it within about a week.
Kovac said he was subjected to an investigation, including search warrants used to examine his personal communications and other data.
During the investigation, he said, his attorney contacted the village and warned that Kovac's Facebook activities were constitutionally protected, and that Orland Park could open itself up to liability.
Kovac said in the lawsuit that two criminal complaints were filed against him in late March 2024, and that he turned himself in April 7 of last year. The charges against him were dismissed in court this past January, according to his lawsuit.
'Sergeant Sanchez's retaliatory termination for complaining about discrimination and Mr. Kovac's arrest and prosecution for non-threatening parody posts online were patently illegal abuses of power,' Tresnowski said in the news release. 'Mr. Kovac and Sergeant Sanchez deserve justice, and the Village must be held accountable.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
30 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Scores Legal Win in 'Alligator Alcatraz' Fight
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A federal judge in Miami has dismissed part of a lawsuit brought by immigrant advocates challenging detainees' access to legal process at "Alligator Alcatraz," handing state and federal officials a partial win aligned with President Donald Trump's immigration agenda. Why It Matters The ruling marks a partial victory for Trump and Florida officials defending the South Detention Facility, nicknamed "Alligator Alcatraz," in the Florida Everglades, but it leaves unresolved questions about detainees' rights and legal access. By dismissing one constitutional claim while transferring the rest of the case to another court, Judge Rodolfo Ruiz underscored the facility's contested role in the president's immigration agenda and set the stage for continued litigation over whether detainees face unconstitutional barriers to attorney access. What To Know In a 47-page ruling issued Monday night, U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz dismissed a claim that detainees at the facility were denied access to immigration courts, finding it moot after the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) designated the Krome North Processing Center near Miami as the immigration court with jurisdiction over detainees' cases on Saturday. "Several developments have occurred since Plaintiffs filed this case," Ruiz wrote. "First, many of the Detained Plaintiffs have been transferred out of Alligator Alcatraz. Second, many of the Detained Plaintiffs (including those who have since been transferred out of Alligator Alcatraz) have received access to counsel, and all the Attorney Plaintiffs have received access to Alligator Alcatraz detainees." Ruiz, a Trump nominee to the bench, granted the state defendants' motion to transfer for improper venue from the Southern District of Florida to the Middle District, where the facility is located. The case will now proceed there on the remaining claims alleging violations of detainees' First Amendment rights to communicate with counsel. President Donald Trump speaks to the press after touring Alligator Alcatraz in Florida on July 1, 2025. President Donald Trump speaks to the press after touring Alligator Alcatraz in Florida on July 1, 2025. ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images Lawsuit Background Filed July 16, the lawsuit alleges that detainees held at the facility were deprived of timely and confidential access to lawyers and left unable to file petitions in immigration court. Civil rights attorneys said detainees had difficulty contacting their lawyers, sometimes waiting weeks for meetings or phone calls; they alleged that one person was deported without being able to reach counsel and that a mentally disabled man was encouraged to sign a voluntary departure form without an attorney present. Plaintiffs also argued they could not petition an immigration court because the government had not specified which court had jurisdiction over the facility. That changed on Saturday, when EOIR publicly designated Krome as the court with jurisdiction, an action Ruiz said resolved one of the plaintiffs' central claims. State and Federal Positions Lawyers for Florida and for the Trump administration argued the suit was filed in the wrong venue because the facility sits on an airstrip in Collier County (Middle District of Florida). They also noted that many detainees had been transferred and had received attorney access by the time of the ruling. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has defended the detention center as an essential part of Trump's immigration enforcement efforts. Built on an isolated airstrip surrounded by swampland, the facility has an estimated annual cost of $450 million and was intended to serve as both a secure holding site and a deterrent. Supporters liken its remote setting to Alcatraz Island, the source of its nickname. What People Are Saying From Judge Rodolfo Ruiz's order: "This is a classic case of mootness. The Bond Plaintiffs have therefore received all the relief they seek. The Court can do no more." Eunice Cho, lead attorney for the ACLU representing the plaintiffs: It should not take a lawsuit to force the government to abide by the law and the Constitution." The ACLU maintains that detainees still face obstacles to counsel, including a lack of private communications and delays in arranging visits. What Happens Next The dismissal of the Fifth Amendment claim represents a partial win for state and federal officials defending the facility and is aligned with Trump's agenda. The case now moves to the Middle District of Florida, where judges will weigh the remaining First Amendment claims about alleged barriers to legal access. Civil rights groups may seek injunctive relief to expand attorney contact, while state and federal officials are expected to argue that access has improved. As Ruiz noted, the case has had "a tortured procedural history," and further litigation over "Alligator Alcatraz" is expected in the months ahead.
New York Times
30 minutes ago
- New York Times
Judge Halts Texas' Law Mandating the Ten Commandments in School
A federal judge in Texas temporarily halted on Wednesday a state law that would have required the Ten Commandments to be visibly displayed in every public school classroom by Sept. 1. The law, passed earlier this year by the Republican-controlled Legislature, mirrors one in Louisiana that was declared 'plainly unconstitutional' in June by a panel of judges from the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans. A federal judge also blocked a nearly identical measure in Arkansas this month. In Texas, 16 families from different faith backgrounds brought the legal challenge. They argued that the law would pressure students to adopt a state-favored religious scripture and that it amounted to a clear violation of the separation of church and state. The version of the Ten Commandments that the law would have required was drawn from the King James Bible, the families said, and it would not have reflected other religious groups' interpretations of the Ten Commandments. Some parents also argued that portions of the commandments are inappropriate for young children, including the lines 'thou shalt not commit adultery' and 'though shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife.' 'Even though the Ten Commandments would not be affirmatively taught, the captive audience of students likely would have questions,' Judge Fred Biery of the Western District of Texas wrote in his decision. 'Teenage boys, being the curious hormonally driven creatures they are, might ask: 'Mrs. Walker, I know about lying and I love my parents, but how do I do adultery?'' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
an hour ago
Texas can't require Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, judge says
Texas cannot require public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom, a judge said Wednesday in a temporary ruling against the state's new requirement, making it the third such state law to be blocked by a court. A group of Dallas-area families and faith leaders sought a preliminary injunction against the law, which goes into effect on Sept. 1. They say the requirement violates the First Amendment's protections for the separation of church and state and the right to free religious exercise. Texas is the largest state to attempt such a requirement, and U.S. District Judge Fred Biery's ruling from San Antonio is the latest in a widening legal fight that's expected to eventually go before the U.S. Supreme Court. 'Even though the Ten Commandments would not be affirmatively taught, the captive audience of students likely would have questions, which teachers would feel compelled to answer. That is what they do," Biery wrote in the 55-page ruling that began with quoting the First Amendment and ended with "Amen." The lawsuit names the Texas Education Agency, state education Commissioner Mike Morath and three Dallas-area school districts as defendants. A federal appeals court has blocked a similar law in Louisiana, and a judge in Arkansas told four districts they cannot put up the posters, although other districts in the state said they're not putting them up either. Although Friday's ruling marked a major win for civil liberties groups who say the law violates the separation of church and state, the legal battle is likely far from over. Religious groups and conservatives say the Ten Commandments are part of the foundation of the United States' judicial and educational systems and should be displayed. Texas has a Ten Commandments monument on the Capitol grounds and won a 2005 Supreme Court case that upheld the monument. In Louisiana — the first state that mandated the Ten Commandments be displayed in classrooms — a panel of three appellate judges in June ruled that the law was unconstitutional.
