On June 30, 2016, Prison Legal News (PLN) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District Court of Illinois against Cook County Jail under section §1983, alleging violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process and Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants prohibited delivery of written speech from PLN and other related publications, failing to provide due process via notice and opportunity to challenge the censorship and denying Plaintiff equal protection as required under the Constitution. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief to stop the censorship practices, as well as compensation for damages and legal fees.

On July 1, 2016, the plaintiff motioned for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiff sought a declaration that the Jail's mailroom policies and practice of allowing some newsprint while barring PLN violate the plaintiff's right under the First Amendment, Due Process, and Equal Protection clauses of the Constitution. On November 21, 2016, the court (Judge Joan Gottschall) denied the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction, stating preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy that may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled to such relief. The court noted that the regulations were at least rationally related to prison security and that it could not grant such extraordinary relief on the indeterminate factual record plaintiffs had provided at that time.

The parties appear to have been engaged in settlement talks after the denial. On March 30, 2017, the court referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Marie Valdez for a settlement conference. Initially that proved unsuccessful, and on January 24, 2018, the parties informed the court that settlement discussions had been unsuccessful, leading the court to set a schedule for discovery.

However, in the months that followed the parties returned to negotiating a settlement, and appear to have reached one that will resolve the case. On December 12, 2018, the parties informed the court that the settlement they reached called for the court to resolve the dispute over plaintiff's fees. The court set a date for a hearing on the motion for fees, but on March 11, 2019, the court granted a joint motion to stay that hearing in light of the parties' representation that they have agreed in principle to settle their dispute over costs and fees.

The hearing on the motion for fees is currently set for April 12, 2019, but the court has advised the parties that additional time will be granted should they need it to finalize the settlement agreement.

Ginny Lee - 01/26/2017
Chris Pollack - 03/21/2019


compress summary