Today at the Illinois Police Officers Memorial Ceremony in Springfield, Comptroller Susana Mendoza railed against the Pretrial Fairness Act, claiming that it “permits violent offenders accused of heinous crimes to be released on electronic monitoring.”
Comptroller Mendoza was referring to the murder of police officer Enrique Martinez. Our hearts continue to break for Officer Martinez’s loved ones, who undoubtedly feel the pain of their loss daily. We would like to leave our comments there, but because of the Comptroller’s weaponization of this tragedy, we cannot.
As Comptroller Mendoza undoubtedly knows, Darion McMillian, who fired the fatal shots, was on pretrial release for possessing between 300-500 grams of cannabis, an offense that falls under no definition of “heinous” or “violent” anywhere in the country. Nothing about the allegations against McMillian indicated that he would participate in a shooting that would result in an officer’s death.
We should always evaluate how we can make our communities safer, including reviewing data and research, which is exactly what underlies every aspect of the Pretrial Fairness Act. Mendoza also took aim at a policy included in the law that allows people on pretrial electronic monitoring two periods of movement each week to complete essential tasks like going to the grocery store and laundromat or visiting a doctor. These provisions were put in place because the Cook County Sheriff’s Office had created a human rights crisis by preventing people on his electronic monitoring program from doing those tasks as well as activities like taking out the garbage or getting the mail. The program was so impractical and inhumane that Cook County began sunsetting it last month.
Mendoza also repeated the false talking point that people on pretrial electronic monitoring have “two days a week off the monitoring grid.” This three-year old piece of misinformation has already been debunked through reporting and simple consultation of actual law and practice. People on pretrial electronic monitoring are under GPS surveillance 24/7, including during any periods of essential movement.
Since the Pretrial Fairness Act took effect, violent and property crimes have decreased in urban and rural areas across the state. While we are not claiming this is a direct result of ending money bail, it does make clear that the claims that this law has made our communities less safe are quite simply false.
In a moment where misinformation is being used by officials in Washington D.C. to undermine our most basic rights, we should put a premium on facts. We hope that the Comptroller will stop spreading lies to court conservatives and spread fear.
Background on Darion McMillian’s case:
- On May 12, 2023, he was charged with Manufacture/Delivery/Possession with Intent to Deliver 300-500 grams of Cannabis, a class 3 felony. The Will County State’s Attorney declined to file a detention motion using the law’s Willful Flight standard.
- McMillian was ordered to submit to drug testing as a condition of his pretrial release. A violation was filed on October 16, 2024, and McMillian was subsequently charged with attempting to defraud a drug test and ordered onto electronic monitoring.
- On October 21, 2024, the Will County State’s Attorney’s Office filed a motion to revoke pretrial release based on the second charge. Instead of hearing that motion, the judge issued a continuance and allowed Mr. McMillian to remain on electronic monitoring pending the revocation hearing.
Background on Pretrial Release:
On September 18, 2023, Illinois implemented the Pretrial Fairness Act and ended the use of money bond. Pretrial release decisions are now focused on safety and not access to money. A study of the law’s implementation conducted by researchers at Loyola University found that:
- Comparing the first six months of 2023 (before the law took effect) to the first six months of 2024 (after the law took effect), the statewide volume of reported crimes declined 11%. Violent crime declined 7%, and property crime declined 14%.
- The number of people incarcerated pretrial decreased by 14% in urban areas and 25% rural counties after the law went into effect. While fewer people are being jailed now than before the Pretrial Fairness Act took effect, a significantly higher proportion of those who are jailed are facing violent or weapons-related charges than before the Pretrial Fairness Act.
- Analysis of court data from 22 counties indicates that overall failure to appear warrant rates actually declined from 13.6% before the Pretrial Fairness Act to 12.5% after.
- Detention hearings are longer under the Pretrial Fairness Act (median 10-30 minutes) than under the money bond system, when people were routinely jailed for weeks or months after very short hearings (median 4-6 minutes).
- Detention hearings are now more transparent, with judges articulating reasons for their decisions, pointing to case-specific facts to support them, and establishing a record for appellate review.
- Families were estimated to have paid over $140 million per year in money bond before the implementation of the Pretrial Fairness Act. An estimated $14 million was kept as administrative fees by counties, even for accused people whose cases were dismissed or who were found not guilty.
- Socially DIstant Watcher - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:07 pm:
I don’t understand Mendoza’s fascination with running for Chicago Mayor and hope she stays in state office for a long and productive time. Maybe then she’ll avoid mistakes like yesterday’s.
Plus, who else is going to fly the JBT flag so proudly?
- H-W - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:09 pm:
Excellent rebuttal. I wish those who exist on talking points would recognize the harms they unintentionally, and in some cases intentionally, cause when the fail to reason. It is high time we stop this nonsense that assumes only two sides of any issue exist: us v. them; conservative v. liberal; republican v. democrat.
We are better than this. So is Ms. Mendoza. Deep down, we are all in this thing call Illinois together, and we only win when we all Illinoisans are able to grow and move forward.
A simple apology would be nice. But more important, a commitment to work together for our common good and our shared commonwealth, collectively, must become the goal of members of both parties. We can become our better angels because those examples already exist among us. Let them become our role models; not party platitudes from without.
- Juice - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:14 pm:
She’s not even trying to snag the Paul Vallas lane from the 2023 election. Its almost like she’s trying to take the Garry McCarthy lane from 2019 instead.
- Blooms of Spring - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:15 pm:
Reminds me of her unconstitutional position to not pay legislators because they didn’t pass a budget.
- Google Is Your Friend - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:16 pm:
The truth is, if she’s interested in anything above Comptroller, Mendoza has no future in the Democratic Party. Being a Ronald Reagan clone whose self-described political mentors are convicted corrupt felons is not a winning message.
- froganon - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:25 pm:
Great rebuttal. Will it get to the audience Mendoza was courting and if it does, will they hear it? The continued opposition of many in law enforcement to the Safe-T Act seems to be based on a victim mentality. Facts take second or third place to grievance mindsets. Mendoza has done an amazing job as Comptroller but comments like this make her seem unfit for other leadership roles.
- Homebody - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:32 pm:
Mendoza is great at her frankly nonpartisan position. I have no complaints about her work as Comptroller.
But the fact that the tough on crime crowd always loves to ignore facts and point blame at the wrong places to benefit themselves basically guarantees I’ll never vote for her for anything that involves policy discretion.
- Leatherneck - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:35 pm:
Mendoza is not the only Democrat critical of the SAFE-T Act.
Last December locally, Teresa Haley, members of Sonya Massey’s family, and other Springfield-area community advocates pointed out flaws in the act that threatened to put Sean Grayson back on the streets:
https://www.wandtv.com/news/advocates-massey-family-share-concerns-over-safe-t-act/article_7a453caa-b35a-11ef-84b3-c7d37669215a.html
- New Day - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:42 pm:
I love Susanna. I really do. I think she’s been fabulous in her current job and has a good career ahead of her. But this willingness to swallow hook, line and sinker IPI talking points on this law does her (and the public) an enormous disservice. She needs to get her facts straight before opining on public safety in particular ever again.
- Roman - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:47 pm:
Chicago voters worry a lot about crime — they did long before the SAFE-T Act and will continue to. So if you’re running for mayor, focusing on public safety is smart. But those same voters happen to be disproportionately liberal. They don’t want to hear MAGA-like hyperbole.
Eileen O’Neill Burke just did a pretty good job of striking a balance. Mendoza must not have been paying attention.
- Anyone Remember - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:47 pm:
When it comes to “showing your work” this is how it should be done.
- sewer thoughts - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 12:55 pm:
A reminder that running for Mayor of Chicago and getting 20% of the vote citywide would be a massive improvement for Comptroller Mendoza.
- The Magnificent Purple Walnut - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:05 pm:
Would an Aggravated Discharge of a Firearm (firing in to an occupied vehicle) conviction for Mr. McMillian in 2021 qualify as a possible violent crime to be considered?
- Excitable Boy - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:08 pm:
- threatened to put Sean Grayson back on the streets -
How’d that work out? Is he out and about?
Also as far as I can tell Teresa Haley isn’t a statewide office holder who should understand laws and how they work.
I’m joking of course. While I find Mendoza less than competent at her job, she knows the actual circumstances of the case, she’s just willing to say anything she thinks will help with her next campaign.
- Big Dipper - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:09 pm:
Murders were down in April in Chicago even thought the same people who lie about the SAFE-T Act screamed that getting rid of Shotspotter would increase murders. And all we hear is crickets.
- Donnie Elgin - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:16 pm:
= Will it get to the audience Mendoza was courting and if it does, will they hear it? =
Many of the posts may have the technical aspects of the Safe-T act correct, but do supporters of the Act really want Mendoza to use Darion McMillian as a political symbol of what is wrong with the law? Be careful what you wish for - as this accused cop killer is a menace.
https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/new-details-fatal-shooting-chicago-police-officer
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:18 pm:
===threatened to put Sean Grayson back on the streets===
And he wasn’t released. The statements were made from a position of true and understandable fear and perhaps a buy-in of some propaganda pushed by folks like yourself.
- James - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:23 pm:
It’s funny how hyper dems are when the Safe-T-Act is scrutinized. It’s telling for both Dem’s and Republicans that you cannot deviate from the partisan orthodoxy without severe backlash.
- Norseman - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:29 pm:
Once again, we see someone trying to bring facts to the conversation. What a bummer for the pols trying to play a narrative where they come to save the day.
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:30 pm:
===deviate from the partisan orthodoxy===
It’s deviation from actual facts that bothers most. But you probably wouldn’t know that because you’ve fully absorbed the propaganda.
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:37 pm:
===this accused cop killer is a menace===
And the judge could’ve and should’ve locked him up when he had the chance.
- Norseman - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 1:50 pm:
James, party orthodoxy or pushback on false narratives constantly being spouted by opponents?
For as huge an initiative this was, I’m surprised with how few fixes have been needed.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 2:00 pm:
Attending a memorial in order to deliver a speech about “When we give more rights to the criminals then we do to our police officers” is behavior unworthy of a response this measured and respectful.
But I’m glad it exists, to help out anyone else who is still unclear about reality, or who needs detailed information in order to discuss the law with those who are.
- leo21 - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 2:35 pm:
If a politician is going to run against the SAFE-T Act, they need to come with facts. I am open to hearing debates on it, but not with people who will lie. We should be asking questions about the prosecutors and the judges, not attacking the law. Under the bail system, that man could have still been on the streets.
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 2:41 pm:
===Eileen O’Neill Burke just did a pretty good job of striking a balance===
She lost the city.
- Amalia - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 3:17 pm:
no idea what Susanna is running for. but with a family member who is police, she sees things differently.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 4:05 pm:
😆
- Arsenal - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 4:07 pm:
==It’s telling for both Dem’s and Republicans that you cannot deviate from the partisan orthodoxy without severe backlash.==
This line continues to confuse me. If I support the SAFE-T Act and think that Mendoza’s criticism of it is misguided, am I not supposed to say so just because she’s a Dem?
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 2, 25 @ 4:14 pm:
===am I not supposed to say so just because she’s a Dem? ===
Correct. lol