Filed Date: 2015
Closed Date: 2017
Clearinghouse coding complete
In the aftermath of the November 2015 release of a police video showing a white Chicago police officer shooting a black teenager, Laquan McDonald, sixteen times first as he walked away and later as he lay in the middle of the road, citizens called for a federal investigation into the Chicago Police Department (CPD). On December 7, 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it was opening an investigation into CPD under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The DOJ aimed to identify any constitutional or federal law violations carried out by CPD and focused on CPD’s use of force and accountability standards.
The investigation’s findings were released on January 13, 2017. The report highlighted many incidents of unjustified force that violated the Fourth Amendment, such as shooting at individuals who did not pose immediate threats to CPD officers, used by CPD and concluded that this pattern was attributed to “a collection of poor policies.” These policies included inadequate training and supervision, a lack of accountability, poor data collection techniques, and procedures that eroded trust between CPD and the community. DOJ outlined how CPD had begun to take steps to ameliorate CPD’s unlawful behavior. Tactics adopted by CPD prior to the findings’ release include implementing a body camera program, providing a force mitigation training course for CPD officers, and revisiting old CPD policies connected to use of force.
The report indicated that even though CPD had taken commendable steps to improving its practices, reform will likely not continue without an independent monitor and consent decree. The City of Chicago pledged to negotiate with the DOJ after the findings were released in order to solve the issues outlined in the report.
However, the DOJ under the Trump Administration declined to pursue a consent degree with the City. In response to this, the State of Illinois commenced a lawsuit that sought to achieve the same effect. Its proceedings are summarized in Illinois v. City of Chicago.
Summary Authors
Amelia Huckins (2/12/2017)
Matthew Feng (5/23/2022)
Fardon, Zachary T. (Illinois)
Gunston, Emily A. (District of Columbia)
Gupta, Vanita (District of Columbia)
Rosenbaum, Steven H. (District of Columbia)
Patton, Stephen Ray (Illinois)
Last updated Aug. 30, 2023, 1:47 p.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Illinois
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: 2015
Closing Date: 2017
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
U.S. Department of Justice.
Plaintiff Type(s):
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Attorney Organizations:
U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act, 34 U.S.C. § 12601 (previously 42 U.S.C. § 14141)
Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.
Constitutional Clause(s):
Unreasonable search and seizure
Special Case Type(s):
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General:
Incident/accident reporting & investigations
Policing: