As reports circulate this weekend suggesting that Governor JB Pritzker will sign a major police and criminal justice reform measure into law on Monday, it is important to note that the bill advanced by the Illinois Black Caucus in the lame duck session of the General Assembly early this year enjoys wide public support. The high level of support is meaningful, given that many media outlets continue to refer to the bill’s provisions as “controversial” or worse, echoing the claims of a small number of police unions, law enforcement officials and politicians resistant to any reform.  But voters see this change as much needed and long overdue. 

“In the wake of the last summer’s protests against police violence and the responses to the release of the video showing the humiliation and harassment of Anjanette Young, there is little doubt about the strong support for additional police accountability and criminal justice reform,” said Khadine Bennett, director of advocacy and intergovernmental affairs at the ACLU of Illinois. “That call reflected the views of millions from all across Illinois – and the legislature responded with House Bill 3653.” 

“It is not accurate to suggest this is anything other than a much-needed package of policy solutions that have been called for by advocates and community members, legislation filed by many members of the General Assembly, including members of the Black Caucus over the years.”  

In early 2021 the Illinois General Assembly approved House Bill 3653, following months of hearings and town hall meetings discussing policies that became part of the bill, including legislation proposed in the Spring 2020 session and other previous General Assemblies. Law enforcement voices – individuals and organizational voices – were invited to engage and were participants in this discussion, whenever they determined it was appropriate to engage. But after legislators rejected some of their arguments and passed the bill, police unions and some law enforcement have complained widely to the media about the process and arguing that the bill is a threat to public safety and policing in Illinois. But polling conducted by the ACLU in late 2020 demonstrates that these hyperbolic voices are a distinct minority. 

Among other findings, public opinion research shows: 

• 9 out of 10 (91%) Illinois voters support legislative efforts that hold police accountable for misconduct
• 69% of voters agree that reform is necessary now because of racial bias in policing
• Two thirds (66%) of Illinois voters would be more likely to support a state legislator who signals willingness to hold police more accountable for their actions to just 9% of voters who would be less likely.

Nearly 9 out of 10 Illinois voters back:

• Holding law enforcement accountable for violating individuals’ constitutional rights (89% say it should be a major priority)
• Establishing clear and consistent statewide limits surrounding the use of force by police, including deadly force (80% say it should be a major priority)
• Training all police to a clear and consistent standard surrounding the use of force by police, including deadly force (90% say it should be a major priority)
• Rules mandating that officers are held responsible when they use force without justification resulting in a death (88% support)
• Establishing consequences for not turning on dashboard or body cameras (88% support)

More than 3 out of 4 voters in Illinois support:

• banning chokeholds (76%)
• requiring a state agency to report when a police officer uses force (78%) 
• 69% of voters want to end special protections for police officers – known as qualified immunity – that allows officers to escape from many lawsuits, denying victims of real harm a day in court.

“Despite weeks of claims by police officers and police unions that this bill is dangerous, it turns out that the legislation reflects the will of the voters that these officers serve. We encourage the Governor to sign the bill – policing policy, like all government policy, needs to reflect the voice of the public.  No public entity can simply write its own rules and reject appropriate oversight,” added the ACLU’s Bennett. 

The polling referenced here is drawn from two separate polls of 600 registered voters in Illinois. The first poll was conducted by Global Strategy Group from October 27 - November 4. The second poll, also conducted by Global Strategy Group, fielded from December 15-21, 2020. Each survey, respectively, has a margin of error of +/- 4.0% and were conducted online using a voter file match. Care was taken to ensure that each poll represented the geographic and demographic divisions of the population of registered voters.  

The below statement can be attributed to Nusrat Choudhury, Legal Director, ACLU of Illinois:

“The key findings of the Inspector General’s report were clear from countless first person videos and reports last summer of how Chicago police responded to historic protests for racial justice. It was predictable that the police killings of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breanna Taylor would inspire large protests due to the Chicago’s long and painful history of police violence against Black and brown communities. 

Once again, the City and Chicago Police Department failed to plan in any meaningful way to ensure that officers on the ground would respect the First Amendment rights and safety of those marching for justice. As a result, Chicago police retreated to their usual, discriminatory practices. 
 
Without leadership, guidance, and training from the top, we saw officers use batons and pepper spray against protesters, retaliate against people recording police violence in real time, and try to evade accountability by covering their names and star numbers and failing to document uses of force. We also saw officers do little to protect Black neighborhoods while enforcing a vague and overbroad curfew to overwhelmingly target Black people for arrests. It is ironic and unacceptable that protests that decried police violence were met with yet more police violence, efforts to evade accountability, and racial injustice. This is a sad legacy for the City.”

The City of Chicago’s far-reaching surveillance camera system continues to expand and remains largely opaque 10 years after the release of a report first expressing alarm about cameras in the City. In February 2011, the ACLU of Illinois first issued Chicago’s Video Surveillance Cameras: A Pervasive and Unregulated Threat to Our Privacy. At the time of the report, the City’s surveillance camera system linked together around 10,000 private and public cameras. Today, the number of cameras in the system exceeds, by some estimates, more than 30,000.  

Although the number of cameras has expanded, the system continues to operate without any regulation or privacy or regular public reporting about the camera system. To date, the Chicago City Council has never held a single hearing – let alone adopted an ordinance – to protect personal privacy in Chicago.  

The ACLU report asked the City to institute a moratorium on the deployment of any further cameras until a comprehensive review of the entire system, its reach, its costs and its impact on privacy could be conducted. 

“Even ten years on, it is not too late for the City of Chicago to act,” said Edwin C. Yohnka, Director of Communications and Public Policy at the ACLU of Illinois. “After a decade of rampant expansion of surveillance camera systems, we need a moratorium to allow time for appropriate privacy regulations with regular reporting to be put in place.” 

“Other cities – from the District of Columbia to Pittsburgh – have adopted regulations and privacy protections; Chicago can do it as well.”  

The ACLU’s call for a moratorium were based on the lack of any meaningful limits to protect privacy in this powerful and expanding camera system. The cameras to “pan-tilt-zoom” in order to allow police and other officials to use the cameras to track people from camera to camera and look inside cars and homes in some locations across the City and enables facial recognition technology and automatic tracking. There is no public audit regarding the use and effectiveness of the camera system.    

Chicago’s camera system is multi-faceted across the entire stretch of the City. In addition to thousands of surveillance cameras under the control of the Chicago Police Department, cameras from the CTA and parks system, as well as cameras from private businesses and residences in a wide range of neighborhoods. All of these cameras can be accessed in a command center of the Office of Emergency Management and Communications. The breadth of the surveillance is astounding. For example, it has been estimated that if a person walks north on Michigan Avenue from Roosevelt Road to Oak Street, their image would be shown on a camera viewable within the OEMC for the entire duration of the walk. 

The privacy concerns first raised by the ACLU report were confirmed four years ago by the findings of an investigation conducted by the Office of Inspector General. The report demonstrated that OEMC could not guarantee that only those with authorization to use and manipulate these powerful and ubiquitous cameras had access to the system.   

“The City long has claimed that they have privacy guidelines to govern the cameras,” added Yohnka. “But as the OIG report demonstrated, the City cannot show that only authorized personnel are using the cameras and who, if anyone, has ever been disciplined for violating those guidelines.” 

“Secret privacy policies are no policies at all.”