Crime & Law
Proposal to Allow CPD to Impose ‘Snap Curfews’ to Stop Teen Gatherings Fails to Advance
A proposal to allow Chicago Police Department officials to impose a curfew anywhere in the city with just 30 minutes notice in an effort to stop large gatherings of teens failed to advance Wednesday after a fierce debate over the constitutionality of the measure.
After more than five hours of debate, the Chicago City Council’s Public Safety Committee took no action on the plan, backed by Chicago Police Supt. Larry Snelling but opposed by Mayor Brandon Johnson.
Ald. Brian Hopkins (2nd Ward), who crafted the measure after two high-profile shootings in Streeterville, a neighborhood popular with tourists and wealthy Chicagoans, will bring the measure back for a vote at 1 p.m. Monday.
Johnson has repeatedly said that he does not believe that expanding the city’s curfew would stop teen “trends” or “takeovers,” large gatherings organized on social media and popular among teens, from turning violent.
The measure would allow Snelling and Deputy Mayor for Community Safety Garien Gatewood to declare a three-hour curfew anywhere in the city with 30 minutes notice. The ordinance sets no limits on how large an area could be covered by the “snap curfew.”
“What we are seeing in our public spaces ... cannot be tolerated,” Ald. Pat Dowell (3rd Ward) said. Even though Dowell is Johnson’s hand-picked Finance Committee chair, the two have split on a series of high-profile issues in recent months.
The measure would allow police to declare a curfew in the event of a gathering of 20 or more people in a way “likely to result in substantial harm to the safety of the community or others, or substantial damage to property, or substantial injuries to a person.”
Ald. Matt Martin (47th Ward) said that standard was “incredibly vague” and would invite costly lawsuits the city was likely to lose.
The city has already spent more than $82 million — its entire annual budget — to resolve lawsuits alleging police misconduct, just four months into 2025.
A majority of the committee rebuffed an effort by Ald. Silvana Tabares (23rd Ward) to allow Snelling to unilaterally declare a snap curfew after Ald. Brendan Reilly (42nd Ward) suggested that Gatewood, who reports to the mayor and has also said curfews are not an effective law enforcement tool, would block Snelling from acting.
Ald. Jason Ervin (28th Ward), a key ally of Johnson’s, said that provision was an important “check and balance” and said if that provision was removed, he would vote against the proposal and urge his colleagues to do the same.
Chicago Police Department Chief of Patrol Jon Heim faced a barrage of questions about how police brass would use the expanded power if it was approved by the City Council and whether it was necessary.
Heim repeatedly assured members of the committee that CPD would use the expanded curfew “constitutionally.”
Heim said CPD’s widely praised handling of the gatherings outside the Democratic National Convention in August and the progress the department has made in complying with the consent decree — the federal court order requiring CPD to change the way it trains, supervises and disciplines officers — should reassure alderpeople that CPD will use the new power appropriately.
CPD has fully complied with 16% of the consent decree, according to the latest report from the independent monitoring team charged with keeping tabs on the city’s progress.
The rules governing large gatherings were crafted after months of negotiations with the coalition that sued to force the city into the consent decree after objections the original version was unconstitutional.
That policy outlines when and for what reason CPD can declare a gathering unlawful and order people to disperse or face legal consequences. The policy requires that “three or more persons are committing acts of disorderly conduct that are likely to cause substantial harm in the immediate vicinity” before a dispersal order is issued.
Reilly said the City Council should trust Snelling’s expertise and give him the tools he says he needs to keep the city safe.
Snap curfews cannot be declared to disperse groups exercising First Amendment rights, including the right to assemble, according to the proposal.
“Giving the power to a deputy mayor and superintendent to determine a curfew in a time of political repression worries me,” Ald. Maria Hadden (49th Ward) said.
Several members of the City Council’s Progressive Caucus pressed Heim to explain why CPD wants to expand its power to declare a curfew and how that power would be different from its existing authority to disperse unlawful gatherings.
Ald. Jessie Fuentes (26th Ward) was one of a number of alderpeople to press Heim on how, exactly, teens would be informed the curfew had been imposed. Officers will follow the same process they use when they declare a gathering is unlawful and issue an order to disperse.
Fuentes also said she was concerned that the measure concentrates too much power in the hands of two unelected city officials.
Ald. Jeanette Taylor (20th Ward) said she was disappointed so much of the hearing was devoted to “demonizing young people.”
“This is like putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound,” Taylor said. “This is not it.”
Heim bristled at Taylor’s remarks, speaking at length for the second time about the toll of being exposed to violence involving children and teens takes on officers.
“I don’t think it’s fair to say we’ve ever demonized a child ever,” Heim said.
Contact Heather Cherone: @HeatherCherone | (773) 569-1863 | [email protected]
