* Evanston Now on the 9th Congressional District…

The chair of a U.S. House education committee has called for Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss to brief the panel about claims the mayor refused to provide city police to help Northwestern University officials clear a pro-Palestinian encampment at the school.

The letter, sent on Wednesday and shared publicly by Biss Thursday morning, outlines what Rep. Tim Walberg describes as “documents [that] revealed that Biss refused to clear Northwestern University’s violent and antisemitic encampment in 2024 in order to ‘shore up’ his ‘progressive credentials.’”

The letter includes text messages between former Northwestern president Michael Schill and Northwestern Trustee and mega donor Michael Sacks, who rails against Biss, saying, “if the wind blows the wrong way, he will throw you under the bus. No hesitation. Same with Jan [Schakowsky].”

Walberg called the protests at Northwestern a “hotbed of antisemitic harassment and hostility,” saying the Evanston Police Department, at Biss’ direction, did not assist NU in clearing the encampment.

Biss held a press conference responding to Walberg’s letter this afternoon. His opening remarks…

My name is Daniel Biss, Mayor of Evanston, and I’m gathering you this morning to speak to what occurred here in Evanston in the spring of 2024 during the encampment, relative to activities in Gaza that occurred on Northwestern’s campus.

On the first night of the encampment, I got a call from [President Michael Schill] at Northwestern indicating that he had concluded it would be unable, it would be impossible, to end the encampment peacefully, and therefore that the only remaining option was to clear the encampment, arrest people who remain there. He explained that the Northwestern Police Department didn’t have enough personnel to do this, and therefore asked the Evanston Police to do this. His explanation for why people ought to be arrested was that he would suspend Northwestern students for violating the no tents rule on campus, and once they’ve been suspended, they wouldn’t be entitled to be on campus and should be arrested for trespassing.

I consulted with Evanston Police and other top staff asking the fundamental questions, is there a public safety threat here? What do our policies dictate that we do when protests occurred and we were all completely aligned, there was no public safety threat. It did not make sense to clear the encampment and to make arrests. In fact, EPD cautioned that bringing them in could further inflame the situation.

And so after meticulously assessing the situation through the lens of public safety and the right to peaceful protest, we came to that conclusion. We believed at the time it was the right decision. I believe today it was the right decision. This was about protecting free speech. It was about protecting the right to protest. It was about keeping people safe, and it was about not needlessly putting our own police officers in harm’s way.

I was in close coordination with Evanston Police throughout this process. At no time do they indicate a need for public safety purposes to clear the encampment. By the way, a few days later, a deal was struck to end the encampment peacefully, without violence, without arrests.

So, why are we here today? We are here today because of a dishonest political attack. We are here today because that attack is an effort to go after the right to peacefully protest. This is an effort to use the very real danger of anti-semitism to advance a political agenda.

I will say that personally, as a Jewish person, as a grandson of Holocaust survivors, I find it deeply, deeply offensive. I will also say it’s part of a broader effort to criminalize free speech and crack down on protests. We’re seeing this going on with ICE right now, there is an effort to pressure local officials to crack down on protest. Federal agents are attacking and in some cases assassinating dissenters on our streets. The President and his allies are engaged in a coordinated campaign to push anyone they can, whether it’s municipal governments, public safety entities, universities, corporations to silence dissent. It’s unacceptable. I’m not going to allow it to happen here.

I have to say, in light of what was in the letter from Chairman Walberg, the specific reason that we’re here is because Republicans are trying to create a media circus. We are here because they chose to make this public, because they are trying to draw attention to this. My actions on this issue have, at every single moment, been driven by the question of public safety and the right to free speech, and unfortunately, it is Republicans who are trying to turn it into a media event.

Now, by the way, there’s an election in less than 50 days, a high profile election. It’s almost two years after this decision was made, many months after the decision was made public, this is an effort to launch a frivolous political attack, and I will not stand for it, so I’m going to work with city staff, with Corporation Counsel and other advisors to design the appropriate response to Chairman Walberg’s absurd letter. But I’ll end where I began. I am proud of the way that we made, the decision that we made at the time, given the information that we had, it was the right decision, and looking back with almost two years of hindsight, it is even more clear today that it was the right decision, and I stand by it.

* From the Q and A…

Reporter: You kind of alluded to this in your remarks. You said it’s a politically motivated and the timing of it also draws the question, why do you think that? Can you kind of clarify why you think this is something that you’re making an issue with? Now, you also mentioned, of course, your election. But if you could kind of expand on that.

Biss: I don’t know. I would reiterate that the decision was made almost two years ago, that information about the decision was shared with House Republicans in particular, a very long time ago, and then made public a number of months ago, and they’re choosing to do this under 50 days before an election. It’s obviously not a coincidence. We’re not going to pretend otherwise. I can’t speculate if any organization wants to publicize good decisions I’ve made that I’m proud of. I would welcome that and encourage them to do so, but I can’t help but notice that Chairman Walberg’s biggest campaign supporter is AIPAC, and there’s widespread rumors that AIPAC is preparing multi million dollar ad offensive against me, and I don’t know what conclusion to be drawn from that, but it seems noteworthy to me. […]

Reporter: In the text messages that are attached to the letter, Schill wrote that you were talking to members of the council and potentially Congresswoman Schakowsky. I was wondering, in the process of making that decision, were there conversations between you and those parties?

Biss: I don’t remember every call that I made-I heard from President Schill, as I recall, I believe I heard from [Schill] or at least that we connected at 10 o’clock that night. So only some people that I call at that hour. So I don’t remember whether or not I spoke with members of city council, and I just don’t remember I did call Congressman Schakowsky for her advice on this, because I thought her insights would be very helpful, and they were. She was totally in alignment with the instinct that I had that it did not make sense to make arrests and clear the encampment as there was peaceful protest going on, and I value that conversation.

Reporter: Actually, Michael Sacks was in those text messages as well, communicating back and forth with former president Schill and he said that-and Schill said in another message that it seemed as though you were trying to bolster your political ambitions. What’s your response to that?

Biss: My response is very simple. How did you find out about this? Right? The press found out about all of this through sources other than myself. I made the decision that I thought was right based on the considerations that were most important, which is again, public safety and the right to protest, and then I went about my business, trying not to politicize it. Others have chosen to politicize it. I regret that decision, but now that they’ve done it, I feel compelled to share the truth.

Click here to listen to the full audio recording.

* Evanston Roundtable…

Former U.S. Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-New York) endorsed Kat Abughazaleh in the 9th Congressional District race Thursday morning, adding to the list of out-of-state congresspeople and caucuses now weighing in on the high-profile Democratic primary.

Bowman represented New York’s 16th District from 2021 to 2025 and was a member of “the Squad,” a small group of the Democratic Party’s most progressive congresspeople. He wrote in a message announcing his endorsement that Abughazaleh “represents the kind of leadership this moment demands and our country desperately needs.”

* Evanston Now’s Matthew Eadie…

* Laura Washington for the Tribune…

The [7th Congressional District] has been a deep and historically African American one. Its current occupant, U.S. Rep. Danny Davis, has been reelected to 15 terms, serving nearly 30 years. He was preceded by Cardiss Collins, who reigned over the district for 23 years. […]

Nearly all of the 13 running are African American, with plenty of prominent names in the crowd: Chicago city Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin, Forest Park Mayor Rory Hoskins, former Cook County Commissioner Richard Boykin, Illinois state Rep. La Shawn Ford, union leader Anthony Driver and community organizer Kina Collins.

Also running are Thomas Fisher, David Ehrlich, Anabel Mendoza, Jazmin Robinson, Reed Showalter and Felix Tello.

Then there is Jason Friedman, who could change the racial equation, as the only white candidate who brings significant money and clout. […]

“The 7th Congressional District is an historically Black seat,” Emanuel “Chris” Welch, the African American speaker of the Illinois House, noted in a recent interview on Black talk radio WVON-AM 1690. “And we need to make sure the seat stays a Black seat. That is a voice at the table for Black people.”

* 7th CD candidate Reed Showalter is out with his first campaign ad. The press release…

Today, Reed Showalter, former federal attorney and candidate for Illinois’ 7th Congressional District, released his first campaign ad ahead of the March 17th Democratic Primary election. The 30-second ad, titled “Don’t Take,” is running across digital and streaming platforms.

“Don’t Take” reflects Showalter’s commitment to taking on establishment politicians who are failing to deliver solutions to the serious problems facing Americans today, from lawless ICE raids to the corporate takeover of our democracy. Showalter highlights that he refuses AIPAC money and corporate PAC money, because unlike many politicians, he “can’t be bought.”

View “Don’t Take” here.

Script:

Showalter: “Right now we’re facing overlapping crises. And we know we can’t fix it with outdated thinking and establishment politicians bought by corporate interests. I’m Reed Showalter, progressive Democrat running for Congress, and I’ve spent my career fighting against the corporate establishment. I don’t take AIPAC money. I don’t take corporate PAC money. Because I can’t be bought. In Congress, the only person I’ll fight for is you.”

*

* 2nd CD candidate Donna Miller announced an endorsement from US Rep. Jan Schakowsky this morning. Press release…

The campaign of Donna Miller for Illinois’ 2nd Congressional District proudly announces the endorsement of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, a longtime champion for working families, healthcare access and social justice.

Congresswoman Schakowsky and Cook County Commissioner Miller share a deep and longstanding relationship built on mutual respect, trust and shared values. Over the years, Commissioner Miller has frequently sought Congresswoman Schakowsky’s advice and guidance on key issues, drawing upon her experience and leadership to better serve Cook County residents.

* Miller appears to have flipped on her position on Medicare for All. From Miller’s Independent Voters of Illinois - IPO questionnaire…

Q: Do you support Universal Healthcare (such as “Single Payer” or “Medicare for All”)?

A: I support access to care for every American however that is achieved, that allows a continued marketplace for medical services where everyone has access to the healthcare they need. I do not necessarily support a single payer system where the government is the single payer; however, having 40 million people uninsured is not acceptable in the United States.

I also support expanding pre-tax accounts, such as Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs), as they can provide significant support for individuals managing healthcare costs. By increasing contribution limits and broadening eligible expenses, employees can better offset rising medical costs while reducing their taxable income. This approach not only encourages proactive healthcare planning but also helps alleviate the financial burden of unforeseen medical events. Expanding these accounts could also incentivize preventive care, as participants may be more likely to seek services if they know they can cover expenses with pre-tax dollars.

Commissioner Miller’s campaign website…

Everyone deserves affordable, accessible health care no matter their income or ZIP code. I’ll fight to lower prescription drug costs, cap insulin prices, expand access to generic drugs and restore funding for rural and suburban hospitals. Health care is a human right and I support a Medicare for All framework.

[From Rich: “Medicare for All” must be polling well with Democrats because Sen. Laura Fine has done basically the same thing as Commissioner Miller on this topic.]

* More…

* Tribune | Top candidates for the US House in Illinois’ 2nd, 4th, 7th, 8th and 9th districts for the 2026 election: Three incumbents announced plans to leave Congress, while two others are running for U.S. Senate, opening four seats outright. A fifth contest was thrown into turmoil after U.S. Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García announced late in the election cycle that he would not seek reelection, a move that cleared the way for his chosen successor while complicating efforts by potential write-in candidates. All five districts are held by Democrats, making the Democratic primary races the ones to watch. Republicans are also fielding candidates in several races as the GOP nationally hopes to maintain its thin majority in the House.

* Sun-Times | ‘Broadview Six’ conspiracy case involving congressional candidate could go to trial in spring: Attorneys in the case sought a trial date Wednesday during a status hearing before U.S. District Judge April Perry. They did so less than a week after a separate case tied to the feds’ aggressive immigration campaign ended with a high-profile jury acquittal. A trial in Perry’s courtroom likely wouldn’t move forward until after the March 17 primary, when Abughazaleh is seeking the Democratic nomination in Illinois’ 9th District. She is one of four Democratic politicians charged in the conspiracy case. The trial is more likely to take place in late May or June.

* Sun-Times | Duckworth, Illinois Democrats blast Vice President JD Vance for likening senator to ‘Forrest Gump’: Duckworth responded to the comment by calling it a “petty” insult “at the expense of people with disabilities.” “Forrest Gump ran toward danger in Vietnam. Your boss ran to his podiatrist crying bone spurs,” Duckworth wrote on X. “Petty insults at the expense of people with disabilities won’t change the fact that you’re risking troops’ lives to boost Chevron’s stock price. It’s my job to hold you accountable.”

* WTTW | Ald. Byron Sigcho-Lopez Announces Independent Bid for Congress: “We’re not strangers to being outspent by big corporate PACs,” Sigcho-Lopez said. “I think that there is a desire to elect independent leadership that is unbought.” Sigcho-Lopez is the third candidate to throw a proverbial hat in the ring, joining Patty Garcia and political organizer Mayra Macías, who is running as an independent.