Judge plans to rule next month on whether serious police cases can be heard in private

A Cook County judge announced Monday he plans to rule next month on whether the most serious cases of police misconduct can be heard in private — a highly anticipated decision that will likely prompt an appeal from either the city or its largest police union.

During a hearing at the Daley Center, Judge Michael T. Mullen also lifted a freeze on proceedings before the Chicago Police Board after confirming that no evidentiary hearings were scheduled before he plans to issue a summary judgment on March 20.

In deciding against the Fraternal Order of Police’s push for a continued stay on Police Board proceedings, Mullen said the union hadn’t proven that its members would suffer “irreparable harm” if the board got back to work in a limited capacity.

However, Mullen directed FOP lawyers to file an emergency motion if the board schedules an evidentiary hearing before the March 20 ruling. The board’s schedule shows the next such hearing — a quasi-legal proceeding that leads to a board ruling — is set for March 25.

Mullen’s previous halt on Police Board proceedings, which ran from Jan. 25 until Sunday, was issued before a second City Council vote on an arbitrator’s finding that cops facing dismissal or suspensions of more than a year can have their cases heard behind closed doors.

Arbitrator Edwin Benn concluded that state labor law affords the union’s rank-andfile members the right to bypass the public proceedings before the board and seek “final and binding arbitration,” like other public sector employees.

Benn’s finding set off a political firestorm, with city officials and activists warning it undercuts transparency and accountability. Mayor Brandon Johnson, a defendant in the lawsuit before Mullen, echoed those concerns and urged his colleagues to vote down the ruling.

The Council rejected Benn’s decision on Feb. 15, reaffirming its initial vote in December.

A day later, the FOP filed its motion seeking a summary judgment in the case it brought between the two votes. The union urged Mullen to adopt Benn’s decision, arguing that city officials failed to formally contest it within a 90-day period that ended on Jan. 17.