On September 12, 2012, youth confined in facilities operated by the Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice (IDJJ) filed this
class-action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court against the IDJJ. The plaintiffs, represented by counsel from the Roger Baldwin Foundation of the ACLU, sought declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that systemic IDJJ conditions, services, and treatment violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The plaintiffs alleged that the IDJJ:
- Failed to provide youth with minimally adequate education and mental health;
- Failed to protect youth;
- Subjected youth to improper and excessive room confinement; and
- Held youth beyond their release dates after failing to secure appropriate community placement.
In October 2012, Judge Matthew F. Kennelly
certified a plaintiff class consisting of all youth confined by the IDJJ, and a sub-class consisting of all members who have special education needs.
In December 2012, the District Court approved a
consent decree and appointed three experts to investigate IDJJ conditions and services and report their findings and recommendations. In September 2013, experts filed
reports, finding inadequate education and mental health services, excessive solitary confinement, and other deficiencies.
Under the terms of the consent decree, the parties jointly submitted a proposed remedial plan on March 14, 2014, followed by a revised plan on April 4, 2014. The District Court
approved the remedial plan on April 7, 2014, obligating the IDJJ to implement the plan, and the ACLU and court-appointed experts to monitor and enforce the plan.
Beginning in July 2014, the parties and court-appointed monitors negotiated numerous changes to IDJJ policy in such areas as special education, individualized mental health services, and protection of LGBT youth. The District Court approved. On April 24, 2015, the District Court approved a new confinement policy that:
- Completely prohibited punitive isolation;
- Narrowly limited non-punitive isolation for purposes of safety;
- Guaranteed that youths placed in non-punitive isolation will continue to receive ordinary education and mental health services; and
- Mandated that youth confined for 24 hours or longer be allowed out of their rooms for at least 8 hours each day.
The consent decree called for yearly reporting by monitors on the defendants' progress until all IDJJ facilities showed substantial compliance with the decree for a period of at least one year. In addition, the court awarded the plaintiffs $502,666 in attorneys' fees and costs as of April 7, 2014.
On October 30, 2015, the parties filed a joint status report. The monitor-authored report commended the IDJJ for progress on drafting implementation of new procedures, but also highlighted areas of continued need for improvement. The report pointed to a lack of sufficient educational and medical personnel, and questioned whether new programs purporting to replace excessive confinement measures were in fact still forms of excessive confinement. On November 5, 2015, Judge Kennelly issued a supplemental order dictating the required ratios of mental health staff to classes of confined youth delineated by the severity of their condition. The order gave the IDJJ 120 days to comply. On May 10, 2016, following another status update from the parties, the court again issued a supplemental order to comply with staffing ratios for mental health professionals. The IDJJ had apparently made some effort to comply with the required ratios but had not yet fully complied. The court again gave the IDJJ 120 days to comply.
On June 30, 2016, the court awarded additional costs and attorneys fees for the plaintiffs totaling $197,500. These fees covered the period between April 2014 and April 2015.
On December 12, 2016, the parties filed yet another status report. The IDJJ had still not fully complied with the consent agreement's educational program requirement. The IDJJ cited security issues at its facilities that prevented regular classes from being held, but maintained it had complied with hiring requirements for additional educational and mental health staff. On February 16, 2017, Judge Kennelly issued an order requiring additional status reporting by IDJJ through 2017.
On July 27, 2016 the plaintiffs filed a motion to compel compliance, alleging that some IDJJ facilities were violating elements of the consent agreement related to confinement and facility conditions. The report alleged that facility staff retaliated against residents for disorderly behavior by filing charges against them at the district attorney's office. This violated the IDJJ's agreement not to file criminal charges or use punitive confinement in response to disorderly behavior by residents at its facilities. The motion sought an injunction against this practice. On December 13, 2017, the parties field an amended consent decree requiring that the IDJJ notify the plaintiffs of any criminal prosecutions against facility residents. The amended decree provided for continued supervision subject to yearly reporting by monitors until the IDJJ complied with all terms of the agreement.
Status reports consistently demonstrated a lack of compliance my the IDJJ. After a status hearing on February 11, 2019, Judge Kennelly ordered the parties to confer and revise the remedial plan to address the shortcomings. Specifically, parties need to address placement of IDJJ youth in psychiatric institutions when needed, as well as arrangements for youth that have acute mental health needs short of hospitalization. The parties filed the amended remedial plan and Judge Kennelly approved it on March 28, 2019. Monitoring continued from there, with periodic adjustments of policy.
As of April 20, 2020, this case is ongoing for monitoring purposes.
Jessica Kincaid - 03/28/2014
Robert Lake - 06/05/2015
Nathaniel Flack - 11/01/2018
Alex Moody - 04/20/2020
compress summary
