Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Three Senate Democratic candidates talk about whether they support Schumer
Next Post: Report: Armored vehicles, surge in federal agents expected in Chicago as two-pronged strategy takes shape
Posted in:
* Background is here and here if you need it. Attorney General Kwame Raoul appeared on Chicago Tonight last night…
Q: Adams County Sheriff Tony Grootens in Western Illinois, he has said that he intends to aid the Department of Homeland Security in its deportation efforts. WTTW news obtained records showing that the county did indeed transfer at least two men into ICE custody. Do you see this as a violation of the state’s Trust Act, which prevents local law enforcement from supporting the federal government’s immigration deportation efforts?
AG Raoul: I’m not [going to] say too much about that particular case, because we have to examine all the specifics. You know, there are sheriffs and individuals who can proclaim a lot. I looked at some of the statements that he made that were represented in media, various media reports, saying things like, ‘there have been a few,’ and it’s very vague statements. So clearly, the law of the state of Illinois is that law enforcement, state and local law enforcement resources are not supposed to be used for immigration enforcement. Sheriffs are sworn officers that are supposed to abide by the law, and so that’s all I will say about that right now.
Video is here.
He’s had well over a month to examine the specifics. Just saying.
My own thought is other sheriffs will see AG Raoul’s essentially non-reaction and decide they can do the same thing.
But, hey, I could be wrong. Your view?
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 11:23 am
Previous Post: Three Senate Democratic candidates talk about whether they support Schumer
Next Post: Report: Armored vehicles, surge in federal agents expected in Chicago as two-pronged strategy takes shape
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
When a law is passed, but not enforced, it’s effectively just words on paper, and is no law at all.
Comment by fs Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 11:46 am
good for the sheriff.
Comment by Blue Dog Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 11:48 am
I’m not sure how much trouble it is worth for the AG to get into a fight with a sheriff from maga-land.
Is he ready to sue or prosecute the sheriff, setting him up as a maga-martyr? I don’t see that leading anywhere positive for Raoul or Pritzker.
Comment by Friendly Bob Adams Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:04 pm
==good for the sheriff.==
Yeah, because a law enforcement officer should actively break the law. It’s his job to UPHOLD the law, not to flaunt it.
To the post - I don’t understand why the Attorney General is being so non-committal about what is going on here unless he is preparing some sort of lawsuit against the Sheriff, but even then he should be able to say something more stern on this topic. The Sheriff is breaking the law. The Attorney General needs to do something about it.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:05 pm
It was 8 years ago today that Gov. Bruce Rauner signed the law making Illinois a sanctuary state.
Comment by here we go again Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:06 pm
Is it possible that the two people transferred were the subjects of ICE criminal warrants? Is it possible Grootens is lying or embellishing to burnish his MAGA credentials?
I thought this statement from the AG was telling:
“You know, there are sheriffs and individuals who can proclaim a lot.”
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:07 pm
==sanctuary state==
I wish we would stop using that term. We aren’t a sanctuary from anything. The federal government can still engage in the shenanigans they are engaging in right now, we’re just not going to help them do it unless they have a valid criminal warrant. There is nothing “sanctuary” about that.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:14 pm
My thoughts? Same as yours Rich.
=good for the sheriff.=
OK, so long as you are comfortable with anyone doing anything they want to do, anarchy. Then ok.
But you also need to be ok if you call 911 and the response is “we don’t feel like responding to your needs” because that is what you are giving a pass to.
Raul needs to get on the stick or advocate for a repeal of that aspect of the law.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:26 pm
===Is it possible ===
Sure. But this story broke on July 18. You’d think the AG’s office could figure out what’s going on in 41 days.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:28 pm
=== I looked at some of the statements that he made that were represented in media, various media reports, saying things like, ‘there have been a few,’ and it’s very vague statements. ===
That’s all you have at present? You have listened to and read the sheriff’s words, but not dug deeper?
Most criminals would love to go up against such a prosecutor who doesn’t look into the facts of the accusation - just the words of the accused.
Dig deeper.
Comment by H-W Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:31 pm
That Sheriff should be removed if he violated the law and quickly. He swore an oath. It would be interesting but unlikely the corner should arrest him. Make a martyr out of him who cared get rid of him. He can always run for governor once his area secedes
Comment by DuPage Saint Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:34 pm
FS Marbury vs Madison appears to allow for that in my unqualified opinion maybe you know about a court case that I don’t though
Comment by Macon Deliberations Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:36 pm
Macon, so you’re ok with public officials, while acting in their official capacity, knowingly and intentionally violating State law? State law that does not, btw, conflict with any requirement under Federal law.
Your Cliff Notes version of irrelevant constitutional law aside, that conduct is, in an orderly and lawful society, typically considered official misconduct.
Comment by fs Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:50 pm
==Your view?==
probably banned
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:53 pm
That was meant as a joke
but I just went back to see how I managed to put it more politely on this other thread and can’t see my post?
https://capitolfax.com/2025/08/25/ag-raoul-again-re
fuses-to-answer-questions-about-adams-county-she
riffs-defiance-of-state-law/#comments
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 12:57 pm
My view is what it always is. Start consolidating some of the many government entities and streamlining state and local government. Merge a bunch of the low population counties. What that gives you in this case is far fewer yahoo sheriffs, with the ones left actually having some work to do.
Comment by Excessively Rabid Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:06 pm
Gootens is just another Republican hack lawbreaker. So much fir being “tough on crime”. The double standard of these people is incredible.
Comment by low level Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:13 pm
Anyway, despite the AG’s power to issue subpoenas and require the sheriff and other Adams Co employees to attest to compliance with the law, under oath,
So far it is only WTTW’s FOIA that has delivered clear evidence of Adams Co jail entering into an unlawful contract for ICE detention TWO years after this was prohibited
Letting sheriffs continue to break the law is dangerous at any time
Doing it right now means that either one doesn’t believe there is attempted authoritarian takeover
Or that one doesn’t care
Neither are flattering
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:17 pm
Ah, I see it, thanks
==
- Stephanie Kollmann - Monday, Aug 25, 25 @ 6:03 pm:
The question on the table is whether IL is a sanctuary state…for lawbreaking sheriffs. And the longer this drags on without open and public correction, the more it appears to be one. The laws Grootens is breaking were passed through constitutional, democratic processes. The powers he is seizing were not. End of story. Letting this continue is dangerous.
Thanks for continuing to follow up on this.==
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:19 pm
=== The question on the table is whether IL is a sanctuary state…for lawbreaking sheriffs. ===
Well said, Stephanie Kollmann
Comment by H-W Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:26 pm
Rabid:
Merge a few counties?
You might be onto something there.
Comment by btowntruth from forgottonia Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:31 pm
More for Rabid:
Merge Scott into Morgan,and looks like some southern Illinois counties could do some merging.
Comment by btowntruth from forgottonia Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:34 pm
Rich,
There are a bunch more county sheriffs in Forgottonia that believe exactly what Grootens believes but they’re more quiet about it for the most part.
Comment by btowntruth from forgottonia Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:36 pm
Letting in lay for now seems prudent for AG and everyone. Maybe some private conversations will set things straight where public challenges only retrench existing attitudes. If this continues, then some kind of sanction is needed, I agree.
Comment by Da Burden Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:42 pm
I think MAGA Sheriffs have been spoiling for a fight with Il-Dems ever since the covid lockdowns, and now that their felon-in-chief occupies the White House they are chomping at the bit. Grooten is baiting Raoul, so are other GOP operatives like Terri Bryant who created an illegal “hotline” for IDOC COs to report immigrants to ICE.
I wish Raoul could prosecute them all but he has SO MUCH on his plate that is life-critical for people in this state, all the lawsuits against the Trump admin illegally withholding funding to myriad programs that directly affect people’s lives here at home NEED to be won. The resources it would take to prosecute one sheriff or one state senator may not seem like much at first, but once the dam is opened there will be “protest” violations of the law as other MAGA sheriffs begin to openly assist ICE. Just go back and look at how many counties’ S.O. issued statements in defiance of covid rules or PICA? Those same counties will line up behind the Adams Co sheriff over this issue as well and it will be open lawfare between the AG and half the state’s sheriffs.
If it comes to that, will the AG office’s budget be able to handle it all *and* whatever else the Trump admin throws at us?
AG has to pick his battles, I wish he could throw the book at Grooten but in this case discretion may indeed be the better part of valor. The warning at the end to “sworn officers” may be a bluff, it’s up to Grooten (or another MAGA sheriff) to decide if they want to call it. We’ll see what happens, I guess.
Comment by CA-HOON Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:47 pm
That sounds like a standard Raoul-style response. He doesn’t play politician as much as close-to-the-vest lawyer.
He and his team do their talking in court. They’re invaluable right now.
Comment by walker Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:52 pm
The underlying reality is that partisans always like when their side is taking a stand on a law or subject matter they don’t like. Their philosophy on “sanctuary” changing with the wind depending upon who is implementing it.
It is overall a poor idea for this very reason. Be careful what you choose to enforce or not, as it will come boomeranging back at you when the other side does it with something you despise.
The immigration dynamic, closing the boarder etc., is extraordinarily popular despite the tactics being used being beyond questionable.
Simply stated - this subject matter is a loser for the Dems as Political matter and they are stunningly slow in understanding that they got torched on this matter in the 2024 election.
Comment by All Good Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:54 pm
Also Trump has spoken in the past about “federalizing” law enforcement. If the AG were to prosecute a sheriff for assisting ICE in violation of the TRUST Act (signed into law by GOP Gov. Rauner) would Trump not jump on that as an excuse to help “persecuted” LEOs who are clearly loyal to him? Could he issue an EO “federalizing” the Illinois sheriffs? Who would the sheriffs listen to? State law or their cult leader?
Not a scenario I enjoy thinking about.
Comment by CA-HOON Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 1:57 pm
@ CA-HOON
You are probably right on most of those points.
Comment by H-W Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 2:08 pm
walker: the AG, like all prosecutors, has no problem with using the bully pulpit to issue general warnings about intended crackdowns well in advance of (and: alongside) any investigation or court proceedings
Whether that’s done or not just seems to depend on whether the prosecutor deems a situation to be sufficiently urgent and important
https://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/News-Room/2021-Pre
ss-Release-Archive/202109-13%20ANNOUNCES%20PUBLIC-PRIVATE%20PARTNERSHIP%20AIMED%20AT%20DISRUPTIN
G%20ORGANIZED%20RETAIL%20CRIMES.pdf
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 2:09 pm
Stephanie K Your point is well made and appreciated.
Comment by walker Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 2:16 pm
If I’m understanding the argument here, it’s that:
-The Trump Admin is attacking the rule of law in IL
-Some IL elected officials are (seemingly) committing crimes in order to facilitate those attacks, undermining the rule of law from within the state — and squarely within the AG’s direct jurisdiction (and not necessarily anyone else’s)
-but the IL Attorney General can’t really be expected to do that work because it’s a lot
Yikes. Please don’t any of you ever defend me!
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 2:20 pm
Even if the the AG did an investigation and found a violation by the Sherriff. Not entirely sure what remedy exists. The Trust Act does not have any penalties for a violation. I guess you could charge the Sherriff with “official misconduct.” But then you would need to put a criminal case on in front of a jury of people who don’t agree with the Trust Act.
A private citizen might be able to use the Trust Act as the basis for a Section 1983 Federal suit but not sure the AG could.
It would be a hard sell to say a violation of the Trust Act could permit the AG to remove the duly elected Sherriff from office.
Comment by Unionman Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 2:31 pm
I think it’s smart not to pick this battle.
Comment by Chicagonk Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 2:37 pm
Another example of the breakdown of Rule of Law catalyzed by MAGA, Tea Party, and Trumptopia. Btw, Adams County went for George Wallace in 1968…just sayin’
Comment by Forgottonia Egypt Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 3:26 pm
===Could he issue an EO “federalizing” the Illinois sheriffs?
He can issue anything he likes, but he has no power or authority to do so. Sheriffs, despite the ones beclowning themselves as being Constitutional Sheriffs, are purely creations of the State of Illinois. Sheriffs are not mentioned in the US Constitution and so there is no authority to nationalize them.
Comment by ArchPundit Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 4:03 pm
==Not entirely sure what remedy exists.==
All of the usual ones.
Civil enforcement.
Criminal enforcement.
And no it doesn’t need to be filed in Adams Co.
The AG wouldn’t necessarily even have to do it. Conflict of interest can get messy. He could ask for a special prosecutor.
I don’t know what it is about this situation (other than weak will or personal disagreement with valid law) that has people imagining that lawbreaking is something a prosecutor just doesn’t know how to deal with.
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Aug 28, 25 @ 5:08 pm