Summer 2024 Newsletter

Dear Friends, we hope this letter finds you safe and as well as possible. Thank you to everyone who has taken time to write to us. While we are unable to answer each letter individually, we read every single one of your letters. We love hearing from you!

We started the year by hosting Legislative Advocacy and Loved Ones Self-Advocacy Trainings, while legislative work in Springfield kept our policy team busy. In April, we led an advocacy day in Springfield to bring attention to our state’s solitary confinement policies. The regular legislative session concluded at the end of May. Keep in mind as you read the legislative updates that it is challenging for criminal legal system reform bills to move during an election year when many legislators are running for re-election. Throughout the summer, we will meet with legislators in their district offices to educate them about making the criminal legal system in Illinois more compassionate. We will return to Springfield for the veto session, which is scheduled for November 12-14 and November 19-21, 2024. In addition to the November veto session, there will be one more opportunity for bills in the current 103rd General Assembly to pass during the “lame-duck” session. The lame-duck session will likely be in early January of 2025 before the inauguration of legislators for the next General Assembly.

One big update we want to share is our founding Executive Director, Jobi Cates, whom so many of you know, stepped down in March 2024. Jobi is living with long COVID and has been on medical leave since late March 2023. She made the difficult decision to step down when it became clear that her health would not allow her to return to Restore Justice in her previous capacity. We all miss her, but she still supports our team and our work as Executive Director Emerita. We are thrilled that our Board of Directors unanimously appointed Wendell Robinson as our next Executive Director. Wendell initially joined Restore Justice as Jobi’s apprentice; he went on to create and lead the Future Leaders Apprenticeship Program (FLAP) to provide other returning citizens the support to turn their skills and passions for social good into leadership opportunities. Wendell served more than 25 years in the IDOC for a conviction at the age of 17; he was originally sentenced to life without parole as a child and is now leading Restore Justice into an exciting new chapter. We believe that the people who have been directly impacted by the criminal legal system should be in leadership positions guiding the work to reform it. Wendell brings so much passion and unique expertise to the role of Executive Director. We’re so grateful to Jobi for everything she built, and we’re excited about the future of our work under Wendell’s leadership as we continue to grow, fight to bring people home from prison, and support system-impacted people.

In this newsletter, we include information about how you and/or your loved ones can get involved, an overview of how a bill becomes a law, information about our current bills, updates on other bills that could impact you, summaries of recent litigation and court decisions, answers to some of your frequently asked questions, and updates from our team. We hope you find this newsletter informative. Please feel free to share it, write to us with questions, or just send us a quick note to say “Hi.”

CONTACTING IDOC FOR YOUR LOVED ONES

Encourage your loved ones to share concerns they may have, including but not limited to visiting (video and in-person), mail, lockdowns, medical issues, and any other infractions they experience or witness, with IDOC’s family liaison and the Constituent Services Office.

Your loved ones can reach the liaison by emailing DOC.Constituent.Services@illinois.gov or calling (217) 558-2200 ext. 6226. If they do contact the family liaison, please let Restore Justice know about their experience by writing to hello@restorejustice.org.

HOW A BILL BECOMES A LAW IN ILLINOIS 

The Illinois General Assembly, which includes the Illinois Senate and House of Representatives, usually convenes in Springfield twice each year.

The first period is known as the “regular session” and takes place from January through May. Generally, bills considered during the regular session need only a simple majority vote to pass. That means it takes 30 votes in the state Senate and 60 votes in the state House for a bill to pass. Most legislators try to get their bills passed during this time.

The second period, or “veto session,” happens for two weeks in or around October and November. Usually, the first order of business during the veto session is addressing any bills the Governor vetoed during the summer. However, the House and Senate can, and often do, take up new items. It is harder to pass a bill with an immediate effective date during the veto session because it requires a supermajority vote to pass in each chamber; that is 36 votes in the Senate and 71 votes in the House.

Bills can originate in either chamber (Senate or House). If a state senator introduces a bill in the Senate and it passes, it goes to the House. If a state representative introduces a bill in the House and it passes, it then goes to the Senate. The Illinois Constitution requires bills to be read into the record by title on three different days before a vote can be taken. Along the way, a bill is considered in each chamber by a committee that invites expert witnesses to hearings and reviews relevant research. If a bill is amended (changed) in the second chamber, it has to be voted on “concurrence” (agreed) again in the original chamber to “concur” with the changes.

Once a bill passes both chambers, it goes to the Governor. The Governor then has four options: (1) Sign the bill into law, (2) do nothing, in which case the bill automatically becomes a law after 60 days, (3) reject the bill entirely (this is a “veto”), or (4) issue an “amendatory veto” to suggest a small change to the bill. Legislators can reconsider the bill during the veto session if the Governor vetoes a bill or does an amendatory veto.

Bills only become law if they pass both chambers and are approved by the governor. While some bills may take effect immediately after being signed into law, most bills have specific dates they become effective. Bills can include a specific date (such as “effective immediately” or “on November 1, 2024). Bills that don’t have effective dates become law based on when they pass; bills that passed before or on May 31 take effect on January 1 of the following year. Bills that pass on June 1 or after take effect on June 1 of the next year.

At the end of the two-year General Assembly, the legislature usually convenes in early January for a “lame-duck” session and considers any legislation that has not passed yet. It’s called this because some of the lawmakers who return for this session will not be in the next General Assembly and are informally called “lame duck” members. We are currently near the end of the 103rd General Assembly. A lame-duck session is likely to be scheduled in early January 2025.

LEGISLATIVE UPDATES

January-May 2024 Legislative Session Updates

Key for bill statuses below: In the process for a bill to become a law, the bill has to pass through a committee and the floor of each chamber. After a bill passes both chambers, it is sent to the Governor. Bills that did not advance during the regular 2024 session are indicated below and might be considered by the state legislature later during this General Assembly.

*PASSED BOTH HOUSES AND SIGNED INTO LAW – This bill is now a law in Illinois.

*PASSED THROUGH A COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE OR SENATE – This bill passed through a committee but did not advance out of the House or Senate chamber.

*THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE – This bill did not pass a committee and did not advance out of the House or Senate chamber.

In the legislative updates, several terms that are used repeatedly are abbreviated as follows: Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC), Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice (IDJJ), mandatory supervised release (MSR), and Prisoner Review Board (PRB).

Please note that 2024 legislative initiatives and bills of interest are pending in the Illinois General Assembly and may be amended or changed. 

Restore Justice’s 2024 Legislative Initiatives

SB 2073 (Sen. Seth Lewis): This bill would allow people who were 20 or younger and sentenced after 1978 to submit a petition for parole consideration. This builds on two recent youthful parole laws; those laws, Public Act 102-1128 (2023) and Public Act 100-1182 (2019), created the first new parole opportunities in Illinois since our state abolished parole in 1978. The most recent law extends parole review for young people sentenced to natural life in prison; this ensures no children 17 and younger can receive a life without parole sentence. Retroactivity would ensure youthful parole opportunities are applied fairly and evenly and bring Illinois in line with most states that have retroactively and prospectively abolished life without parole for children and young adults. PASSED THROUGH A SENATE COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE SENATE.

HB 3375 (Rep. Lilian Jiménez/Sen. Adriane Johnson): This bill would create a narrow exception to the Post-Conviction Hearing Act. The bill would eliminate the “cause” requirement for people sentenced before they turned 21 who want to file new petitions citing their youth. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court created a new constitutional rule requiring states to consider youth and relevant characteristics when sentencing young people (Miller v. Alabama). In 2014, the Illinois General Assembly adopted these factors into state law with the bipartisan Public Act 99-0069. Illinois courts now must consider those factors when sentencing people 18 and younger in adult court. The Illinois Supreme Court later extended the Miller factors to 18-21-year-olds (People v. Harris). Under current Illinois law, it is extremely difficult for a person to file more than one post-conviction petition, and the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that Miller isn’t a sufficient reason for a person to be able to file a second petition. This bill would allow anyone sentenced under 21 to file a petition to have their youth considered. PASSED THROUGH THE HOUSE AND A SENATE COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE SENATE.

HB 4828 House Amendment 1 (Rep. Kevin Olickal/Sen. Robert Peters): There is no publicly available data about who is subjected to restrictive housing, why, and for how long in the IDOC. This bill would require the IDOC to publish data on the use of restrictive housing in Illinois in online quarterly and annual reports. It would also require the Department to verify the accuracy of the data. The data reporting requirements would be enforceable in circuit court. Led by Restore Justice, the Uptown People’s Law Center, and the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights. PASSED THROUGH THE HOUSE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE SENATE.

HB 1501 (Rep. La Shawn Ford): Illinois’ mandatory gun enhancements are the most severe in the country. Judges are required to add 15, 20, or 25 years to life to prison sentences of people who had firearms during the commission of certain felonies. Fifteen years are added if a firearm is possessed but not discharged, 20 are added if the gun is discharged with no injuries, and 25 years to life are added if there is a death or grievous injury. In 2015, Illinois made firearm enhancements discretionary for children younger than 18. HB 1501 would make firearm enhancements discretionary for 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds. This bill would provide that a court consider youthful mitigating factors when determining an appropriate sentence for people who committed an offense when they were under 21 years old. PASSED THROUGH A HOUSE COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

HB 3807 (Rep. Maurice West): Mandatory minimums are a one-size-fits-all approach to sentencing that has taken away judges’ discretion and forced extreme sentencing of youth without consideration of the individual circumstances of a case. Long sentences leave people in prison years or even decades after they likely have aged out of crime. To fix this, this bill would give judges the discretion to consider certain mitigating factors and decide appropriate sentences for people younger than 21 on an individualized basis. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2257/HB 4828 (Sen. Robert Peters/Rep. Kevin Olickal): In Illinois, state law does not limit the length of time a person can be held in isolated confinement, which violates an internationally recognized standard called the Nelson Mandela Rules. Under the Nelson Mandela Rules, more than 15 days in isolation is considered torture. The Nelson Mandela Act, also known as the Isolated Confinement Restriction Act, would limit the use of solitary confinement in prisons, jails, and immigration facilities and bring Illinois into compliance with the Nelson Mandela Rules. It would require everyone to be allowed out of their cells at least 4 hours a day or, when a person needs to be kept in a cell for more than 20 hours a day, that can only last 10 days in any 180-period. It would also require the IDOC to post online quarterly reports on the use of isolated confinement. Led by Restore Justice, the Uptown People’s Law Center, and the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2258/HB 3964 (Sen. Robert Peters/Rep. Kelly Cassidy): In 2023, the Illinois Resentencing Task Force recommended prospective and retroactive reform and called for the General Assembly to create a new pathway to reduce Illinois’ prison population through resentencing. This legislation would incorporate the Task Force’s sixteen recommendations. It would establish a process for people who have served ten years to petition the courts for another look at their sentences. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2259/HB 3901 (Sen. Robert Peters/Rep. Justin Slaughter): Illinois’ so-called “truth-in-sentencing” (TIS) law is one of the biggest drivers of our state’s over-incarceration. It severely limits how much time people convicted of certain offenses can earn off their sentences. Earning “good time” incentivizes people to participate in programming, which is one of the safest ways to reduce the prison population and prepare people to return home. This bill would allow people with TIS sentences to earn up to 15% off their sentences. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 3400 (Rep. Celina Villanueva): Under Illinois’ accountability theory, it is legal for a person to be charged with and convicted of a crime they did not commit and also did not plan, agree to, or intend to commit. In fact, the person need not have been present. People currently charged through accountability can receive the same term of years in prison as the primaries in their case. SB3400 would ensure people convicted under accountability are charged and sentenced based on their actual involvement in the crime. This bill would require specific intent so a person is held responsible for their intended actions and ensure the possible punishment matches the person’s actual involvement. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

Bills of Interest – Signed into Law

HB 3241 (Rep. Camille Lilly/Sen. Kimberly Lightford): The Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council will study and identify discriminatory practices in sentencing across the State and recommend ways to remedy those discriminatory practices to the Governor and General Assembly. PASSED BOTH HOUSES AND SIGNED INTO LAW EFFECTIVE 7/19/24: PUBLIC ACT 103-657.

HB 4500 Senate Amendment 1 (Rep. Kam Buckner/Sen. Javier Cervantes):  This bill would change the titles “Unlawful Use of a Weapon” to “Unlawful Possession of a Weapon” and “Armed Habitual Criminal” to “Unlawful Possession of a Firearm by a Repeat Felony Offender.” Initiative of Justice Advisory Council, Cabrini Green Legal Aid, and the Law Office of the Cook County Public Defender. PASSED BOTH HOUSES AND SIGNED INTO LAW EFFECTIVE  1/2/25: PUBLIC ACT 103-0822.

HB 5431 House Amendments 1 & 3 (Rep. Cassidy/Sen. Mary Edly-Allen): This bill will create statewide protection and require humane treatment of pregnant and postpartum people in custody. Restraints will be banned in all county jails and IDOC throughout pregnancy and six weeks following delivery (unless there is a documented security concern). It will increase supplemental nutrition for those who are pregnant or lactating and require the posting of rights, including access to reproductive health options. Electronic monitoring anklets will be removed when someone is delivering a baby or if a doctor requests that a pregnant person’s monitor be removed. All facilities will submit an annual report of the number of pregnant people who are detained or incarcerated each year, as well as the number of people who give birth or miscarry in custody. Initiative of Women’s Justice Institute. PASSED BOTH HOUSES AND SIGNED INTO LAW EFFECTIVE 1/1/25: PUBLIC ACT 103-745.

SB 426 Senate Amendment 1 (Sen. Laura Murphy/Rep. Will Guzzardi): This bill would allow the IDJJ to establish emerging adult programs for people ages 18 to 21 who have been committed to the IDOC. This would allow qualifying 18- to 21-year-olds to transfer to IDJJ facilities to participate in developmentally appropriate educational services and individual or group therapy, case management, vocational training, and higher education opportunities. PASSED BOTH HOUSES AND SIGNED INTO LAW EFFECTIVE 1/1/25: PUBLIC ACT 103-0875.

SB 2803 (Sen. Christopher Belt/Rep. Justin Slaughter): This bill will require the Secretary of State to issue a standard Illinois Identification Card to a person incarcerated at IDOC, IDJJ, a Federal Bureau of Prisons facility located in Illinois, or a county jail or county department of corrections (rather than only at IDOC or IDJJ). PASSED BOTH HOUSES AND SIGNED INTO LAW EFFECTIVE 8/6/24: PUBLIC ACT 103-0782.

SB 3285 (Sen. Robert Peters/Rep. Kelly Cassidy): This bill would amend the Gender-Based Violence Act to ensure that criminalized survivors who were sentenced pursuant to fully negotiated plea deals are eligible to petition for resentencing. This is critical for many survivors who did not have their experiences of abuse considered in their original sentences. Initiative of Women’s Justice Institute. PASSED BOTH HOUSES AND SIGNED INTO LAW EFFECTIVE 1/1/25: PUBLIC ACT 103-0968.

Bills of Interest – Pending

HB 46 House Amendment 2 (Rep. La Shawn Ford): This bill would require IDOC to establish rules and regulations for restrictive housing. People would be placed in restrictive housing when they pose a direct threat to the safety of persons or a threat to the safe and secure operations of the facility. Each restrictive housing placement would be reviewed within 24 hours by a higher authority who was not involved in the initial decision. Restrictive housing units would allow people placed in them to converse with and be observed by IDOC staff and have outdoor exercise areas. A review of each person in restrictive housing would be conducted every 7 days for the first 60 days and at least every 30 days thereafter. A mental health appraisal would be completed within 7 days of placement. People in restrictive housing would be observed by a correctional officer twice per hour, but no more than 40 minutes apart, on an irregular schedule. People in restrictive housing would receive daily visits from the senior correctional supervisor, daily health care rounds, visits from program staff at least weekly, and opportunities for visits. All people in restrictive housing would receive medication, suitable clothing, and access to basic personal items, reading materials, and legal materials, as well as laundry and hair care services. People in restrictive housing would be able to write and receive letters on the same basis as people in the general population. People in restrictive housing would receive a minimum of one hour of exercise outside their cells 5 days per week unless there are safety or security concerns. They would be allowed telephone privileges to access the judicial process and family emergencies as determined by the facility administrator. People in restrictive housing who are lactating would have access to breast pumps. IDOC would establish a multidisciplinary review program to facilitate the reintegration of people from restrictive housing into the general population. THIS BILL PASSED THROUGH A COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

HB 676 (Rep. Maura Hirschauer/Sen. Don Harmon): Changes to the Illinois Domestic Violence Act and Firearm Restraining Order Act would include requiring firearm removal to occur during service of an emergency order of protection when granted by a judge. It would clarify existing language in statute for a judge to issue a warrant when granting the firearm remedy to allow for consistent firearm removal enforcement across the state. It would close a loophole in the current statute by barring the transfer of firearms ownership when the firearm remedy is granted. Furthermore, it would add dating partners and ex-dating partners to the list of petitioners in the Firearm Restraining Orders Act to create additional avenues of firearm relief when an order of protection is not needed. Other provisions include authorizing county boards to regulate/prohibit the discharge of firearms in any residential area (defined as an area within 1,000 yards of at least 3 single or multi-family residential structures), preventing individuals from possessing prepackaged explosive devices without a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card and expanding the First Time Weapon Offense Program to people of all ages. PASSED THE HOUSE AND PENDING IN THE SENATE.

HB 681 Senate Amendment 2 & 5 (Rep. Kelly Cassidy/Sen. Don Harmon): This bill would require the PRB to publish on its website and provide information to registered victims on how to submit a victim impact statement to be considered by the PRB. Within 24 hours, the PRB would inform a victim of the early release of a person from state custody if the victim has previously requested that information. Prior to participating in a vote as a PRB member, members would complete annual domestic and gender-based violence training. Prior to entering an order discharging a person from MSR or parole, the PRB would provide a 30-day opportunity to comment to any registered victim and run a LEADS (Law Enforcement Agency Database System) report. The PRB would publish on its website the names and identification numbers of people alleged to have violated parole or MSR, the Board’s decision about whether to revoke parole or MSR, and the names of voting members. This information would only be available while the person is in state custody. This bill would create the PRB Task Force to study and make recommendations to the General Assembly and Governor on ways to improve the PRB. The PRB would make all en banc open meetings and all parole, aftercare release, and MSR revocation hearings available to the public for live broadcast on the PRB’s website. The broadcast of all recordings would remain available for public viewing on the website for a minimum of 18 months. Upon approval, the minutes of all PRB open meetings would be made available within 24 hours on the PRB website. A petition for an order of protection would not be denied because the petitioner or the respondent is incarcerated at the time of the petition filing. PASSED THROUGH THE SENATE AND A HOUSE COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE ON CONCURRENCE.

HB 989 (Rep. La Shawn Ford): This bill would ensure that people convicted of a felony or under sentence in a correctional institution have their voting rights restored within 14 days of their conviction. In provisions concerning temporary branch polling places at county jails, it would provide that a voter entitled to vote in another county, other than the county in which the jail is located, shall be allowed to vote only by mail. Would provide that a correctional institution shall make available to a person in its custody current election resource material from the State Board of Elections and current election resource material that is requested by a person in custody and received at the correctional institution from a local election authority in response to the request. It would create the Post-Conviction Task Force to strengthen and improve provisions that restore the right to vote to a person convicted of a felony or otherwise under sentence in a correctional institution or jail. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 1015 House Amendment 2 (Rep. Mary Flowers/Sen. Elgie Sims): A petition for a certificate of innocence would state facts in sufficient detail to permit the court to find that the petitioner is likely to succeed at trial in proving that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offenses for which they were convicted (rather than innocent of the offenses charged in the indictment or information) or that their facts or omissions for which they were convicted (instead of for those charged in the indictment or information) did not constitute a felony or misdemeanor against the State of Illinois. In order to obtain a certificate of innocence, the petitioner would prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offenses for which they were convicted (rather than offenses charged in the indictment or information) or that their acts or omissions for which they were convicted (instead of those charged in the indictment or information) did not constitute a felony or misdemeanor against the State of Illinois. This bill would apply to petitions filed on and after September 22, 2008. THIS BILL PASSED THE HOUSE AND A SENATE COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE SENATE.

HB 1033 (Rep. Mary Flowers): This bill would remove electronics, video recording devices, computers, and computer peripheral equipment used in online educational courses approved by the Director of Corrections or the chief administrative officer of the penal institution from the definition of “electronic contraband.” It would provide that IDOC educational programs include online instruction. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 1053 House Amendment 1 (Rep. Rita Mayfield): This bill would repeal the armed habitual criminal statute in 720 ILCS 5/24-1.7. It would also repeal the general recidivism and habitual criminal provisions in 730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-95. THIS BILL PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

HB 1091 (Rep. Mary Flowers): If a person has been found guilty by a judge or jury after a trial, the prosecutor would file with the court at the sentencing hearing a verified written statement signed by the prosecutor setting forth their final offer, if any, of any specified sentence and any charge to be dismissed or not charged in a plea discussion in exchange for a plea of guilty from the person charged and waiver of their right to trial. Would also provide in any sentence that a person shall not be punished by the imposition of a heavier or greater sentence merely because they exercised their constitutional right to be tried by an impartial judge or jury. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 1092 (Rep. Mary Flowers): This bill would require IDOC and IDJJ to provide educational and vocational programs in each of its institutions and facilities for all individuals who are incarcerated. Teachers holding Professional Educator Licenses issued by the State Superintendent of Education under the School Code must be allowed into institutions. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 1203 (Rep. Mary Flowers): This bill would amend the Court of Claims Act. It would delete language regarding the amount a court shall award to a person for time unjustly served in prison when the person imprisoned received a pardon on the ground of innocence of the crime for which they were imprisoned, or they received a certificate of innocence. Would provide instead that the court shall award $50,000 per year during which the person was wrongfully imprisoned, including the number of years the person was awaiting trial. Would provide that the court shall award attorney’s fees in an amount not to exceed 25% of the award granted. Would provide that the changes made by the amendatory act apply to all claims pending or filed on or after the effective date. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 1245/SB 75 (Rep. Justin Slaughter/Sen. Robert Peters): This bill would create the Second Chance Public Health and Safety Act to establish the Department of Returning Resident Affairs to develop and administer the Second Chance State Program for returning citizens. It would provide for the appointment of a Director of Returning Resident Affairs who was previously incarcerated for at least a year and has experience working for a community-based organization as well as an Assistant Director and a General Counsel. Initiative of Illinois Alliance for Reentry and Justice. HB 1245 PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE. SB 75 DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 1380 (Rep. Kam Buckner): This bill would create the Wrongful Prosecution Commission Act. The Wrongful Prosecution Commission would be an independent commission under the Illinois Human Rights Commission to conduct inquiries into claims of wrongful prosecution. A “claim of wrongful prosecution” would be a claim by or on behalf of a living person convicted of a crime in a county of more than 3,000,000 inhabitants asserting that the person was falsely incriminated for the crime and there is credible evidence related to allegations of the use of false evidence to obtain the conviction. If the Commission concluded there is sufficient evidence of wrongful prosecution to merit judicial review, the Chair of the Commission would request that the Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County assign the case to a trial judge for consideration. This bill would apply to claims of wrongful prosecution filed no later than 5 years after the effective date of the Act. The Act would be repealed 10 years after the effective date. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 1390 (Rep. Jackie Haas): This bill would provide that a period of probation, a term of periodic imprisonment, or conditional discharge shall not be imposed for a felony offense that requires registration under the Sex Offender Registration Act. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 2045 (Rep. Justin Slaughter): This elder parole bill would allow a person who is 55 years old and has served at least 25 consecutive years of incarceration to petition for parole. Parole hearings would be held by a panel of at least 8 members of the PRB, and a majority vote would be necessary to grant the petitioner parole. If denied, the PRB would provide a rehearing no later than three years after the denial. These provisions would apply retroactively. THIS BILL PASSED THROUGH A COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

HB 2067 (Rep. Maurice West/Sen. Michael Halpin): This bill would allow individuals who are incarcerated in an IDOC facility to make a transfer request every six months. Regarding the IDJJ, a person who is incarcerated or their guardian may request a transfer at any time. PASSED THE HOUSE AND DID NOT ADVANCE IN THE SENATE.

HB 2245 (Rep. Curtis Tarver): This bill would amend the Freedom of Information Act to include the judicial branch. It would exempt preliminary drafts, notes, recommendations, memoranda, and other records in which opinions are expressed, or policies or actions are formulated, that pertain to the preparation of judicial opinions and orders. Judicial records already subject to fees imposed under the Clerks of Courts Act would be exempt. Initiative of the Better Government Association and Court Transparency Coalition. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 2956 (Rep. Dan Caulkins): This bill would create the Firearm Crime Charging and Sentencing Accountability and Transparency Act. It would provide that in a criminal case if a person is charged with an offense involving the illegal use or possession of a firearm and subsequently enters into a plea agreement in which the charge will be reduced to a lesser offense or a non-weapons offense in exchange for a guilty plea, at or before the time of sentencing, the state’s attorney shall file with the court a written statement of their reasons in support of the plea agreement, which specifically states why the offense or offenses of conviction resulting from the plea agreement do not include the originally charged weapons offense. Would provide that in a case in which the original charge is or was for an offense involving the illegal use or possession of a firearm, if the person charged pleads guilty or is found guilty of the original charge, a lesser offense, or a non-weapons offense, in imposing the sentence, the judge would set forth in a written sentencing order their reasons for imposing the sentence or accepting the plea agreement. This bill would also provide for adult prosecution of a minor who was at least 16 years of age at the time of the offense and who is charged with armed robbery or aggravated vehicular hijacking while armed with a firearm. This bill would provide for enhanced penalties for committing various offenses with a firearm. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 2970 (Rep. Christopher Davidsmeyer): This bill would create the offense of unlawful publication of criminal activity. It would provide that a person commits the offense when they knowingly make a video record or live video of a crime while the crime is being committed and transmits or uploads the video of the crime to social media. A person who commits unlawful publication of criminal activity would be sentenced to the same penalty as the penalty for the crime uploaded to a social media site. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3010 (Rep. Dan Ugaste): This bill would increase penalties by one class for unlawful use of weapons when a person knowingly: (1) carries or possesses in any vehicle or concealed on or about their person except when on their land or in their own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person’s permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun, taser, or other firearm; or (2) carries or possesses on or about their person, upon any public street, alley, or other public lands within the corporate limits of a municipality except when an invitee in or on the public street, alley, or other public lands, for the purpose of the display of the weapon or the lawful commerce in weapons, or except when on their land or in their own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person’s permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun, taser, or other firearm. Would provide that a first offense of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon committed with a firearm by a person older than 18 where certain factors exist is a Class 3 felony (rather than a Class 4 felony), for which the person shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than two years and not more than five years. Would increase the penalty by one class for unlawful possession of firearms. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3025 (Rep. Cassidy): This bill would provide that all conditions of parole or MSR shall be imposed by the PRB unless the conditions of release are being imposed or modified by a parole agent. Any condition imposed by the PRB would not be more restrictive than necessary to: (1) comply with the person’s gender-responsive risks, assets, and needs assessment; (2) achieve public safety; and (3) facilitate successful reintegration back into the community. Parole agents would not modify an existing condition of release or add additional conditions of release without approval from the PRB unless doing so under a rule adopted by the IDOC. Parole or MSR would not be revoked solely for failure to comply with a condition of release that requires the parolee or releasee to affirmatively do something unless there is sufficient evidence the failure was willful. When considering whether the failure was willful, the parole agent and the PRB would consider the person’s ability to pay and the availability of programs or other resources necessary for compliance. It would provide that conditions of parole or MSR may (rather than shall) include referral to an alcohol or drug abuse treatment program, as appropriate, only when necessary to comply with trauma and gender-informed risk, assets, and needs assessment. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3252 (Rep. Robert Rita): This bill would provide that the penalty for contributing to the criminal delinquency of a minor if the offense committed is vehicular hijacking is a Class X felony for which the person shall be sentenced to not less than 12 years of imprisonment and not more than 60 years of imprisonment. Would provide that if the offense committed is aggravated vehicular hijacking, the penalty for contributing to criminal delinquency of a minor is a Class X felony for which the person shall be sentenced to not less than 30 years and not more than 60 years of imprisonment. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3315 (Rep. Will Guzzardi): This bill would provide that if a person dies while incarcerated in an IDOC facility, the chief administrative officer of the Department or institution must order an autopsy to be conducted by a physician contracted by IDOC or the county coroner. The autopsy results would be publicly shared and posted on the Department’s website. PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

HB 3335 (Rep. Kevin Olickal): This bill would allow IDOC to provide temporary housing assistance to a person being released from a correctional institution through rental vouchers to prevent housing instability or homelessness. Temporary housing assistance would not exceed a period of six months. IDOC would establish policies for prioritizing funds available for housing vouchers for those at risk of experiencing homelessness while taking recidivism into consideration. PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

HB 3373/SB 2129 (Rep. Carol Ammons/Sen. Celina Villanueva): This bill would provide that people who are incarcerated, including those serving natural life sentences, would be eligible for earned reentry if they have served a term of imprisonment specified as follows: (1) for the first year following the effective date of the act, a person is eligible for earned reentry if they have served 35 consecutive years: (2) for the second year following the effective date of the act, a person is eligible for earned reentry if they have served 25 consecutive years; and for the third year following the effective date of the act and thereafter, a person is eligible for earned reentry if they have served at least 20 consecutive years. Every person would bring legal counsel or an advocate to the earned reentry hearing. People would not be barred from programming because their maximum out date is not in the near future. Incarcerated people would attend and testify at their earned reentry hearing in person or by video conference or would have counsel or an advocate read a statement. The PRB would conduct all hearings for earned reentry. This bill would apply retroactively. Initiative of Parole Illinois. HB 3373 PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE. SB 2129 DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3378/SB 2077 (Rep. Justin Slaughter/Sen. Robert Peters): This bill would end reincarceration for minor, technical violations of MSR conditions. It would reward people who do not violate MSR by awarding a credit for each day without a violation. Initiative of the Illinois Prison Project and Chicago Appleseed. HB 3378 PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE. SB 2077 DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3380/SB 2079 (Rep. Justin Slaughter/Sen. Robert Peters): This bill would repeal Illinois’ three strikes law, returning discretion to judges. It would allow people currently incarcerated under Illinois’ three strikes law to seek a resentencing. Initiative of the Illinois Prison Project and Chicago Appleseed. HB 3380 PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE. SB 2079 DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3381/SB 2078 (Rep. Justin Slaughter/Sen. Robert Peters): This bill would reclassify felony murder from first-degree to second-degree murder. It would allow prosecutors to consider the extent of a person’s involvement when making charging decisions. It would allow prosecutors to charge an accomplice with second-degree murder while retaining their right to charge principals with first-degree murder. People currently convicted under the felony-murder rule would be allowed to seek resentencing. Initiative of the Illinois Prison Project and Chicago Appleseed. THESE BILLS DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3418 (Rep. Justin Slaughter/Sen. Laura Murphy): This bill would create the Securing All Futures through Equitable Reinvestment (SAFER) Communities Act. It would provide that the Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity create a program to award grants to community navigators for specified purposes, including wage reimbursements for employers that employ certain formerly incarcerated people. Would repeal a tax credit for wages paid to people with a felony conviction and establish a credit for wages paid to returning citizens. PASSED THE HOUSE AND PENDING IN THE SENATE.

HB 3495 (Rep. Dave Severin): This bill would restore the death penalty for the first-degree murder of a peace officer killed while performing their duties, to prevent the performance of their duties, or in retaliation for performing their official duties, if the person charged knew or should have known that the murdered individual was a peace officer. In such cases, the State Appellate Defender would not be appointed to serve as trial counsel but would provide the trial counsel with legal assistance and the assistance of expert witnesses, investigators, and mitigation specialists. This bill would create the Capital Crimes Litigation Act of 2023. It would provide specified funding and resources for cases in which a sentence of death is an authorized disposition. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3534 (Rep. Jay Hoffman): This bill would provide that a person is legally accountable for the conduct of another when, acting as an aggressor, they cause another to use force in defense of himself or another, and that use of force is the proximate cause of injury to a third party. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3596 (Rep. Maurice West): This bill would amend the Crimes Victim Compensation Act. It would include additional expenses and costs in the definition of “pecuniary loss.” It removes language providing that: no compensation may be granted while the applicant or victim is held in a correctional institution; and a victim who has been convicted of a felony may apply for assistance at any time, but no award of compensation may be considered until the applicant meets certain requirements. It would remove the time limit and law enforcement notification requirements for submitting an application for compensation. It would require the Attorney General to create a process for applying for emergency awards. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3703/SB 2158 (Rep. Camille Lilly/Sen. Kimberly Lightford): This bill would decrease the restrictions in which it is unlawful for a person convicted of a child sex offense with duty to register to knowingly reside 250 feet from a school building, playground, property comprising any school that persons under the age of 18 attend, or other specified child care facilities. These provisions would not apply if the person’s property were built prior to the date on which the institution opened or received a license to provide programs. This bill would remove the reporting requirement for persons lacking fixed housing. If a person lacks fixed housing, they would not be required to provide documentation of the registering address. It would make “failure to register” a misdemeanor (from a felony) and reduce the 10-year registration time for Murder and Violent Offenses Against Youth registries to five years. This bill would apply retroactively. Initiative of the Chicago 400. THESE BILLS DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 3740 (Rep. Carol Ammons/Sen. Robert Peters): This bill would amend the Illinois Higher Education Student Assistance Act to make incarcerated students eligible for Monetary Award Program funds, Illinois’ largest need-based grant program. Initiative of IL-CHEP’s Freedom to Learn Campaign. PASSED THE HOUSE AND DID NOT ADVANCE IN THE SENATE.

HB 3818 (Rep. Carol Ammons): This bill would require the Board of Higher Education to establish the Commission on Higher Education in Prison. Would provide that the Commission shall be responsible for assisting the Board in implementing and coordinating the recommendations of the Illinois Higher Education in Prison Task Force. Would provide that within the first three months after its first meeting, the Commission would identify recommendations to implement, with a minimum of three recommendations per year. Would provide that any recommendations that are identified shall expand access to quality higher education in prison and propel the State to being a national exemplar in the area. This bill would also set forth provisions concerning Commission membership, meetings, responsibilities, and dissolution. PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

HB 4283 (Rep. Kevin Schmidt): This bill would create the Gun Crime Charging and Sentencing Accountability and Transparency Act. It would provide that in a criminal case, if a defendant is charged with an offense involving the illegal use or possession of a firearm and subsequently enters into a plea agreement in which the charge will be reduced to a lesser offense or a non-weapons offense in exchange for a plea of guilty, at or before the time of sentencing, the State’s Attorney shall file with the court a written statement of their reasons in support of the plea agreement, which would specifically state why the offense or offenses of conviction resulting from the plea agreement do not include the originally charged weapons offense. It would provide that the written statement would be part of the court record in the case and a copy shall be provided to any person upon request. It would provide that in a criminal case in which the original charge is or was for an offense involving the illegal use or possession of a firearm, if a defendant pleads guilty or is found guilty of the original charge or lesser offense or a non-weapons offense, in imposing sentence, the judge would set forth in a written sentencing order their reasons for imposing the sentence or accepting the plea agreement. A copy of the written sentencing order would be provided to any person upon request. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 4332 (Rep. John Cabello): This bill would increase penalties for unlawful use or possession of weapons by a person in the custody of IDOC facilities. It would provide that a person commits unlawful sale or delivery of firearms when they knowingly: (1) sell or give a firearm to a person who has been convicted of a felony or who is a streetgang member or (2) sell or give a firearm that has been purchased or acquired out of state to a person who has been convicted of a felony or is a streetgang member. It would provide that a violation is a Class 1 felony and a second or subsequent violation would be non-probationable. It would delete a provision that the first offense had to be committed when the person was 21 years of age or older to be adjudged a habitual criminal. It would provide that a person who attained the age of 18 at the time of the third offense may be adjudged a habitual criminal. In the Class X sentencing provision for a defendant over 21 years of age who is convicted of a Class 1 or Class 2 felony after twice being convicted of a Class 1 or Class 2 felony, it would delete a provision that the first offense had to be committed when the person was 21 years of age or older and would delete a provision that the offenses had to be forcible felonies. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 4770 (Rep. Will Guzzardi): In the provisions listing factors that would be accorded weight in favor of imposing a term of imprisonment or may be considered by the court as reasons to impose a more severe sentence, this bill would delete as a factor that the sentence is necessary to deter others from committing the same crime. PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

HB 4576 House Amendment 1 (Rep. Yolanda Morris): This bill would provide that IDOC adopt a rule, in consultation with a librarian who has a minimum of a Master’s degree in Library Science or Library and Information Science from an accredited college or university, appointed by the Director of Corrections, prohibiting the chief administrative officer or other correctional officer from summarily rejecting for use or receipt of books, publications, or library materials. It would also prohibit establishing lists of banned publications to people who are incarcerated unless those books, publications, or library materials: (1) are detrimental to the security of the correctional institution or facility; (2) constitute child pornography as defined in the Criminal Code of 2012; or (3) may be used to facilitate criminal activity. The rule would provide an appeal process. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 4829 (Rep. Kevin Olickal): This bill would create the Independent Corrections Oversight Committee Act, which would establish the Independent Corrections Oversight Committee. This Committee would be separate and independent from the IDOC and not staffed, operated, or funded by corrections officials. The Committee would appoint the Independent Corrections Ombudsperson. Members of the Committee would be able to (1) access and inspect correctional institutions upon demand; (2) enter any part of any correctional facility, at any time, without notice, to conduct inspections, respond to or investigate complaints, and monitor facility conditions and the quality of services provided to people who are incarcerated; (3) obtain documents and data upon demand, including documents or data from the IDOC, for which IDOC must respond to such requests promptly and fully; and (4) talk with people who are incarcerated or staff confidentially and have unmonitored conversations with people who are incarcerated or staff in a safe environment. The Committee would investigate any unresolved complaints if IDOC has failed to do so after all administrative remedies have been exhausted. The Committee would also hold regular public hearings to present, review, and discuss data, reports, and findings. The Committee may issue recommendations, including policy and legislative proposals. Effective immediately. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 4845 (Rep. Kevin Olickal): This bill would create the IDOC Independent Ombudsperson Law to increase transparency and accountability in the State correction system. The Independent Corrections Ombudsperson would: (1) monitor and inspect facilities of IDOC; (2) investigate unresolved complaints from people who are incarcerated, their families, and corrections staff regarding correctional facility conditions and treatment of people who are incarcerated; (3) create a uniform reporting system and collect and analyze data related to deaths, suicides, sexual and physical assaults, lockdowns, staff vacancies, persons who are incarcerated-to-staff ratios, visits, and use of solitary confinement in correctional facilities; (4) conduct regular inspections of correctional facilities at least once every year for facilities not meeting standards, and at least once every 36 months for facilities that are meeting standards; and (5) publicly issue periodic facility inspection reports and an annual report with recommendations and a summary of data. The Independent Corrections Ombudsperson would serve a term of 6 years and only be removed from office by the Governor for cause. The Independent Corrections Ombudsperson would not be a current or former employee of the IDOC, the IDJJ, or a contractor for those departments. All reports of the Independent Corrections Ombudsperson would be made available to the public online and provided to the Director of Corrections, the Governor, the Attorney General, and the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 5037 House Amendment 1 (Rep. Kelly Cassidy): This bill would make mandatory sentence enhancements for firearms discretionary for numerous Class X offenses and First Degree Murder. The proposal would require someone to be personally displaying the firearm or to be personally armed with the firearm for the 15-year enhancement to be applied. It would also delete provisions that permit the court to impose a term of natural life imprisonment upon the defendant when a person discharges a firearm that proximately causes great bodily harm, permanent disability, permanent disfigurement, or death to another person. It would exclude co-defendants who didn’t carry or use a firearm from mandatory firearm enhancements. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 5132 (Rep. Dave Severin): In addition to any other penalty provided by law, an additional one year of imprisonment would be added to the sentence of a person who brings contraband into a penal institution or for unauthorized bringing or delivery of contraband into a penal institution by an employee by using an unmanned aerial vehicle. A person who knowingly and intentionally operates an unmanned aerial vehicle below the navigable airspace overlying a State penal institution would be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. A person who knowingly and intentionally captures images or data of a State penal institution through the operation of an unmanned aerial vehicle would be guilty of a Class 4 felony. This provision would not apply to any employee who operates an unmanned aerial vehicle within the scope of their employment, or a person who receives prior permission from the penal institution. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 5219 (Rep. Barbara Hernandez): This bill would provide every person who is incarcerated with one day of sentence credit for each day spent in prison, effectively eliminating the current “truth-in-sentencing” policy that a person must serve various percentages for particular offenses. People who are serving a term of natural life would be eligible to accumulate sentence credit so that in the event that their sentence is reduced to something less than a sentence of natural life, it can thereafter be credited toward their new sentence. Within six months of the bill’s effective date, IDOC would recalculate each person’s release date by crediting each person one day sentence credit for each day the person has spent in prison on the current sentence. Initiative of FAMM. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 5257 (Rep. Hoan Huynh): This bill would provide that a person who is incarcerated in IDOC is entitled to make free telephone calls from the correctional institution or facility. Neither the IDOC nor its agents would be able to adopt rules that charge a person who is incarcerated per telephone call made. IDOC would be able to adopt rules determining the length of each call, how many times each day a person who is incarcerated may make telephone calls, and may prohibit calls for illegal purposes. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

HB 5487 (Rep. Justin Slaughter): This bill would end excessive MSR in Illinois, which currently lacks an efficient early discharge mechanism. This bill would allow individuals to be discharged from MSR upon meeting all conditions. Initiative of Illinois Prison Project. THIS BILL PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE BUT DID NOT ADVANCE OUT OF THE HOUSE.

SB 87 (Sen. Laura Fine): This bill would provide that all IDOC facilities provide every person with access to bathing facilities once a day. In the case of a lockdown, the bill would provide that access to bathing facilities would be restricted for the first two days. If the lockdown continued for more than two days, people would be provided with access to bathing facilities no less than once every two days for the entirety of the lockdown. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 1483 (Sen. Mike Simmons): This bill would provide that people convicted of a felony or under sentence in a correctional institution would have their right to vote restored no later than 14 days following the conviction or five days before an election following the person’s confinement. Election authorities would be required to collaborate with a correctional institution to facilitate mail voting for eligible voters. This bill would also require correctional institutions to make election resource materials available to people in custody and abide by the requirements of state, local, and federal laws pertaining to language and disability access. The State Board of Elections would be required to create an annual data report in conjunction with correctional institutions regarding compliance with provisions. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 1596 (Sen. Jason Plummer): This bill would reinstate the death penalty. It would change aggravating factors for which the death penalty would be imposed. It would reinstate the Capital Litigation Trust Fund and abolish the Death Penalty Abolition Fund. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 1603 (Sen. Chapin Rose): This bill would change the amount of sentence credit people serving sentences for bringing contraband into a penal institution would be eligible to receive. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 1830 (Sen. Elgie Sims): This bill would reclassify the penalty for possession of small amounts of drugs from a felony to a Class A misdemeanor and offer behavioral health assessments and access to treatment for people who need it, rather than incarceration. This bill would also provide that an individual may file a petition to expunge certain felony charges related to drug possession. Each county’s State’s Attorney’s office would be required to submit annual reports to the Sentencing Policy Advisory Council regarding such petitions. Initiative of ACLU-Illinois. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2018 (Sen. Don Harmon): This bill would establish a Life Skills Reentry Center for Women in IDOC. The Center would offer educational, job readiness, and cognitive behavior therapy courses to women who are incarcerated and have one to four years remaining on their sentences and qualify for placement at the Center. Programs offered at the Center would include: prevocational and reentry-related life skills, adult basic education, high school equivalency courses, literacy courses, creative writing courses, and training for vocations including welding, manufacturing, restaurant management, and custodial maintenance. Women assigned to the Center may participate in Alcoholics Anonymous, other 12-step programs for recovery from alcoholism or substance use disorder, worship and chaplaincy services, religious studies, family days, job partnership programs, substance use disorder therapy programs, critical thinking, cultural self-awareness programs, and various mental health services, including art therapy. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2077 (Sen. Robert Peters): This bill would delete a provision that the PRB would revoke parole or MSR for violations of the requirement that, if the parolee or releasee was convicted for an offense that would qualify them as a sexual predator under the Sex Offender Registration Act on or after January 1, 2007, they wear an approved electronic monitoring device for the duration of their parole, MSR term, or extended MSR term, and if convicted for an offense of criminal sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual assault, predatory criminal sexual assault of a child, criminal sexual abuse, aggravated criminal sexual abuse, or ritualized abuse of a child committed on or after August 11, 2009 when the victim was under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the offense and the person used force or the threat of force in the commission of the offense, they wear an approved electronic monitoring device for the duration of their parole, MSR term, or extended MSR term. It would also make other changes concerning violations of parole or MSR. It would provide for different conditions if the parolee or releasee violates a criminal statute of any jurisdiction during the parole or release term than for violations of other conditions of parole or MSR. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2078 (Sen. Robert Peters): This bill would eliminate the felony murder provisions from the first degree murder statute. It would provide that a person commits second degree murder when he or she, acting alone or with one or more participants, commits or attempts to commit a forcible felony, other than first degree murder, and in the course of or in furtherance of the crime or flight from the crime, they or another participant causes the death of a person, other than one of the participants. It would provide an affirmative defense to the charge that the defendant: (1) was not the only participant in the underlying crime; (2) did not commit the homicidal act or in any way solicit, request, command, importune, cause, or aid in the commission of the crime; (3) was not armed with a deadly weapon; and (4) did not engage himself or herself in or intend to engage in and had no reasonable ground to believe that any other participant intended to engage in conduct likely to result in death or serious bodily injury. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2091 (Sen. Patrick Joyce): This bill would provide that a hate crime is a Class X felony if committed by a person over the age of 18 while armed with a firearm or if the victim of the hate crime, at the time of the offense, was under the age of 18. This bill would also provide that a period of probation, a term of periodic incarceration, or conditional discharge shall not be imposed for such offenses. Would provide that such offenders may receive no more than 4.5 days of sentence credit for each month of their sentence of imprisonment. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2187 (Sen. Terri Bryant): This bill would provide that the annual report of the PRB transmitted to the IDOC would include the number of C-number cases and good conduct requests that are considered, granted, and denied by the Board. The report would be disaggregated by offense, including but not limited to, murder and offenses involving sexual conduct or penetration, and would indicate if the victims were under 18 years old or members of law enforcement. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2150 (Sen. Steve Stadelman): This bill would require the PRB (in conjunction with the IDOC and Department of Central Management Services) to create a standardized petition for pardon, commutation, or reprieve and an online portal for the petition to be filed electronically. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2311 (Sen. Celina Villanueva): This bill would provide that a person serving a term of imprisonment, including a term of natural life, in an IDOC institution or facility is eligible for earned discretionary reentry if he or she has served a term of imprisonment of at least 20 years. Petitions for earned discretionary reentry would be administered by the PRB. It would remove the provision that no person serving a term of natural life imprisonment may be paroled or released except through executive clemency. It would provide that if any person who is incarcerated is released on earned discretionary reentry, their sentence would be considered complete after the term of MSR. Applies retroactively. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2633/HB 4469 (Sen. Celina Villanueva/Rep. Maura Hirschauer): This bill would clarify and strengthen the law that requires firearms be removed when a domestic violence survivor is granted an order of protection. It would require firearms to be removed during the service of an emergency order of protection when granted by a judge. It would bar the transfer of ownership of firearms when the firearm remedy is granted. It would add dating and ex-dating partners to the list of petitioners in the Firearm Restraining Order Act to create additional avenues of firearm relief when the order of protection is not needed. THESE BILLS DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2928 (Sen. Natalie Toro): This bill would create the Second Chance Seat in Every Class Act. Each institution of higher education would reserve at least one enrollment in each class for a returning resident (a person who is a resident of and domiciled in Illinois, has graduated from high school or the equivalent, has been convicted of a felony in Illinois, was sentenced to incarceration pursuant to that conviction, and is not currently incarcerated) and at least one enrollment in each online class for a person who is incarcerated. It would provide computer equipment, Internet connections, books, and supplies for enrolled students who are incarcerated. It would create the Incarcerated Individuals and Returning Residents Educational Supply Fund as a fund of the Department of Returning Resident Affairs. The Fund would be used exclusively to pay for costs that students who are incarcerated and returning residents incur for books or other supplies needed to take classes under the Act. This bill would also create the Second Chance State College Admissions Act that would provide that no institution of higher education would consider criminal history information when making any decision about an applicant or student, inquire about or consider criminal history information at any time during the admission decision-making process, or place an applicant or student on probationary or similar status based upon criminal history information, with specified exceptions. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 2975 (Sen. Doris Turner): This bill would create the Decatur Welcome Home Reentry Pilot Program Act. The assistance provided by IDOC would include, but is not limited to, helping provide individuals with identification cards and providing workforce training before a person is released. The Department would partner with community-based organizations that help people released into the greater Decatur area to receive vocational training and assistance, find gainful employment, find housing, and provide physical and behavioral health services and support services. The program would operate for 3 years. The Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority would work with IDOC to analyze data and report on the results of the program. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 3234 (Sen. Robert Peters): This bill would amend the No Representation Without Population Act. The demographic data of people incarcerated in IDOC facilities provided by the IDOC to the State Board of Elections would be used only as the basis for determining legislative, representative, and all local government districts that are based on population (rather than just legislative and representative districts). THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 3381 (Sen. Mike Simmons): This bill would create the Censorship in Correctional Facilities Act. It would provide that a law enforcement agency or law enforcement official would not refuse to approve or would prohibit the use of books, including, but not limited to, memoirs, autobiographies, and biographies, based upon the depiction in those materials of matters related to the protected characteristics or categories identified in the Illinois Human Rights Act in any correctional facility in the State. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 3482 (Sen. Lakesia Collins): This bill would create the Reintegration and Civic Empowerment Act to ensure people serving sentences in IDOC correctional facilities have access to peer-taught civics classes within the first year of their sentence. A person convicted of a felony, or otherwise under sentence in a correctional institution, would also have their right to vote restored and would be eligible to vote not later than 14 days following their conviction. A person would not be denied the right to vote because of a past criminal conviction. Each local election authority would coordinate with the correctional institution, IDOC, and other correctional agencies incarcerating eligible voters to facilitate voting by mail for those voters eligible to vote in that election jurisdiction who are incarcerated in the correctional institution. The civics peer education program and workshops would be available to all people regardless of the date they were first incarcerated or the length of their sentence. Initiative of Chicago Votes. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

SB 3545 (Sen. Jason Plummer): IDOC would require drug screening of every person committed to a Department facility and would provide appropriate drug treatment services to certain people based on the results of initial screening. THIS BILL DID NOT ADVANCE.

LITIGATION UPDATES

These are summaries created to the best of our abilities and are for informational purposes only. You or your attorney are ultimately responsible for reading the cases and making arguments accordingly.

Discussion of a Selection of Cases Since 6/22/23

Illinois Supreme Court

People v. Webster, 2023 IL 128428: In 2018, petitioner was convicted of a murder he committed when he was 17 years old and was sentenced to 40 years in prison. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court stated that it considered all factors in aggravation and mitigation, including petitioner’s age at the time of the offense. After People v. Buffer came out in 2019, holding that a sentence of more than 40 years counts as a de facto life sentence for juveniles, petitioner appealed. An appellate court found that his sentence was not unconstitutional, but still sent it back for resentencing because it thought the trial judge probably didn’t mean to give petitioner what was now considered a life sentence. However, the Illinois Supreme Court found this was wrong and reinstated petitioner’s 40 year sentence. The court said an appellate court can only send a case back for resentencing if they find the trial court made an error or abused its discretion, which didn’t happen in this case.

People v. Hilliard, 2023 IL 128186: Petitioner filed a post-conviction petition, claiming that his 25-year firearm enhancement, as part of his total 40 year sentence for attempted murder, violated the proportionate penalties clause of the Illinois Constitution as it applied to him specifically. He claimed that the mandatory nature of the enhancement did not allow the court to consider his age and lack of criminal history in sentencing him. The Illinois Supreme Court decided the enhancement was fine as it applied to petitioner because, although petitioner was a young adult at the time of the offense, his 40-year sentence was not a mandatory sentence or a de facto life sentence (which has previously been defined as more than 40 years). The court importantly confirmed that a sentence of any length can be challenged under the proportionate penalties clause and that this type of claim is not limited to only juveniles or people with life sentences.

People v. Wells, 2023 IL 127169: Petitioner previously pleaded guilty to first degree murder in 2001. In 2016, the legislature added subsection (b-5) to 735 ILCS 5/2-1401. Under this provision, a person convicted of a forcible felony may petition the trial court for sentencing relief if his or her participation in the offense was related to him or her having been a victim of domestic violence. In 2018, petitioner filed a petition arguing that her husband, who was convicted of the same murder, had physically abused her for years, and that her participation in the murder was due to fear and compulsion. The Illinois Supreme Court found that subsection (b-5) cannot apply to petitioner because her sentence was part of a guilty plea agreement.

People v. Griffin, 2024 IL 128587: The Illinois Supreme Court held that when a court considers whether to allow a petitioner to file a successive post-conviction petition based on an actual innocence claim, the same standard applies to everyone. Petitioner pleaded guilty to first-degree murder in exchange for a 35-year sentence and the dismissal of additional charges. Later, he filed a successive post-conviction petition arguing he had newly discovered evidence of his actual innocence. Typically, someone asking to file a successive post-conviction petition based on actual innocence has to make a “colorable claim” of actual innocence. This means they have to show that the evidence they have is new, material (relevant and would show petitioner is innocent), noncumulative (not essentially the same thing as earlier evidence), and would probably change the result on retrial. The court here decided that the same standard applies, even if a petitioner pleaded guilty in their case.

Illinois Appellate Court

People v. LaPointe, 2023 IL App (2d) 210312; People v. Barry, 2023 IL App (2d) 220324 & People v. Bucio, 2023 IL App (2d) 220326: An Illinois appellate court ruled in multiple cases that a post-conviction petition or successive post-conviction petition is not the proper way to challenge that 730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-115(b) (providing parole review opportunities for those under the age of 21 at the time of their offense(s) sentenced on or after June 1, 2019) violates the equal protection clauses of the U.S. and Illinois Constitutions. This is because the Post-Conviction Hearing Act, which controls post-conviction petitions, only enables a petitioner to challenge denials of their constitutional rights that occurred in the proceedings which resulted in their conviction. This statute was created years after each petitioner’s convictions and therefore could not impact their conviction or sentencing. The court also held that, even if they could address the issue, the statute does not violate equal protection.

People v. Carrasquillo, 2023 IL App (1st) 211241: Traditional parole being served by a “C-Class inmate” who had been sentenced to 200-600 years’ imprisonment for the 1978 shooting death of a police officer at age 18 didn’t provide a meaningful opportunity for release under the proportionate penalties clause. The sentence was imposed without consideration of youth and its attendant circumstances. And despite substantial evidence of rehabilitation, parole had been denied more than 30 times over the years.

People v. Gates, 2023 IL App (1st) 211422: In 2021, petitioner, who was 18 years old at the time of the offense, was sentenced to 48 years’ imprisonment for first degree murder. Under 730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-115(b), petitioner was eligible to seek parole after serving 20 years of that sentence. Petitioner appealed, arguing that the 48-year sentence was an unconstitutional de facto life sentence under the proportionate penalties clause of the Illinois constitution. An Illinois appellate court agreed with petitioner, deciding that the 48-year sentence was a de facto life term even though there was a possibility he would be paroled before he served 40 years. Such a system doesn’t provide a meaningful opportunity for release based on demonstrated rehabilitation and maturity.

People v. Durant, 2024 IL App (1st) 211190-B: In 2005, petitioner was sentenced to life in prison as a “habitual criminal” based on prior offenses, including a robbery when he was 16 years old. In 2021, the legislature amended the Habitual Criminal Provision, 730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-95(a), to specify that a person can’t be a “habitual criminal” unless the first qualifying offense was committed when they were at least 21 years old. Following this amendment, petitioner filed a successive post-conviction petition, claiming his life sentence was unconstitutional. An appellate court  extended the reasoning and holdings in People v. Stewart, 2022 IL 126116, and found that the amendment applies retroactively to convictions that occurred before the amendment. The court sent the petitioner’s case back for resentencing because the life sentence at issue was predicated on a Class X robbery committed at age 16.

People v. Langston, 2024 IL App (5th) 220296: Petitioner argued that his 25-year sentence was excessive because it was a de facto life sentence, given that he was 65 years old at the time of sentencing. An appellate court disagreed, saying courts do not have to give all defendants an opportunity for rehabilitation. The sentencing court properly considered the mitigating and aggravating factors in the petitioner’s case.

Hauschild v. Harrington, No. 13 CV 05032, 2024 WL 1932850: On habeas review, despite the nearly-impossible AEDPA standards, Judge Pallmeyer of the Northern District vacated Hauschild’s de facto life sentence. Because Hauschild did not commit a homicide, the Illinois Appellate Court violated clearly established law by applying Miller, when it should have applied Graham. Whether a de facto life sentence is discretionary has no bearing on a Graham claim: “For juvenile offenders who did not commit homicide, all sentences to life in prison with no meaningful opportunity for release—even when discretionarily imposed—are unconstitutional.” Federal court noted that Illinois Courts have been getting this wrong. Did not matter that Hauschild had four offenses from the same incident.

Pending cases:

People v. Vidaurri, 129551: The Illinois Supreme Court will decide whether, following the decisions in People v. Dorsey (2021 IL 123010) and People v. Clark (2023 IL 127273), petitioner, who was over 17 years old at the time of the offense, is categorically precluded from challenging his de facto life sentence under the proportionate penalties clause in a successive post-conviction petition, even if his initial petition was rejected on the grounds that youth is not mitigating.

People v. Clark, 127838: The Illinois Supreme Court will make a decision on whether a defendant who committed an offense prior to the enactment of 730 ILCS 5/5-4.5-105, but who is resentenced after the effective date, is entitled to consideration of the Miller factors at resentencing.

People v. White, 129767: In People v. Jones, 2021 IL 126432, the Illinois Supreme Court held that if a defendant entered into a negotiated guilty plea, they could not later challenge the constitutionality of their sentence under the Miller line of cases (a series of cases that give additional sentencing protections to juveniles). The Illinois Supreme Court will decide if defendants who agreed to blind guilty pleas without any agreement about their sentence are also not allowed to challenge their sentence under the Miller line of cases.

People v. Williams, 127304: The Miller line of cases (see above) only applies to people who are under 18. However, courts have recently allowed young adult offenders to claim some of the same sentencing protections as juveniles if they can show that they, as an individual, were more like a juvenile than an adult at the time of the offense. The Illinois Supreme Court will decide what kind of evidence petitioners need to supply to show that they were more like a juvenile when filing a post-conviction petition arguing that there was a problem with their sentence. The court will decide if it is enough for petitioners to cite scientific studies on brain development and the Miller line of cases. Worth noting that the petitioner in this case was 22 years old at the time of the alleged offense and is serving a mandatory life sentence.

People v. Spencer, 130015: The Illinois Supreme Court will decide whether emerging adults under the age of 21 who received a de facto life sentence can challenge the constitutionality of their sentence under the Illinois Constitution’s proportionate penalties clause even though they are eligible for parole after they serve 20 years.

ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS

We love hearing from you. Although we cannot individually respond to all the letters we receive, we read every letter and note your concerns. Please read below for answers to your frequently asked questions:

PROSECUTOR-INITIATED RESENTENCING (SB2129):

In July 2021, Governor Pritzker signed Senate Bill 2129 (725 ILCS 5/122-9, effective January 1, 2022), which allows prosecutors, at their discretion, to file motions to resentence incarcerated persons whose original sentence “no longer advances the interests of justice.” Specifically, the law provides:

(b) At any time upon the recommendation of the State’s Attorney of the county in which the defendant was sentenced, the State’s Attorney may petition the sentencing court or the sentencing court’s successor to resentence the offender if the original sentence no longer advances the interests of justice. The sentencing court or the sentencing court’s successor may resentence the offender if it finds that the original sentence no longer advances the interests of justice.

The law does not allow the judge to resentence the individual to a greater sentence than the original sentence. Additionally, the law allows the resentencing judge to consider various “post-conviction” factors, including “disciplinary record and record of rehabilitation while incarcerated; evidence that reflects whether age, time served, and diminished physical condition, if any, have reduced the inmate’s risk for future violence; and evidence that reflects changed circumstances since the inmate’s original sentencing such that the inmate’s continued incarceration no longer serves the interests of justice” in determining the new sentence.

The process for initiating and considering resentencing petitions varies from county to county. Some State’s Attorney offices have websites that list their procedures, so it is important to find out what the process is in the specific county in which the original sentencing took place. Additionally, there might be limitations on the types of cases that are being considered by each prosecutorial office. For instance, in Cook County, the State’s Attorney’s Office has provided some guidelines on its website regarding which types of individuals and cases they are prioritizing:

• Persons who have served at least 10 years of a sentence for a drug-related offense.
• Persons who are currently age 65 or older and have served at least 20 years for a non-sex and non-homicide offense.
• Persons who were under 21 at the time of their offense and have served at least 15 years for a non-sex and non-homicide offense
• Persons who have served at least 10 years for a theft/robbery/burglary offense.

 

WHAT TYPES OF SENTENCE CREDIT ARE AVAILABLE? –

General Overview

Various forms of sentence credits are available to people in custody; however, not all people in custody are eligible for each type of credit. The three most common types of credit are Statutory Sentence Credit (SSC), Program Sentence Credit (PSC), and Earned Discretionary Sentence Credit (EDSC). ** It is important to note that all awarded sentence credit is subject to be reduced or taken away based on the IDOC’s rules and regulations regarding disciplinary infractions**

SSC Statutory Sentence Credit refers to the percentage of time a determinate-sentenced individual in custody must spend incarcerated. Individuals in custody serve 50%, 75%, 85%, or 100% of their sentence, determined by statute and based on the offense the person was convicted of. Additionally, the percentage is applied as required by law to each individual conviction in the case of multiple convictions (i.e. if a person has a 10-year sentence required to be served at 85% and a consecutive 4-year sentence to be served at 50%, an individual’s release date would reflect those percentages. 85% of 10 years equals 8.½ years and 50% of 4 years equals 2 years for a total of 12-½ years.Individuals in custody may lose statutory sentence credit based on negative behavior while in custody.The sentencing credit is calculated by the IDOC during the receiving and classification process and is shown as applied automatically on every calculation paper individuals receive from the IDOC.

EPSC Earned Program Sentence Credit refers to time earned by an individual in custody for participation in education, life skills courses, behavioral modification, drug treatment, re-entry planning, or Illinois Correctional Industries programs. Not all individuals in custody are eligible for programming credit; for instance, individuals in custody convicted of offenses that require them to serve 100% or 85% of their sentence are not eligible to earn credit but may still be able to participate in such programming. Individuals in custody earn one half-day off their sentence for each day of participation in such programs if they successfully complete the programs (for example: if an eligible individual in custody completes a drug treatment program that is 30 days long, they may be awarded 15 days off their sentence). Individuals in custody may lose program sentence credit based on bad behavior while in custody.

Sentence Credit Public Act 101-0440, effective January 1, 2020, Section 3-6-3 of the Unified Code of Corrections, revises the eligibility requirements and expands awards of sentence credits to those whose convictions are for crimes that occurred prior to June 19, 1998, and who participated in and completed programming prior to January 1, 2020. In addition, individuals in custody who obtain a bachelor’s, master’s, or professional degree during their current term of incarceration shall be eligible for additional program sentence credits.

Public Act 103-0330, effective January 1, 2024, requires the Department to

recalculate sentencing credits previously awarded before July 1, 2021, for completion of eligible

substance abuse programs, correctional industry assignments, educational programs, work-

release programs or activities, behavior modification programs, life skills courses, or re-entry

planning. The Act also requires the Department to calculate sentencing credit awards for

qualifying days of engagement in self-improvement programs, volunteer work, or work

assignments occurring before July 1, 2021, the date on which Public Act 101-652 made those

activities eligible for credit. These credits are categorized under 730 ILCS 5/3-6-3(a)(4) and (4.2).

The Act’s required sentence credit award calculations (subject to exceptions and limitations) will

occur at the day-for-day or half-day rates established on or after July 1, 2021.

EDSC Earned Discretionary Sentence Credit refers to credit of up to 180 days for a sentence of less than 5 years and up to 365 days for any sentence over 5 years on an individual in custody’s incarceration that can be issued at the sole discretion of the Director of the IDOC. Similar to SSC and EPSC, individuals in custody may lose EDSC based on IDOC rules violations while in custody. For an individual in custody to be eligible for an award of EDSC, a person must have served more than 60 days in IDOC custody and be serving a sentence for offenses that are not excluded from an award pursuant to Section 3-6-3(a)(3) of the Code of Corrections (730 ILCS 5/3-6-3(a)(3)). Additionally, eligibility for EDSC, according to the IDOC, shall be based on but not limited to the following:

• results of any risk/needs assessment or other relevant assessments or evaluations administered by the Department using a validated instrument
• the circumstances of the crime
• any history of conviction for a forcible felony
• the individual in custody’s behavior and disciplinary history while incarcerated
• the individual in custody’s commitment to rehabilitation, including participation in programming offered by the department
• if recommended by a court, must have completed substance abuse treatment or been waived from the requirement by the Department
• must have completed mandatory sex treatment (if necessary) or been waived of the requirement by the Department (if applicable)

 

ARE PELL GRANTS NOW AVAILABLE FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE INCARCERATED IN APPROVED PROGRAMS?

Incarceration can impact your eligibility for federal student aid. However, recent policy changes at the federal level removed several barriers to accessing Federal Pell Grants to pay for college. As a result:

• Federal student aid eligibility is now “sentence-blind” – the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) no longer requires applicants to provide information about convictions.
• All incarcerated people who meet other eligibility requirements are eligible, regardless of conviction or sentence length.
• Previously incarcerated individuals may qualify for a Federal Pell Grant if they are Pell-eligible.
• Incarcerated individuals may qualify for a Federal Pell Grant if they are Pell-eligible and enrolled in an approved prison education program.
• Once released, eligibility limitations related to incarceration are removed.

 

WHAT ARE PELL GRANTS?

• Pell Grants are a form of federal financial aid that help students pay for college. These grants are awarded only to eligible undergraduate students. Incarcerated students may be eligible if enrolled in an approved Prison Education Program.
• Award amounts can change yearly. The maximum award for the 2024-25 award year is $7,395. Unlike loans, Pell Grants do not need to be repaid.
• Funds are sent to the school a student is enrolled at, and the school applies those funds to the student’s tuition and fees.

 

WHAT DO PELL GRANTS COVER?

• Pell Grants pay for school-related expenses, including tuition, fees, textbooks, and supplies. These funds can be used at eligible community colleges, career schools, trade schools, and four-year colleges and universities.
• The amount of funds you may receive over your lifetime is limited to 12 full-time terms or six years of funding. 

 

WHO IS PELL ELIGIBLE?

• Any undergraduate student who (1) has financial need and (2) has not earned a bachelor’s, graduate, or professional degree may be eligible for a Federal Pell Grant.
• Eligibility and award amount are determined by the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). You may request a paper FAFSA by calling the Federal Student Aid Information Center at 800-433-3243. The form may also be downloaded from https://studentaid.gov/sites/default/files/2024-25-fafsa.pdf if you have someone who can access it and send it to you.
• To maintain eligibility, the FAFSA must be completed every year.
• Incarcerated students enrolled in approved programs should submit their completed FAFSA to the program. In turn, the program will submit the completed FAFSA to the Office of Federal Student Aid on behalf of the student.
• Individuals nearing release may apply for aid before they are released to ensure aid is processed in time for them to start school. If applying before release, use the mailing address where you’re confined. After release, update your mailing address by calling the Federal Student Aid Information Center at 800-433-3243.

 

WHAT IF I AM INELIGIBLE FOR PELL GRANTS BECAUSE OF DEFAULTED LOANS?

There are currently two ways to get out of default:

1. Consolidate your defaulted federal student loan into a Direct Consolidation Loan. To do so, you must agree to repay the consolidated loan under an income-driven repayment plan or make three consecutive, on-time, full monthly payments on the defaulted loan before consolidating.
2. Enroll in Fresh Start. Fresh Start is a temporary program that ends September 30, 2024. This program offers unique benefits, like restoring access to federal student aid. To enroll, write to P.O. Box 5609, Greenville, TX 75403. In your letter, include your name, social security number, date of birth, current mailing address, and the following: “I would like to use Fresh Start to bring my loans back into good standing.” Letters must be postmarked before Oct. 1, 2024.

 

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE AN APPROVED PRISON EDUCATION PROGRAM (PEP)?

• To become an approved PEP, an interested college must first secure approval from the relevant corrections agency. In Illinois, colleges must first submit information to the IDOC.
• After the corrections agency’s approval, the college must secure approval from the relevant accreditor, the Higher Learning Commission in Illinois.
• Finally, after securing approval from the corrections agency and the accreditor, the college must apply to the Department of Education. The college will be authorized to administer Pell Grants to incarcerated students if approved.

 

WHAT APPROVED PEPS ARE IN ILLINOIS?

• Two programs in Illinois are currently Pell-eligible: Augustana Prison Education Program at East Moline Correctional Center and Lewis University Prison Education Program at Sheridan Correctional Center and Kewanee Life Skills Re-Entry Center.
• Both PEPs accept applications from incarcerated individuals statewide. Qualified students must meet individual program requirements and be eligible to transfer to the relevant facility. For more information, incarcerated individuals should contact the Education Facility Administrator at the facility they are incarcerated in.

 

WHAT OTHER HIGHER EDUCATION IN PRISON PROGRAMS EXIST IN ILLINOIS?

There are 12 other higher education in prison programs in Illinois that are not Pell-eligible but offer similar programs at no cost to students. Below is a list of these programs and the facilities they operate in:

• Adler University – Big Muddy River Correctional
• Danville Area Community College – Danville Correctional Center
• DePaul University – Stateville Correctional Center
• Eastern Illinois University – Danville Correctional Center
• Knox College – Hill Correctional Center
• Lake Land College – Illinois River Correctional Center
• Millikin University – Decatur Correctional Center
• North Park University – Stateville Correctional Center and Logan Correctional Center
• Northeastern Illinois University – Stateville Correctional Center
• Northwestern University – Stateville Correctional Center and Logan Correctional Center
• Prison + Neighborhood Arts/Education Project – Stateville Correctional Center and Logan Correctional Center
• University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign’s Education Justice Project – Danville Correctional Center

 

HOW DO YOU ENROLL IN CLASSES?

• Reach out to the education staff in your specific facility and see what postsecondary education programs they offer.
• Colleges and correctional facilities often have their own admission requirements. If you are deemed ineligible, contact the educational staff at your facility for more information.
• If your facility does not have an eligible PEP, reach out to colleges in your local area to propose creating a PEP program.

 

WHAT PERSONNEL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED WITH THE PRISONER REVIEW BOARD (PRB)?

The PRB considers cases of people who are incarcerated and eligible for parole, sets conditions for parole and MSR, revokes good conduct credit, suspends or reduces the rate of accumulating such credit, and reviews recommendations for executive clemency. There have been several recent changes to the PRB: Donald Shelton, Chair, resigned in May; LeAnn Miller, PRB member, resigned in May; Krystal Tison, new member, appointed May 2023; Darryldean Goff, new member, appointed May 2023; and James Montgomery, new Executive Director of the PRB, appointed in April.

WHO ARE THE CURRENT PRB BOARD MEMBERS? 

As of July 2024: Jared Bohland, Matthew Coates, William Delgado, Julie Globokar, Darryldean Goff, Jeffrey Grubbs, Rodger Heaton, Robin Shoffner, Carmen Terrones, Krystal Tison, and Ken Tupy.

WHEN AND WHERE ARE UPCOMING PRB CLEMENCY HEARINGS*?

*Dates and locations of hearings are subject to change or extension. Schedules are posted on the PRB website, https://prb.illinois.gov/prbexclemex.html

October 2024

• Hearings: October 8 – 10, 2024. Hearings held in Chicago at: To Be Determined.
• Petition Filing Deadline: July 24, 2024 by 5:00 P.M.

 

January 2025

• Hearings: January 7 – 9, 2025. Hearings held in Springfield at: To Be Determined.
• Petition Filing Deadline: October 24, 2024 by 5:00 P.M.

 

April 2025

• Hearings: April 8 – 10, 2025. Hearings held in Chicago at: To Be Determined.
• Petition Filing Deadline: January 22, 2025 by 5:00 P.M.

 

July 2025

• Hearings: July 8 – 10, 2025. Hearings held in Chicago at: To Be Determined.
• Petition Filing Deadline: April 24, 2025 by 5:00 P.M.

 

October 2025

• Hearings: October 7 – 9, 2025. Hearings held in Chicago at: To Be Determined.
• Petition Filing Deadline: July 24, 2025 by 5:00 P.M

 

FAMILY SUPPORT & ADVOCACY GROUPS

COMMUNITIES & RELATIVES OF ILLINOIS INCARCERATED CITIZENS (CRIIC) We meet on the second Tuesday of every month, alternating between in-person and virtual, from 1 to 3 p.m., to discuss legislation, court decisions, and prison conditions. We also share our strategies for self-care and caring for an incarcerated loved one. Your loved ones do not have to do it alone. Please have your loved ones email Julie Anderson at janderson@restorejustice.org to be added to our email list for meeting information and registration. In-person meetings are held at Precious Blood Ministry of Reconciliation, in “The Front Porch,” located at 1130 W 51st St. in Chicago. Lunch is provided for in-person meetings. Upcoming CRIIC meetings typically occur on the second Tuesday of each month. Upcoming dates: 

• Sept 10, 2024 – 1:00 to 2:00 P.M. via Zoom
• Oct 8, 2024 – in-person 1:00 to 3:00 P.M. at “The Front Porch”
• Nov 6, 2024, 2024 – in-person, noon to 4:00 P.M., The Front Porch“ Christmas card signing and photos. *Note: this is a Wednesday
• Dec 10, 2024 –  1:00 to 2:00 P.M. via Zoom
• Jan 14, 2025 – 1:00 to 3:00 P.M. in person at “The Front Porch”
• Feb 11, 2025 – 1:00 to 2:00 P.M. via Zoom
• March 11, 2025 – 1:00 to 3:00 P.M. in person at “The Front Porch”

 

LOVED ONES REUNITED (LOR) is a newer support group for people who have loved ones who have come home or will soon be coming home from prison. We talk about issues we are facing with our loved ones. To be added to our email list for meetings, please contact Julie Anderson at janderson@restorejustice.org.

Upcoming Dates:

• Sept 17, 2024 – in person at “The Front Porch”
• Oct 15, 2024 – in person at “The Front Porch”
• Nov 13, 2024 – in person at “The Front Porch”

 

LOVED ONES’ SELF-ADVOCACY TRAINING

We have held four trainings this year so far and have plans to host two more to help your loved ones navigate the IDOC. All of these are via Zoom. We record the sessions, and they are available to your loved ones. Your loved ones can email Lizzie Lewandowski at elewandowski@restorejustice.org and she would be happy to share the recordings. Topics:

• March 2024 – Preparing for your loved ones’ homecoming.
• April 2024 – Transfers in the IDOC. The Transfer Coordinator from Springfield was our guest, so we were unable to record. We do have notes available; your loved one can email Lizzie for a copy.
• May 2024 – How to fill out a “Freedom of Information Act” (FOIA) request.
• June 2024 – Higher education in prison.
• August 20, 2024 – Grievances, who should file and why, with Alan Mills from Uptown People’s Law Center (UPLC)
• September 18, 2024 – Medical Issues in the IDOC, with Alan Mills from UPLC

NOTE: If your loved ones have any questions or suggestions for next year’s series, please have them contact Julie Anderson at janderson@restorejustice.org.

RETURNING CITIZENS NETWORK (RCN)

We provide the opportunity for returning citizens to come together to share personal experiences and feelings, coping strategies, and first-hand information about the challenges they face reentering society after long periods of incarceration. RCN’s monthly meetings are led by Restore Justice staff and attended by recently returned citizens who were incarcerated for lengthy adult sentences as youth and young adults. The most meaningful aspect of these meetings is that they help returning citizens develop a sense of togetherness when returning to society after serving long sentences; it is important to have a safe space to deal with the stressors of life after incarceration. To be added to our email list about these meetings, please contact James Swansey at jswansey@restorejustice.org.

ENCOURAGE YOUR LOVED ONES TO ADVOCATE WITH RESTORE JUSTICE

Our Advocacy Team is for anyone who lives in Illinois and wants to advocate for sentencing and prison reform, and for bills that help family members. We ask team members to spend a few minutes each week during the January-May legislative session contacting their legislators. This is an easy way for someone with limited time to advocate for compassionate change. Share this link with your loved ones: restorejustice.org/our-work/advocacy/advocacy-team

UPCOMING ADVOCACY TRAININGS

Our free advocacy trainings are open to individuals and organizations interested in advancing change in our state through the legislative process in Springfield. While our focus is on criminal legal reform, we try to make our training useful for any issue. People can learn more at our website: https://www.restorejustice.org/our-work/advocacy/advocacy-trainings/ 

LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY 101 TRAINING

******FALL TRAINING DATES COMING SOON****** 

During Legislative Advocacy 101, you’ll learn about the legislative process and how a bill really 

becomes a law in Illinois, develop skills to navigate Springfield, and learn to build support for issues that matter to you. 

BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH LEGISLATORS ADVOCACY TRAINING

******FALL TRAINING DATES COMING SOON******

This is a more advanced training than Legislative Advocacy 101, but everyone is welcome. 

HOW CAN YOUR FAMILY OBTAIN A COPY OF OUR NEWSLETTER?

Your loved one can visit our website to view this newsletter virtually:

restorejustice.org/category/newsletters

RESTORE JUSTICE ADDRESS UPDATES

Restore Justice is happy to add anyone incarcerated in Illinois to our mailing list. Your loved one can email hello@restorejustice.org We are always happy to hear of people being released. If you are released, please send us an email at hello@restorejustice.org. We would love to stay in touch when you return home.

If your LO is unable to email us and you would like to be added to our mailing list, or you are transferred or discharged, please let us know. Send your letter to: Restore Justice, PO Box 101099, Chicago, IL 60610

Thank you to everyone who has expressed interest in receiving email updates from us. We appreciate your interest and requests. Unfortunately, due to current staffing limitations, we are unable to send out legislative updates via email at this time.

RESTORE JUSTICE STAFF UPDATE

FROM THE DESK OF…

Wendell Robinson, Executive Director What’s good Y’all! I am hoping things are as well as can be, all things considered. I want everyone who reads this to know my promotion to Executive Director is a testimony to the fact that when you give system-impacted individuals an opportunity, good things can happen. When people believe in and invest in “US” (that is, the system-impacted community), look at what’s possible. I will not say that these first couple of months have been easy. It’s a constant learning curve, but one that I welcome all aspects of.

When I think about the things our system-impacted community is involved in, I can’t help but feel inspired. We have so many people leading in all sorts of ways: mentoring, advocacy, outreach workers, law students, Directors of all those things, and more. I mention this because sometimes, that carceral environment hinders us from dreaming. But I want people to continue to dream big, invest in themselves, and believe that when you come home, there is a space where you and everything you’ve been through has value. Please believe: Our lived experience can’t be simulated! And it adds volume to the work we do. I often say I’m just one example of what long term incarceration can look like. I know the caliber of individuals who exist within the system, and I also know that so many of you are going to come home and take this work to the next level. That’s why I operate under what I consider “Real Growth.” What does Real Growth mean to me? It means embracing and promoting the concept of creating opportunities for others. When we are able to do this in a selfless capacity, the return on this investment in humanity becomes astronomical. Plus, it feels good. And with that, know that I’m forever in Solidarity!

Julie Anderson, Outreach Director  Greetings, I can’t believe we have another issue of the newsletter going out. As you know, the newsletter has grown from a few pages to a large publication. The entire staff and our interns work to deliver updated information. We research new laws, which bills did not pass, and new litigation cases, as well as working to answer all of the questions we receive. Sometimes the information is difficult to find and you can imagine there are many different scenarios, as with the application of good time. We strive to deliver honest answers even when they are not the answers we or you would like to hear. We believe you deserve the truth, not rumors or false information.

Here at RJ things have evolved, Jobi Cates, our beloved founding director has stepped down, and Wendell Robinson has moved into her position. As hard as it was to have Jobi step down, we are lucky to have Wendell. He has the passion and real life experience needed for this role. As for me, I’ve been working hard helping your loved ones advocate for themselves when it comes to visiting, prison conditions, programs, medical issues and more. It’s not an easy path for loved ones and it helps to have each other. If your loved one needs assistance, please have them reach out. Sadly, I can’t always fix the problem, but I can offer suggestions and give them the space to realize they are not alone. As you know my son Eric came home a year ago after being in for 27 years. The transition has been a beautiful, bumpy ride that we are still on. Having him home is a dream come true; I believe all of your loved ones deserve the same, and I will keep on advocating for you and them. Peace.

Lindsey Hammond, Policy Director Hello! I hope this newsletter finds you safe and cool. As we wrap up the newsletter for you, I always wish there were more bills that we could report have passed. In the spring 2024 session, only 469 bills passed both chambers, and as you can see, only a few of them may be related to you. However, the long list of bills that are still pending gives me hope, and I hope you feel hopeful, too. In a short time, the general election will be behind us, which will open up possibilities for bills to advance. In the meantime, we are spending time with legislators, educating them about the urgent need for change and opportunities to make Illinois’ laws more compassionate. One of our strongest advocates is our new Executive Director, Wendell Robinson. Our team is delighted to work alongside Wendell and for stakeholders to see the incredible impact people returning home can make. We look forward to this new season of growth and possibilities and will continue to bring you hope and good energy. Peace, hope, and blessings to you.

Alice Swan, Managing Director Hello friends, I write this greeting as I’m finishing up the last of the thank-yous from the luncheon fundraiser we held at the beginning of June, at which we heard from two of the people who are now out on parole as a result of the Youthful Parole Law from 2019. Wendell interviewed these two men, Benard McKinley and Leonard Parker, as well as a defense lawyer who works on a lot of cases involving young people, about how things have changed since that law came into effect five years ago. I was immensely impressed, both by Benard and Leonard for the things they are doing now that they’re home, and also by Wendell, for stepping seamlessly into the role of Executive Director and leading us through a very successful event. We all still miss Jobi, and she’s very much part of the fabric of Restore Justice. She did an incredible job of building our team and laying the very strong foundation on which we are now standing, and I’m excited to see what’s ahead for us with Wendell at the helm.

James Swansey, Policy Manager Hello brothers and sisters!! Just thought I would drop in to give you all some good energy. My journey since I have been home has definitely led me to more learning and a better understanding of how we can be more effective in doing the work. Becoming a registered lobbyist and being able to be in Springfield to speak with legislators about ways to give impacted men and women more meaningful pathways to be released has given me the chance to show that people can and do change. While it is always an uphill battle when having tough conversations, our stories of lived experiences are invaluable, impactful, and can assist in future discussion to find ways to give people who have clearly put in the work to become better second chances. It is always good to be able to show the kind of change that people can make. I plan on continuing to do what it is that I have come to love, and that is to advocate for change within this system. I look forward to keeping people updated on what is going on in our Capitol!! Everyone keep your heads up and continue the fight, stay focused, and positive in nature!!! Always wishing everyone well!!!

Lizzie Lewandowski, Communications Manager Hello! The last time I wrote to you in the newsletter was in the spring of 2023. At the time, I was an intern here at Restore Justice during my second year of a Master’s of Social Work and Social Policy program at the University of Chicago. Since then, I completed my Master’s degree and had the opportunity to return to Restore Justice as Communications Manager. I was – and still am – thrilled to return and be a part of the team in a full-time role. I’m looking forward to the coming months and all they will hold for Restore Justice, including continuing our legislative advocacy efforts, empowering your loved ones with self-advocacy trainings, and the publication of the narrative project Michele and Corinne have been working on. We are thinking of you; thank you for all the letters you write to us. You guide the work we do.

NaJei Webster, Program Manager Hey Family, I hope all is as well as it can be with everyone. The fight for freedom and fairness is REAL out here, but know that we are out here fighting for all of you. This year, I have witnessed so many of us that have been released take strides to fight for those of you we have left behind. The fight will continue until we ALL are FREE. As of June, I took a position at Illinois Prison Project, but the fight is still the same. I am still and always will be part of Restore Justice. I have learned so much during my time working at Restore Justice. I had the blessing of being a part of advocating and almost completely abolishing juvenile life without parole for the state of Illinois. That’s just one of many amazing experiences that I’ve had with RJ. I am so grateful for the experience and please know that this is not goodbye! Stay safe in there and know that no matter how much time the state says you have left, RE-ENTRY STARTS NOW!!

Eric Anderson, Apprentice

Greetings to all my fellow system impacted community members. I appreciate this opportunity to contribute to our newsletter. Since my release in April 2023, I have been working as hard as possible and all the ways I can see available to change our system to find solutions for better outcomes for all of us. I really believe that with more and more momentum we are changing the narrative that surrounds us. There’s a lot of work being done out here by those of us who have been lucky and are out. Just as importantly, even more so to me, is the work being done every day by all of you who are still captive. I’m talking about all the amazing, every minute of every day work to maintain and build our humanity in a system designed to break us down. You have not only survived, in so many ways you come back more resilient and wise. I remain inspired by the responsibility I feel at all times to every single person still being impacted inside and outside of DOC facilities. My time as an apprentice at Restore Justice has been amazing and I’m so appreciative of the opportunities and lessons that I’ve been given since I’ve been out. I promise I use all of that and everything else I got to work on behalf of the members of our community who are still inside.

Joseph Moore, Apprentice To all the brothers and sisters who are held captive inside the gray waste, I encourage you to try as best you can to see beyond the limitations of your confinement and employ your imagination to envision a life for yourself that society says is impossible. I’m here, comrades, in the fight to deconstruct the criminal legal system as we know it, to tell you that whatever you can imagine is possible. For those of you who know me, you are aware of how dedicated I am to developing my mind. You know I would fast from TV and forego dayroom to read a book or work on an essay. And some of you know that I didn’t just hope that I would be able to read and write for a living–I visualized it. Brothers and sisters, I’m honored to tell you that those visualizations have come to fruition. Almost a year to the day after I began an apprenticeship with Restore Justice Foundation, I’ve landed a job that is in alignment with my passion: Advocating for criminal legal reform. This new position will require me to analyze policy and draft public comment, policy reports, and recommendations. Essentially reading and writing.

I’m aware that the limited view provided by the small window inside those cells can make it difficult to envision yourself transcending the low expectations that society has of you and bringing the dreams that you secretly nurse to reality. But I’m telling you, it’s possible. If you can envision it, you can do it. But in the event that my words aren’t convincing enough, please allow my new employment to bear witness to the power of imagination. Peace and love to all the brothers and sisters who are subjected to any form of loss of liberty.

Corinne Kannenberg, Postdoctoral Fellow Hello everyone! Over the next few months, Michele and I are wrapping up our storytelling project on juvenile life without parole sentences in Illinois. It is a bittersweet moment, because as we are seeing the powerful stories and findings from our research come to fruition, this is also a period of transition as our fellowship comes to a close. This summer, I will start a new position as the Communications Director of the Alliance for Higher Education in Prison. In many ways, this is a return to the work that brought me to Restore Justice: as a graduate student, I taught college classes in prison in New Jersey, which was a transformative experience that pushed me toward social justice work. So, this isn’t so much “goodbye” as it is “see you later” — going forward, I will be advocating for the right to quality higher education (in all its forms) for people impacted by the criminal legal system in Illinois and across the United States. Take good care, Corinne.

Michele Kenfack, Postdoctoral Fellow Hello. In the next few months, we will share the powerful and moving narratives from our research on juvenile life without parole in Illinois. We will also share some key findings in the hope of raising public awareness and fostering sentencing reform. I would like to say “Thank You” to those who embraced vulnerability, and opened their hearts to us. This has been an eye-opening experience. I learned so much about the carceral and legal systems in Illinois, and I gained a better understanding of trauma, pain, and heartbreaks. But I also learned about resilience, compassion, hope, and love. Soon, I will move on to my next chapter. However, I am not closing this door, as I will continue to support criminal legal reform and other social justice initiatives. I want to share how much I appreciate the opportunity I had to work on this project and meet incredible human beings who reminded me that the beauty of humanity is not to love the people you know, but those you don’t know. Best wishes and blessings to you all! Michele.

Greetings from our Interns:                 

Chris Barsotti Hello! I’ve had the pleasure of working with Restore Justice this past year as part of my Master’s degree in social work at the University of Chicago, which I have just completed! The social worker code of ethics is rooted in a set of core values: service, social justice, dignity and worth of the person, importance of human relationships, integrity, and competence. It is with these values that I advocate for my siblings who are subjected to the inhumanity of the criminal legal system. As part of Restore Justice I have spent time researching the impact of mandatory consecutive sentencing and solitary confinement in Illinois. I have advocated at the state capitol for the restriction of solitary confinement and expansion of release options for those under juvenile life without parole. I am immensely grateful to be a part of this community and will continue to be part of it past the end of my time with Restore Justice. Nobody’s free until everybody’s free.

Winston Chu Hello, I’m a rising freshman at Cornell University planning to major in public policy and I’ve had the opportunity to intern at Restore Justice this summer. Though new, every experience I’ve had here has been transformative. As a young adult who grew up in the “bubble” of a suburban community, I never had the chance to learn about issues like juvenile LWOP and deteriorating prison conditions. I most certainly never heard the stories of people impacted by this dissolute system. While I am continuously shocked by the number of injustices that plague the system, I’m comforted by the fact that I am part of an organization that has and will continue to accomplish meaningful change. I’m still very new to the study of policy, but seeing the work at Restore Justice has been an inspiring introduction that will help frame my future studies.

Stephen Gloyd Hello! This summer, I have the pleasure of working at Restore Justice as an intern, where I will be able to immerse myself in meaningful and impactful work. I am a rising junior at Temple University, and I am thrilled to bring my experiences to such a dedicated organization. Being from Illinois, it is incredibly fulfilling to have the opportunity to work in my home state. This is my first experience in the realm of reform and advocacy work, and I am incredibly excited for the summer ahead, where I anticipate learning a great deal and contributing to the mission of Restore Justice.

William Guidotti Hey everyone! My name is William, and I am a third-year pre-law student at Vanderbilt University. This past summer, I was fortunate enough to intern at Restore Justice. What I’ve learned these past few months simply cannot be reduced down to a few words. I went from (among other things) critiquing IDOC’s compliance with current state laws to interacting with legislators in Springfield to comparing criminal legal systems with social workers from Germany, all in the span of a few months! Between my time going to college in Tennessee and spending time with family in Illinois, I’ve come to realize that no matter how “progressive” a state may seem, serious improvements need to be made to criminal legal systems throughout the country. My time at Restore Justice has instilled in me a sense of urgency regarding the creation of a more humane and just criminal legal system. Stay well!

Michael Winters This past year I have been extremely privileged to work with Restore Justice as a social work intern through the University of Chicago. In a state that is continuously silencing the voices of incarcerated persons and their families, it is inspiring to work with people who have overcome these injustices and are pursuing justice for others as well. During my time at Restore Justice I have learned more about the power of community and the ways that group action can lead to liberation. While I am ending my internship at RJ, I am excited to continually stay connected to the organization and community. In Love and Power- Michael

IMPORTANT:  WE NEED YOUR ADDRESS CHANGE

Please send us your address changes when you are transferred. If you are released, please let us know. We would love to stay in touch when you return home. Although we cannot answer every letter individually, we read ALL the mail we receive.

Restore Justice

PO Box 101099

Chicago, IL 60610