Reformers push Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson to adopt Law Department changes

Jake Sheridan, Chicago Tribune on Mar 25, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

CHICAGO — Would-be reformers are firing back against Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson’s administration, arguing ethics changes targeting the city’s Law Department can move forward.

Inspector General Deborah Witzburg first proposed the changes last month in an effort to bolster her office’s investigative independence. The mayor-controlled Law Department has long hindered investigations that “may result in embarrassment or political consequences to City leaders,” she told aldermen.

A Johnson ally quickly stalled the reform package when it was introduced at the City Council. The mayor’s corporation counsel, Mary Richardson-Lowry, also blasted it as a “fundamental misunderstanding of the law.”

But a legal opinion the Better Government Association announced Tuesday determined Richardson-Lowry is wrong to argue such changes would be prohibited by state and city law.

“The answer is no, there are no such prohibitions of which I am aware or have been able to identify,” attorney Matt Topic of law firm Loevy & Loevy wrote in the non-binding opinion the BGA obtained from the firm.

The Law Department did not immediately respond to questions about the opinion Tuesday morning.

Witzburg’s 14-page letter to aldermen that sparked the debate said the Law Department under Johnson and other mayors selectively impeded investigations by withholding records, slow-walking compliance with inspector general’s office subpoenas and demanding top mayoral lawyers be allowed to attend confidential investigative interviews.

She asked aldermen to change city law to eliminate the Law Department’s discretion over inspector general subpoena enforcement, block city attorneys from sitting in on investigative interviews and prevent the department from asserting attorney-client privilege to avoid sharing records.

After Ald. Matt Martin, 47th, proposed an ordinance last month aligned with Witzburg’s recommendations, Richardson-Lowry argued the reforms “would dismantle guardrails.” She told reporters the ordinance was “legally deficient on its face” and added Witzburg had not asked her for a legal opinion.

“There has been no such request, but we will be issuing a full-throated legal opinion on the issues that she surfaced,” Richardson-Lowry said. “And we will share it with the aldercore, who should be privy to why the thing that she’s proposing fails on its face.”

Witzburg told the Tribune she did ask Richardson-Lowry for a legal opinion, but in response received legal analysis that she felt did not clearly respond to the proposed ordinance. The Law Department did not immediately share any such analysis when asked Tuesday.

The inspector general praised the BGA-commissioned legal opinion as “helpful and clarifying.” She believes Johnson’s opposition to the ordinance is a “policy position,” she said. The mayor’s administration may not prefer the changes she proposed, but that does not make them illegal, she argued.

“There are no legal barriers to these changes,” Witzburg said. “There’s a choice here for the city to make between the status quo and a better, more accountable government.”

The proposed changes held up in the City Council’s Rules Committee would bring Chicago more in line with other major cities, BGA Vice President Bryan Zarou said. There is “absolutely no legal impediment” blocking the ordinance, he added.

“If they are trying to make a political argument, then we are fine with it,” Zarou said. “But if they are making a legal argument, it is not legally sound, unless they come up with something we haven’t seen yet.”

Martin said he met with the Law Department earlier this month to start “flushing out concerns” about the ordinance and will continue the discussions. He plans to move forward with a revised version of the ordinance, he said.

“I feel confident that we will be able to move forward with an ordinance that addresses any remaining legal concerns that the Law Department has,” Martin said. “I think that the Law Department shared their concerns, some of which they characterized as legal and some of which they characterized as policy.”

The ongoing Law Department tiff is far from Johnson’s first tense run-in with ethics reform groups and the inspector general. He pushed back against efforts to restrict lobbyist donations to mayoral candidates last year.

Johnson has also harshly criticized calls for more transparent handling of gifts since a late January report by Witzburg said the mayor improperly blocked public access to City Hall’s gift room and failed to properly log gift information.

____