At the Chicago Justice Project, we believe that transparency is the foundation of accountability. When public institutions operate in the dark, communities suffer and reform becomes impossible. That’s why we took the Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) to court.
In July 2020, we submitted 24 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to IDOC, seeking data critical to understanding how the state’s prison system operates. These requests covered everything from inmate deaths and gang affiliations to vending machine revenue and healthcare access. What we received in return was a wall of silence, denials, delays, and blanket exemptions.
This post breaks down our legal fight, what we’re trying to make public, and why it matters.
What We Asked For and Why
Our FOIA requests were designed to uncover systemic patterns and inform evidence-based reform. Here’s a snapshot of what we sought:
- Inmate Deaths: Aggregate data by facility and year to understand mortality trends.
- Gang Affiliations: Facility-level data on gang membership and status changes.
- Technical Violations: Information on recommitments due to parole violations.
- Healthcare Access: Data on medical requests, hospitalizations, and mental health services.
- Grievances: Records of complaints filed by inmates, categorized by type and facility.
- Vending Machine Revenue: Financial data on machines in visiting rooms — a hidden economy within prisons.
- Prison Projections: Forecasts used by IDOC to plan for future populations.
These records are essential for researchers, advocates, and policymakers. They help us answer questions like: Are certain facilities seeing higher death rates? Is gang activity being tracked and addressed? Are inmates receiving adequate healthcare?
What We Asked For and Why
Rather than comply, IDOC denied most of our requests. Their justifications included:
- Statutory Exemptions: Claiming the data was stored in confidential “master files” or gang intelligence units.
- Undue Burden: Arguing that retrieving the data would be too difficult or time-consuming.
- Vagueness: Suggesting our requests were unclear — despite being specific and time-bound.
In some cases, IDOC claimed to have provided responsive documents but we never received them. In other cases, they refused to search for records at all.
Our Legal Reponse
We filed suit in Cook County Circuit Court, arguing that IDOC’s denials violated FOIA. Our position was simple:
Public records are presumed open. Exemptions must be narrowly applied. Agencies must search all locations where responsive records might reasonably exist.
We asked the court to compel IDOC to conduct proper searches, produce non-exempt data, and allow discovery so we could test their claims.
What the Trial Court Decided
The court issued a mixed ruling:
Denied Summary Judgment for IDOC on:
- FOIA Requests O & S (inmate exits and deaths): The court found genuine issues of material fact about whether IDOC conducted a reasonable search.
Granted Summary Judgment for IDOC on:
- FOIA Requests N.1 & N.2 (technical violations): Accepted IDOC’s claim that data was stored in exempt master files.
- FOIA Requests L & M (gang affiliations): Accepted that records were maintained by the gang intelligence unit and exempt.
- FOIA Requests E.1, E.2, I, J, R (vending machines, grievances, healthcare): Deemed unduly burdensome.
- FOIA Request T (prison projections): Found the request too vague.
- Bad Faith Claim: Rejected our argument that IDOC acted with dishonest intent.
The court also denied our motion to compel discovery, leaving us unable to challenge IDOC’s claims with evidence.
Why We’re Appealing
We believe the trial court got it wrong — and that the public deserves better.
Here’s what we’re fighting to clarify:
- Exemptions Aren’t Absolute: Just because data exists in a confidential file doesn’t mean it’s exempt everywhere. If the same data is stored elsewhere, a thorough search must be conducted and the information must be disclosed.
- Searches Must Be Reasonable: Agencies can’t avoid FOIA by refusing to look. They must search all locations where records might reasonably exist.
- Discovery Is Essential: When an agency’s claims are based on vague affidavits, courts should allow discovery to test those claims.
- Transparency Is Non-Negotiable: Data on deaths, healthcare, and gang activity isn’t just administrative — it’s about human lives and public safety.
What We’re trying to Make Public
Let’s be clear: we’re not asking for personal inmate files. We’re asking for aggregate, anonymized data that reveals how the system works.
We want to know:
- How many inmates died in custody — and where?
- How often are inmates recommitted for technical violations?
- What’s the scale of gang affiliation across facilities?
- Are inmates getting timely access to doctors and mental health care?
- What does IDOC project for future prison populations?
This data exists. In fact, IDOC publishes some of it on its own website. But when we ask for it through FOIA, the legal channel for public access, they shut the door.
Why it Matters
Transparency isn’t just a legal principle — it’s a moral one.
When public agencies hide data, they shield themselves from scrutiny. That allows injustice to fester, policies to stagnate, and communities to remain uninformed.
By fighting this case, we’re standing up for:
- Evidence-based reform
- Community empowerment
- Government accountability
We’re not just asking for documents. We’re asking for a justice system that operates in the light.
What You Can Do
We need your support to keep pushing forward. Here’s how you can help:
- Donate to support our legal work: Make a gift
- Share this post to raise awareness
Together, we can make transparency the norm, not the exception.
