ATTORNEY GENERAL RAOUL FILES BRIEF WITH ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT CALLING FOR CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS IN SERIOUS CPD DISCIPLINARY MATTERS

ATTORNEY GENERAL RAOUL FILES BRIEF WITH ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT CALLING FOR CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS IN SERIOUS CPD DISCIPLINARY MATTERS

June 02, 2026

Chicago - Attorney General Kwame Raoul filed an amicus brief calling for the continuation of a 60-year tradition of offering public access to hearings in serious disciplinary matters involving Chicago Police Department (CPD) officers. Raoul's brief, filed in the Illinois Supreme Court, argues that moving these hearings behind closed doors would undermine both the state's consent decree with the city of Chicago - a court order mandating broad police reform that his office helps to oversee - and public confidence in CPD.

"Increasing transparency is a cornerstone goal of the state's consent decree with the city to reform policing practices," Raoul said. "Eliminating this longstanding transparency measure would be a step in the opposite direction and would ultimately result in a loss of public trust."

In 2023, an arbitrator appointed to set the terms for a new collective bargaining agreement between the city and a union that represents most CPD officers adopted the union's proposal to allow officers facing serious discipline - that is, termination of employment or suspension for over a year - to choose private arbitration instead of public hearings before the Chicago Police Board. A Cook County Circuit Court judge vacated the portion of the arbitrator's award that authorized closed proceedings, noting that the closure would be counter to Illinois public policy, which favors transparency in serious police disciplinary matters. The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the portion of the ruling requiring that the proceedings remain open to the public. Raoul is now asking the Illinois Supreme Court to uphold the appellate court's ruling.

In his brief, Raoul argues that holding such proceedings out of public view contradicts the basic principles of the consent decree, which institutes numerous transparency reforms to address longstanding issues at CPD. It would also undermine specific mandates of the consent decree, including requirements to supply misconduct complainants with greater information about the status and handling of their complaints.

Raoul further argues that closing serious disciplinary proceedings to the public would likely undermine public confidence in CPD. As the brief explains, the consent decree, the U.S. Department of Justice and policing experts agree that transparency in disciplinary matters is essential to fostering public trust. Eliminating a longstanding transparency measure like public access to serious disciplinary hearings would undercut that trust.