Red Squads
Police intelligence
units specialized in
infiltrating,
harassing, and
gathering
intelligence on
political and social
groups.
Red Squads
The Haymarket Riot in 1886 was emblematic of
disruptive police tactics became common in larger cities
such as Chicago.
Randolph St, Chicago
Red Squads
Investigating anarchists, unions, communists,
radicals and everyday citizens.
The Chicago Red Squad alone, between 1920 and
1960, gathered information on more than 14,000
organizations and 258,000 individuals, including the
United Methodist Church and the League of Women
Voters
Political Climate of the
1960s and 1970s
John Kerry with John Lennon
Protest at the 1968 Democratic
National Convention in Chicago
Groups of activists emerged, from the lawful to the
subversive, to protest the war in Vietnam and Civil
Rights and other social and political causes.
A New Threat Emerges
Police and FBI used new
tactics to infiltrate activist
organizations.
 COINTELPRO
 Church Committee
Many times, they
infiltrated lawful groups
of citizens.
J. Edgar Hoover founded and ran the
FBI for 48 years, from 1924-1972
The Weather Underground
Weather Underground
Organization, was a U.S.
Radical Left group organized
in the 1960s.
The group referred to itself
as a revolutionary
organization of women and
men whose purpose was to
carry out a series of attacks
that would achieve the
revolutionary overthrow of
the Government of the
United States.
Pollikoff’s buddy, and Professor of
Education, Bill Ayers on the left
The Black Panther Party
Fred Hampton was an
American activist and
deputy chairman of the
Illinois chapter of the
Black Panther Party
(BPP).
“THE RED SQUAD”

Subversives Activities Unit of the Chicago Police
Intelligence Division
– Exclusively gathered information on lawful political activities
– Openly harassed individuals and organizations
– “The Red Squad acted like any other secret police. They’d find
out who was dissenting. If a group was considered a threat to
the status quo, they’d try to destroy it, directly or indirectly.
Because it was such a blatant violation of the First
Amendment…the Alliance decided that the best thing to do was
to file a lawsuit.”
Richard Gutman
Attorney for the Alliance to End Repression
(Quoted from The Price of Dissent by Bud and Ruth Schultz)
Red Squads React
Fred Hampton was
killed in his apartment
by a tactical unit of the
Cook County, Illinois
State's Attorney's
Office in conjunction
with the Chicago
Police Department and
the FBI.
Chicago police removing the body of Fred Hampton
from his home at 2337 West Monroe St.
The Citizens Respond
Groups such as The Alliance to End
Repression form in response to police
misconduct and violations of Constitutional
rights.
THE ALLIANCE TO END REPRESSION
What is it?
 A coalition of religious and
community groups formed in
response to violations of civil
liberties in Chicago.
How was it formed?
 On December 4, 1969, Black
Panther leaders Mark Clark and
Fred Hampton were assassinated
by the Chicago police. The
assassinations were planned by the
Chicago police and the FBI, with
the help of an infiltrator.
 The assassinations were regarded
as the “ultimate in repression” and
the Alliance was created as a
response.
THE ALLIANCE TO END REPRESSION
What does the Alliance do?
 John Hill—executive coordinator of the Alliance
– “We decided we were going to attack
repression wherever it was. There were so
many wrongs that needed to be righted.”
– “Then I began to realize that all you needed
was a handful of people with normal
intelligence and experience. If you were
steadfast and continued to meet; if you were
flexible, able to say, “That one will never
work”; and if you were sufficiently
courageous—but more than anything else, if
you were persistent—you would be able to
answer most of the social problems
confronting the community. So I had this
feeling right in my gut that it was possible to
make a change.”
 Bail Project, Prison Visitation Group,
Discrimination in Police Hiring

(Quotes from The Price of Dissent by Bud and Ruth Schultz)
HOW IT BEGAN
Richard Gutman
Attorney for The Alliance to End
Repression



First job was with the Illinois
American Civil Liberties Union
During this time, the Alliance
attorney came to the ACLU for
assistance in filing the complaint
No one from the ACLU wanted to
work on the lawsuit—”high risk
case”
A QUOTE FROM GUTMAN:
Quoted from The Price of Dissent by Bud and Ruth Schultz

“I’d rather have this than any other kind of case
I can think of. I didn’t become a lawyer to
practice law as an end in itself. I became a
lawyer because that was the way I saw myself
participating politically. When I learned of this
case, I knew how important it was. A unit of
government whose purpose is political
repression, that does nothing but target lawful
political dissent—to me, that’s an extremely
important type of litigation. It’s something that
affects all groups, everyone.”
THE COMPLAINT





Filed on November 13, 1974 as a class action lawsuit
Brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Violations of 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 14th Amendments
Allegations:
– 1. surveillance and intelligence-gathering
– 2. unlawful wiretapping and other electronic surveillance
– 3. unlawful entry and seizure
– 4. dissemination of derogatory information
– 5. summary punishment and harassment
– 6. infiltration of private meetings and political organizations
Relief requested:
– Declarative relief
– Injunctive releif
– Compensatory damages
MOTION TO DISMISS

General argument:
– Plaintiffs lack standing to seek injunctive relief
– No justiciable controversy
– Based on Laird v. Tatum (S.C. 1972)
 Allegation of existence of system of surveillance of
unlawful activity
 Allegation of “chilling effect” on exercise of 1st
Amendment rights
 No allegations of specific action taken

Discovery stopped
FIRST MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH
An unrelated lawsuit against the Chicago Police
Department regarding employment
discrimination
 Discovery produced payroll list of all the officers
by name, race, sex, disciplinary actions, unit,
and assignment
 “Assignment Unknown”

– 8 officers assigned this category




Howard Pointer—Operation PUSH
Marcus Sloane—OBA and MAHA
Melvin Barna—CAP
Geno Addams—Alliance to End Repression
MEDIA EXPOSURE
MEDIA EXPOSURE
MEDIA EXPOSURE
SIGNIFICANCE OF EXPOSURE

Exposure of double standard
– Public generally more responsive when those in the
“mainstream” are targeted
– “When radical or Black groups are being spied on, the media
really doesn’t care too much. They think: “It’s probably good
that the government watches them.” But when it’s mainly
white mainstream-type groups, all hell breaks loose.” –Gutman

The result?
– The Red Squad was voluntarily abolished and completely
discredited
– Then the Motion to Dismiss was denied on May 16, 1975
– Grand Jury is convened by State’s Attorney Bernard Carey
GRAND JURY REPORT

Cook County Grand Jury Report
– November of 1975
– “The evidence has clearly shown that the
Security Section of the Chicago Police
Department assaulted the fundamental
freedoms of speech, association, press and
religion, as well as the constitutional right to
privacy of hundreds of individuals.”
CLASS CERTIFICATION

On March 25, 1976, two plaintiff classes were certified
– Individual plaintiffs
 All residents of the City of Chicago, and all other persons who are
physically present within the City of Chicago for regular or irregular
periods of time
– Organizational plaintiffs
 All organizations located or operating in the City of Chicago
– Who:
 Engage or have engaged in lawful political, religious, educational or
social activities and who, as a result of these activities, have been
within the last five years, are now, or hereafter may be, subjected
to or threatened by alleged infiltration, physical or verbal coercion,
photographic, electronic, or physical surveillance, summary
punishment, harassment, or dossier collection, maintenance, and
dissemination by defendants or their agents.
DISCOVERY

July 1, 1976:
– Court order for production of documents related to
intelligence activities of Chicago Police—but access
limited to plaintiffs’ attorneys

October 14, 1976:
– Court allowed plaintiffs’ attorneys to disclose to each
plaintiff their own police file
– Court did not restrict plaintiffs from disclosing files to
anyone of their own choosing

November 10, 1976:
– Court entered preliminary injunction against defendants
from infiltrating the plaintiffs’ legal team and from using
any information gained in that manner
SECOND MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH

Won access to all Red Squad files in entirely
undeleted form
– There were 33 named plaintiffs, but because this case
was certified as a class action suit, they were able to
get the files on everyone
Won the right to search the Red Squad file room
and copy anything on anyone
 Won the right to show these reports to the
people who were spied on
 Won the right to let people give the police
reports about themselves to the media

DISCOVERY RESULTS
Documents produced by Alliance infiltrators

–
Reports of Alliance activity for the Chicago police



–
Talked about the strengths of the Alliance
Reported when the Alliance was ready to file the lawsuit
Included warning: “The people in authority better do what they have to
do, because pretty soon it’s going to be too late.”
Reports regarding legal preparation of the Alliance

Included questionnaires that were used to help find potential plaintiffs
Led to ruling by the courts—although narrow

–
“Under the rules of procedure, if you want some information in a
lawsuit, you have to file a request. You can’t just send somebody
into the organization to spy on them.”
–Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals-
NEGOTIATIONS
Lasted for more than 2 years
 Described as nothing less than “arduous
and adversary”
 Nearly every line, paragraph, and many
words of the resulting consent decree were
the product of intense negotiations
 Impasses occurred at two separate
occasions
 But in the end, attorneys for both parties
agreed that the consent decree was “fair,
reasonable, [and] adequate”

WHY ACCEPT?

“To me, it was a no-brainer. The most
important factor was that even if we were
to win a trial, we would not obtain
injunctive relief even one-quarter as strong
as the consent decree. It is a basic
principal of law that a party can agree to an
injunction that goes beyond what is
required by law.”
 Richard Gutman (via email)
OPINION OF THE COURT
No judicial decision or legislative enactment
is as protective of citizens 1st Amendment
rights as City of Chicago consent decree
 Legal protections of consent decree go far
beyond the legal relief likely entered by the
court
 The law in this area is largely unsettled
 Proof of case at trial would pose difficulties
for plaintiffs

FIRST AMENDMENT CONDUCT

Broadly defined in the Consent Decree:
– Includes “the right to hold ideas or beliefs
concerning public or social policy, or political,
educational, cultural, economic, philosophical
or religious matters”
– Includes “the right to assemble privately
concerning such ideas or beliefs, the right to
advocate alternative systems of government,
and the right to associate in connection with
legal advice and litigation”
CITY OF CHICAGO
CONSENT DECREE
Imposed against any agent or agency of City of Chicago
 Protects 1st Amendment activity
 Enforced by Court

– Allows any person affected by prohibited conduct to bring a claim

Investigation of 1st Amendment activity only allowed for:
– Criminal
 There must be “reasonable suspicion based on specific and
articulable facts that the subject has committed, is committing, or is
about to commit a crime.”
– Dignitary protection
– Public gathering
– Regulatory
The Consent Decree
The Consent Decree
The FBI:
 “shall not conduct in the City of Chicago any warrantless
unconsented physical searches in domestic security
investigations, any unlawful unconsented physical searches of
premises or property of U.S. persons in foreign intelligence
collection or foreign counter-intelligence investigations, any
unlawful entries that constitute searches under the Fourth
Amendment, or any unlawful disruption or harassment of the
lawful activities of any United States person.”
The Consent Decree
The FBI:
 “shall not conduct in the City of Chicago any warrantless
unconsented physical searches in domestic security
investigations, any unlawful unconsented physical searches of
premises or property of U.S. persons in foreign intelligence
collection or foreign counter-intelligence investigations, any
unlawful entries that constitute searches under the Fourth
Amendment, or any unlawful disruption or harassment of the
lawful activities of any United States person.”
Smith Guidelines
“When, however, statements advocate criminal activity or
indicate an apparent intent to engage in crime,
particularly crimes of violence, an investigation under
these Guidelines may be warranted unless it is
apparent, from the circumstances or the context in
which the statements are made, that there is no prospect
of harm.”
Posner on the Guidelines

Posner doubts that “in
agreeing to the consent
decree the Justice
Department tied its hands to
such an extent; for if it did,
it was trifling with the
public safety of the people
of Chicago.”
Hon. Richard Posner, Chief Judge of the
7th Circuit Court of Appeals, thinks this
decree could use a little “modification”
Consent Decrees
Did the decree work?
 Are consent decrees
the best way to
approach institutional
reform?

Roger Parloff, World Pad, CNN.com
December 09, 2006: Judge Posner takes book tour
spending a couple hours in Second Life, the metaverse
simulated by servers operated by Linden Lab.
Consent Decrees

In institutional reform litigation, consent
decrees:
– Allow the state greater flexibility than hard
rules
– Protects the rights of citizens
Consent Decrees

Dual Character of Consent Decrees
– An “agreement” approved by the court
– A “contract” binding the parties
Balancing Test
Consent decrees such
as Alliance must
balance civil liberties
and public safety
Application of the Consent Decree





Spanish Action Committee
Chicago Committee in Solidarity with the People
of El Salvador (CISPES)
Raymond Risley
1996 Democratic National Convention
Attorney Fees
Spanish Action Committee of Chicago

1966:

1984:
Red Squad discredit Juan Diaz,
SACC leader.
SACC win $60,000 in
compensatory damages against
the City.
 Three individual defendants granted qualified
immunity.
Chicago CISPES




1983-85: FBI investigation of National CISPES
1987:
1991:
1997:
 19 separate investigations in Chicago.
 Bank records, phone records, and monitoring of private and public
meetings.
New head of FBI William Sessions orders
audit of the investigation.
 Disciplines those involved
 Changes FBI guidelines.
CISPES receives summary judgment
 FBI signed Consent Decree with knowledge of its terms and the
investigation was undertaken deliberately
 FBI’s actions found to be “intentional non-compliance”.
 Expungement of files; order to comply.
FBI’s negligence is not “intentional noncompliance”.
 Investigation violates the Consent Decree when conducted with
intent to interfere with First Amendment Rights.
Raymond Risley

High ranking Chicago police officer from 1991-1999.
 Investigated by Internal Affairs for allegedly communicating with the media.

Motion dismissed because of 2 year statute of limitations

No Consent Decree violation unless actual First Amendment
conduct!!!
 Risley alleged that investigation was retaliation based on the mistaken
belief of First Amendment conduct.
 No remedy for City actions First Amendment motivations unless
those actions are meant to disrupt, interfere with, or harass a
person because of their actual First Amendment conduct.
 Alleged police retaliation was in response to perceived First
Amendment conduct

Does this go against the idea that intentional non-compliance by the
police violates the Consent Decree???
1996 Democratic National Convention
 Active
Resistance CounterConvention
 Autonomous Zone, CounterMedia, and Active Resistance Organizing
Committee
 Allege they were spied on, radio communications were monitored,
cameras and film were destroyed or seized. and participants were
generally followed, questions, and harassed by the police.
 Summary
judgment
 surveillance allowed of public gatherings
 Plaintiffs would need to show connection between retaliation and
their First Amendment conduct for the police conduct to violate the
Consent Decree.
– Taking radio and sending false communications not violation unless
police were retaliating because of the person’s First Amendment
conduct.
– If cameras opened to destroy the film of police searching a van, that is
retaliation for First Amendment conduct
 Underlying reason for searching the van did not violate CD.
1996 Democratic National Convention

“clear and convincing” evidence
– At bench hearing the plaintiffs fail to show that any of
the incidents were retaliation for First Amendment
conduct.

Unwillingness to enforce where the police action
not clearly done in retaliation to the
plaintiff’s First Amendment conduct.
– CISPES negligence standard sufficient
Modification of the Consent Decree
1997:
City motion for modification
• A burden on ability to serve and protect?
• bad public policy?
• Dist Ct. denies City’s motion for modification
• allows motion for interpretation of the Consent Decree
•
City presents 13 interrogatories calling for
interpretation of hypothetical scenarios
• City’s motion for clarification on
interrogatories denied, court “cannot be in the
business of issuing hypothetical answers.

Misguided Nature
– plaintiffs would not have disputed some of the
scenarios if the City had bothered to ask for the
plaintiff’s interpretation of the interrogatories.
Mr. Edward Feldman
Arguing attorney for ACLU
Modification of the
Consent Decree (cont)



Attorney Edward Feldman:
City had not offered any actual factual examples
where criminal activity resulted from City’s
inability to investigate a political group
Edward Feldman and Richard Gutman:
– Decision was based on the 7th Circuit’s assumption of how the Consent Decree
affected police activity rather than on the factual record presented.
FBI agent affidavit:
to do in an investigation
decree never prevented FBI from doing what they wanted
Changes



“reasonable suspicion” standard removed.
The Consent Decree is still an open contract that the City must abide by or otherwise
face sanctions.
Audits.
Then and Now

Then
– Were the Police correct in
assessing the threat to
public safety?

Now
– What infringements on civil
liberties are necessary for
national security today?
That’s a tough one . . .
Good then . . . Bad now?


The party seeking modification must then show that the
alteration is warranted by changed circumstances
The rationale for modification assumes that a decree can be
“good then, but bad now.”
“They that can give
up essential liberty to
obtain a little
temporary safety
deserve neither
liberty nor safety”
Ben Franklin, 1759