Illinois legislators approves changes to SAFE-T Act.

SPRINGFIELD — The Democratic-controlled Illinois General Assembly on Thursday approved a series of changes to a nearly 2-year-old criminal justice reform law just one month before some of its key provisions, including a controversial measure to eliminate cash bail, are slated to take effect.

An amendment that codifies the changes to the sweeping legislation, also known as the SAFE-T Act, passed along party lines in both chambers: 71-40 in the House and 38-17 in the Senate. The amendment now goes to Gov. J.B. Pritzker, who issued a statement late Thursday saying he was pleased with the legislators’ work.

Referencing campaign season rhetoric that suggested the law would lead to jails being emptied on New Year’s Day, state Rep. Justin Slaughter, a Chicago Democrat who was the chief House sponsor of the SAFE-T Act, said the amendment clearly spells out the process for how current defendants awaiting trial can be transitioned to the new system.

“There certainly will not be any sort of ‘Purge’-like event; in fact, quite the opposite,” Slaughter said during House debate. “We’re providing a very fair legal process … for the court system to handle this.”

The amendment clarifies the process for shifting from the cash bail system to one that sets out specific criteria for judges to determine whether defendants should be incarcerated while awaiting trial.

The amendment also clarifies the standards that judges must follow when considering whether a defendant presents a danger to the public, and adds several offenses for which judges can detain someone if they’re deemed a threat to the community or another person, including aggravated robbery, second-degree murder and home invasion.

Defendants charged with crimes before Jan. 1 would have the option to remain under the old bail system or be moved to the new system. To ease the burden on the court system, the amendment sets out specific time frames for detention hearings for those shifting to the new system.

Defendants accused of nonviolent offenses must have their hearings within seven days, while those deemed to be a flight risk must appear in court within 60 days. Defendants considered to be a safety threat, such as those accused of murder, sexual assault and other violent crimes, must have a hearing within 90 days.

The proposal also seeks to make clear that police can arrest people for misdemeanors such as trespassing that generally require only a ticket, stating that arrests can be made if officers believe “the accused poses a threat to the community or any person” or if “criminal activity persists.” An arrest can also be made if the alleged offender has “obvious medical or mental health issues” that pose a risk to their own safety, according to the amendment.

Misinformation over the SAFE-T Act was rife during the recent election campaign, even as supporters acknowledged some clarification was needed to the legislation Pritzker signed into law in February 2021.

While opponents stoked fears that the law would free violent criminals, judges maintained the ability to keep defendants behind bars if the state could show they were a flight risk or a danger to the public.

Prosecutors had expressed concern that it would be almost impossible to make an argument that a defendant is a flight risk because the law prevented them from using a defendant’s prior history of failing to appear in court. Under the amendment, patterns of failing to show up for court — but not a single nonappearance — can be used in making the argument for detention.

The amendment also creates a grant program — pending the appropriation of funds by the General Assembly — for jurisdictions to employ more public defenders to meet a possible increase in caseload.

Written and passed in early 2021 by the Democratic-controlled legislature, supporters of the SAFE-T Act say it addresses inequities in the criminal justice system that, among other things, leave many defendants sitting in jail simply because they can’t afford bail.

The elimination of cash bail generated extreme heat during the just-completed election, as Republicans painted Pritzker and other Democrats as soft on crime for backing a measure that does away with cash bail as of New Year’s Day.

This fall, about 60 state’s attorneys across Illinois, including some Democrats, joined a lawsuit against Pritzker and other top Democrats contending that the passage of the law violated the Illinois Constitution. A Kankakee County judge could issue a ruling on the lawsuit as early as next month.

During the Senate debate before Thursday’s vote, Republican senators renewed their criticism of the law and complained they were left out of negotiations over the changes.

GOP state Sen. Steve McClure, of Springfield, acknowledged that the changes go further to “protect us in some cases,” but said there’s a shortage of police officers in some parts of Illinois and that a “crisis in law enforcement” started with the passage of the SAFE-T Act.

“We are doing a disservice to the people of this state by not coming together to face all of the problems this time before Jan. 1,” said McClure, a former Sangamon County prosecutor. “Unfortunately, this bill again falls short.”

In fiery remarks on the House floor, outgoing House Republican Leader Jim Durkin, of Western Springs, took exception to his party being referred to as “fearmongers” in their opposition to the SAFE-T Act.

“And sometimes, I’ve heard things which are worse. I take great offense to that,” said Durkin, who once worked as a Cook County prosecutor. “This isn’t a guy who believes in locking them up and throwing away the key. I believe in fairness on both sides. I believe in fairness for the prosecution, police, the defense, and, yes, the victims under our constitution.”

“When this bill was passed a few years ago,” he said, “I said it was a misguided, confusing scheme that will diminish public safety in all regions and streets throughout Illinois and I stand by that today.”

Democrats said various law enforcement interest groups that opposed the SAFE-T Act took a neutral stance on the amendment. The chief Senate sponsor of the SAFE-T Act, Democratic state Sen. Elgie Sims of Chicago, said state’s attorneys, judges, community organizations and others were part of the behind-the-scenes process of writing the law.

He called the law and its changes “a good piece of legislation” and sought to dispel a narrative that the law is an attack on law enforcement.

“This is a product of good work,” Sims said. “This is a product of us coming together and doing what’s in the best interest of the people that we represent.”

One group that championed the SAFE-T Act praised the changes approved on Thursday.

“Detention while awaiting trial should never have depended on one’s wealth — and that soon will end,” said Benjamin Ruddell, director of criminal justice policy for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. “We commend legislators for cutting through the hyperbole, misinformation, and efforts to confuse the impact of ending money bond, instead delivering a measure of fairness to the criminal legal system in Illinois.”

Also on Thursday, both chambers approved a proposal that represents a portion of a bipartisan deal to stabilize the state’s pandemic-depleted unemployment insurance trust fund.

The deal would repay nearly $1.4 billion outstanding from a $4.5 billion federal loan that kept checks going out to unemployed workers during the first wave of COVID-19.

By a 95-8 vote in the House and a 45-8 vote in the Senate, lawmakers sent to Pritzker’s desk a part of the plan that would increase the portion of a worker’s salary on which employers pay unemployment taxes, and also raise the target balance of the trust fund to prepare for future downturns.

The measure, which has the support of both business interests and organized labor along with Pritzker, also sets up terms for an interest-free state loan to the trust fund that would be repaid over a decade through business taxes that would be deposited into the state’s rainy day fund.

The Senate on a 46-9 vote approved separate legislation that would allocate roughly $1.8 billion in surplus revenue from the current budget year to repay the federal government and lend the state unemployment trust fund $450 million to shore up its balance. State Rep. Jay Hoffman, of Swansea, said the House intends to take up the funding component when lawmakers return to Springfield in January.

[email protected]

[email protected]