Question of the day
Tuesday, May 26, 2026 - Posted by Rich Miller
Currently, judicial records in Illinois are not subject to the state’s Freedom of Information Act. Given the courts’ wide-reaching jurisdiction in Illinois, the exemption substantially restricts the public’s ability to understand a wide range of issues.
Senate Bill 1826 aims to remedy this issue by adding the judicial branch to Illinois’ Freedom of Information Act. This bill would allow greater access to court administration records, NOT case file information.
Without this bill, the public has limited access to:
• How courts spend public funds.
• All organizational/administrative records within the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts and offices of the chief judges.
• How long court cases take to go through the system.
• Information regarding diversion programs, etc.
* From the synopsis…
Amends the Freedom of Information Act. Includes the judicial body and its components in the definition of “public body”. Defines “public records” when that term is associated with the judicial body and its components. Exempts from inspection and copying (i) records of the judicial body and its components that pertain to the preparation of judicial opinions and orders or judicial work product and (ii) records that are privileged or confidential under the Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct or the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct. Provides that a person whose request to inspect or copy a public record was denied or treated as a voluminous request by the judicial body and its components may not file a request for review with the Public Access Counselor.
The bill is still in the Assignments Committee. No witness slips have been filed.
* The Question: Should the Illinois court system be subject to FOIA, with the restrictions noted above? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 1:40 pm:
I think the records should be treated like other public records, i.e. generally available with limited exceptions. But I think it would take a lot of discussion to figure out what those exceptions should be for judicial records.
- Lurker - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 1:40 pm:
All use of public funds at all levels, should be FOIA-able.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 1:58 pm:
No. This is ripe for abuse for anyone who has a beef with a particular judge or court.
- @misterjayem - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:10 pm:
With reservations, I voted yes because additional transparency could buttress the credibility of the judiciary.
– MrJM
- Emanuel Collective - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:12 pm:
Yes, Illinois is a big outlier in this regard. 44 other states allow judicial spending to be requested. Illinois is one of only 3 states that doesn’t allow probation and pretrial data to be requested. Pretty good rundown here: https://www.civicfed.org/blog/breaking-down-issue-public-access-judicial-branch-data-illinois
- Retired SURS Employee - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:18 pm:
Can someone explain the actual problem, including examples, that this bill would cure? Or is this a solution in search of a problem?
- DuPage Saint - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:24 pm:
The Clerk of the Circuit Court is considered part of the judicial branch and is not subject to a FOIA I once had a non court related foia to DuPage and the foia officer told me the Clerk office not subject to FOIA I asked why they had a FOIA officer he said it was to tell people they cannot be FOIA d So ad the clerk to this
- Just Another Anon - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:26 pm:
We have enough draws on the court’s valuable time and resources as it is. Most judicial records are available just by walking into a courthouse and asking for a printout. Most judicial budgets (at least the County’s part of it) are available from the County in which they are located. All this will do is allow even more idiots to harass even more judges and judicial staff. Let it die in Executive.
I’d also note, that doing so would raise separation of powers issues, with the PAC (of the AG’s executive branch) effectively regulating the Court (of the judicial branch) on interpretation of a statute (FOIA). Too many worms in that can, keep it closed.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:30 pm:
===We have enough draws on the court’s valuable time and resources as it is===
Yeah. Visit any courthouse on a Friday afternoon. It’s always so busy. /s
- Unionman - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:32 pm:
I voted yes. However, I think that outside the administrative aspects of the courts which should be subject to FOIA just like any other government body. The actual court documents should be available to the public to access and download from anywhere. Make it the duty of the court to either scan all court records related to cases or require everything to be e-filed. Make the records publicly available for download at no cost or at a nominal cost. There are far too many documents that the courts are handling to have a FOIA officer reviewing the documents for exemptions.
While they are at it, they should include campaigns as non-exempt areas. For too long have elected officials claimed something was campaign related when it clearly crosses into their elected position.
- Annon'in - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:34 pm:
Hmmmmmm no one is commentin’ on this hot topic. Can’t imagine why
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:41 pm:
Yes, with the caveats mentioned in the post.
===We have enough draws on the court’s valuable time and resources as it is===
What’s makes the courts more special than any other governmental agency subject to FOIA? Having coordinated the process, I can attest to it being a pain. FOIA should be considered an essential function and as such should be properly funded to implement as intended. Sadly, the public and concomitantly, the pols don’t think in those terms.
=== judicial harassment ===
That too is an issue that comes with the territory
- Just Sayin' - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:50 pm:
I voted no because “[g]eneral administrative and supervisory authority over all courts is vested in the Supreme Court and shall be exercised by the Chief Justice in accordance with its rules” under Section 16 of Article VI of the Illinois Constitution. You can’t get more administrative than rules relating to release of records. The GA and Governor don’t have authority to put the courts’ records under FOIA as it would be unconstitutional.
- Archpundit - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 2:57 pm:
Generally for, but maybe a caveat for nuisances like Devore.
- Tony - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 3:04 pm:
I don’t think most folks realize how much basic government administration is performed by the courts. This is particularly true in Cook County. The electronic monitoring of pretrial defendants for instance, is a big administrative program. Yet it is largely exempt from FOIA.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 3:12 pm:
I voted yes. The separation of powers issue is interesting, although 99/100 PAC opinions are non-binding, so I am not sure it would matter much. The PAC may just never issue a binding decision for a court to avoid the issue. It is funny reading all the opponent comments because you can say all these things about FOIA now, but I guess if it is a simple government worker no one cares.
- old guy - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 4:09 pm:
To what end? What is it that is unknown that should be disclosed. This is not the U.S. Attorney hiding grand jury transcripts. I don’t think the exceptions are broad enough to do anything more than set up a fight.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 4:15 pm:
=== What is it that is unknown that should be disclosed===
Did you even bother to read the post?
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 4:16 pm:
Voted yes for the reasons cited by others. Don’t think it’ll pass. IF it does, the Illinois Supreme Court just might define what constitutes a “legislative day” … .
- Dotnonymous x - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 4:42 pm:
Voted yes…..for all of the good reasons cited above…and because knowledge is power.
- ChicagoVinny - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 5:50 pm:
I voted yes. Courts are answerable to the public like any other public servant.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 6:14 pm:
Yes. All government, especially the legislature and courts should be subject to FOIA. Only then, when they get the weekly or even daily FOIA’s the rest of us get, do we have a chance at real reform.
- Excitable Boy - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 7:18 pm:
- All this will do is allow even more idiots to harass even more judges and judicial staff. -
I don’t see why judges and staff are more special than other public servants. I vote yes.
- btowntruth from forgottonia - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 8:34 pm:
Voted yes.
Maybe if they have to worry about FOIAs we may see more reform.