Capitol - Your Illinois News Radar » AG Raoul blasts lawmakers for allowing his criminal enhancement penalty law to expire
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
AG Raoul blasts lawmakers for allowing his criminal enhancement penalty law to expire

Monday, Nov 20, 2023 - Posted by Rich Miller

* From my October 27th weekly newspaper column

Back in May 2017, Chicago Police Supt. Eddie Johnson traveled to Springfield and promised a House committee that passing a criminal penalty enhancement bill he favored would drastically reduce gun crimes in his city.

The bill, SB 1722, was sponsored by then-Sen. Kwame Raoul, who would run successfully for attorney general the following year. It sought to establish higher minimum prison terms for people convicted of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon if they’d previously been convicted of various crimes. The bill would also increase penalties for unlawful use of a weapon by a felon.

Johnson was asked by committee member then-Rep. Christian Mitchell, D-Chicago, to estimate how many shootings, whether fatal or not, the legislature might prevent by passing the bill.

“I think over time, we will probably, we will cut it, cut it down in half, to half,” Johnson replied. […]

If you’re a sentient being, you know that Johnson’s confident prediction was wildly incorrect. Gun crimes did not plummet by 50 percent.

The law did lead to people being locked up longer, however. Research by the Illinois Sentencing Policy Advisory Council, an entity created by the General Assembly, showed that sentences rose after the law took effect in 2018.

“The mean sentence length for Aggravated UUW sentences with qualifying predicate convictions increased by about 5 months and the likelihood of a sentence of at least six years was about 3.2 times higher” than before the law took effect, the 2021 study found. And the average sentence length for UUW/felon sentences with predicate convictions, “increased by about 4 months and the likelihood of a sentence of at least seven years was about 2.5 times higher than before the effective date.”

As we’ve since discussed, the provision to extend the sunset was stripped out of the sunset omnibus bill and passed the Senate as a stand-alone which passed 42-12, with another three Democrats not voting. But Senators knew this wasn’t going anywhere else because the Senate’s vehicle was a House bill sponsored by Rep. Will Guzzardi, a progressive Democrat who predictably refused to move it forward.

* That brings us to this WAND TV story

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul is disappointed that House Democratic lawmakers are allowing a 2018 criminal justice law to sunset at the end of this year. Raoul was the lead sponsor of the legislation that created new sentencing guidelines for repeat gun offenders. […]

“Someone who is a risk to public safety needs to be incapacitated at least for some period of time such that you protect the public and give that individual some time to rethink what they want to be engaged in,” Raoul told WAND News in an exclusive interview.

Raoul’s law also stated that people convicted of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon several times could serve 6-7 years in jail. The Attorney General stressed that is is wrong to characterize the statute as a new mandatory minimum or penalty enhancement.

“That’s hogwash,” Raoul said. “I really encourage the members of the General Assembly, many of whom are my friends, to actually read the bill. Read the law. The law preserves judicial discretion.” […]

Guzzardi stressed that he would not allow House Bill 1440 to advance and blocked it from being called for a vote in the chamber. Raoul told WAND News that he was shocked to hear about this situation while he was working in Washington D.C.

“I somewhat blame myself. Had I anticipated that there would be this level of pushback on this, I would’ve had individual conversations with legislators to try and help explain it,” Raoul admitted. “I think a lot of people just had a misunderstanding of what the statute actually does.”

He wasn’t in DC the day that bill passed the Senate.

And he surely knew this was a problem, particularly in the House.

* Also, the Republicans claimed this was, indeed, a mandatory sentencing bill. Last week on that very same WAND TV

Guzzardi stressed that he would not allow House Bill 1440 to advance and blocked it from being called for a vote in the chamber.

Still, House Republicans said the extension deserved a vote to protect the public.

“We’re about to get rid of mandatory sentencing,” said Rep. Dan Ugaste (R-Geneva).

Your thoughts?


  1. - Springfield Watcher - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 1:07 pm:

    Why would the Attorney General lie? Just say you were vacationing in Fort Meyers, Florida while the legislature was in session. What about his leg team? What did they do to advocate for the bill?

  2. - DuPage Saint - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 1:12 pm:

    I am old and should know better but it would be nice if legislators either read and understood bills they were commenting on or not mischaracterize what they know the bill really says

  3. - Excitable Boy - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 1:19 pm:

    - “I think a lot of people just had a misunderstanding of what the statute actually does.” -

    That may be the case, but can you provide any data showing that the law had any impact on reducing crime? If not it’s just an additional taxpayer burden with no tangible result.

  4. - Frumpy White Guy - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 1:30 pm:

    The bad guy is the boogie man strategy isn’t working. Putting someone in jail longer doesn’t solve the gun problems. How about more legislation that provides sufficient mental health services and support for disadvataged families.

  5. - Dotnonymous x - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 2:02 pm:

    The Second Amendment protects everyone…or no one.

    The felon exclusion is blatantly unconstitutional.

  6. - Dotnonymous x - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 2:17 pm:

    The law preserves judicial discretion?…when confidence in the judiciary is at an all time low…which these lawmaker’s don’t see?…from inside their insulated bubble?

  7. - Roman - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 2:31 pm:

    It’s not uncommon to have a debate on a proposal in which the proponents overhype the supposed benefit and the detractors exaggerate the alleged negative consequences. Such is the case with this law.

  8. - Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 2:47 pm:

    The FB link doesn’t work for me. Has it been taken down or is it friends-only?

    He wasn’t in DC?

    I don’t understand the point of his interview. So bizarre to continue to portray this upside-down 2-strikes sentencing enhancement (unprecedented in the criminal code as a presumptive maximum stacked on top of a mandatory minimum) as something other than it was: an experiment and a mistake happily ended.

  9. - Me. - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 2:57 pm:

    That may be the case, but can you provide any data showing that the law had any impact on reducing crime? If not it’s just an additional taxpayer burden with no tangible result.

    That’s not the question. The question is, “Did the judiciary make use of the “downward departure”? (what Senator Raoull called a “safety valve” at the time). The bill gave judges discretion to NOT use any of the “mandatorily sentences.” That was to be a watershed moment, for if it worked, maybe we could make mandatory 15-20-25 gun crime add ons, discretionary as well. (SA Alvarez of all people supported Making discretionary the 15-20-25 sentencing enhancements. All of my babble today this, we were all shortchanged by SPACs analysis. They indicated there was no way to determine that result based on “lack of data.” Maybe we can take them at their word, but Cook has used that “safety valve” repeated and regularly. It was a crucial bit of the act. So maybe Rep. Guzzardi can ask why that didn’t happen. (I’m kidding he doesn’t care why, because “sentencing enhancements.”

  10. - Free Market - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 3:03 pm:

    It would be really great if the world worked the way Will G wished it would. It doesn’t.

  11. - charles in charge - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 3:18 pm:

    ==That’s not the question.==

    Please explain why asking proponents to show evidence that this law ever produced the promised results is “not the question.” You want to focus only on the “safety valve,” but the only reason a safety valve was included in the first place is because of concerns about the impact of the underlying sentencing enhancement–concerns that have turned out to be well-founded. The burden should absolutely be on proponents of this law to show that it actually worked. That is 100% “the question.”

  12. - Dotnonymous x - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 3:47 pm:

    If it walks like an enhancement…yeah.

  13. - Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 3:57 pm:

    ==That was to be a watershed moment, for if it worked, maybe we could make mandatory 15-20-25 gun crime add ons, discretionary as well.==

    Great news, Me. We don’t need a new extreme penalty on gun possession in order to end IL’s extreme mandatory minimum add-ons to gun use.

    Instead, we can adjust the law so that judges are sentencing people based on actual culpability, harm, and efficacy, within broad categories of recommended ranges. As used to be standard before someone decided that pulling a trigger once needed to be punished with 25 more years of imprisonment than stabbing someone multiple times.

  14. - Excitable Boy - Monday, Nov 20, 23 @ 5:10 pm:

    - That’s not the question. -

    Whether or not laws have a measurable net positive effect on society is always “the question”.

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.

* Reader comments closed for Juneteenth
* Cash bail did not necessarily make us any safer (Updated)
* Isabel’s afternoon roundup (Updated)
* GOP poll has Sorensen up by 9 points, but below 50 percent
* Showcasing The Retailers Who Make Illinois Work
* It’s just a bill
* Revenue omnibus includes some little-noticed charitable provisions
* Pritzker teams up with IBM, Discover Financial to push for federal quantum funds
* They’ll come back to it
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* Live coverage
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* Yesterday's stories

Visit our advertisers...







Main Menu
Pundit rankings
Subscriber Content
Blagojevich Trial
Updated Posts

June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005


RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0

Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller