Criminal Justice Committee Hearing on Domestic Relations Mediations and Child Representation - June 10, 2026

This hearing, convened by the Cook County Criminal Justice Committee on June 10, 2026, at 1:30 PM, focused on addressing systemic issues in domestic relations court, particularly regarding guardian ad litem (GAL) appointments, fees, oversight, and the service of orders of protection. The meeting included presentations from the Office of the Chief Judge, Cook County Sheriff's Office, State's Attorney's Office, Clerk of the Circuit Court, and the Public Guardian, followed by extensive public testimony from survivors and advocates. The committee passed a resolution (Item 253661) calling for further hearings on fair and equitable processing of domestic relations mediations and child representation.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of remote roll call after a brief debate; Commissioner Miller voted present due to improper late notice for remote participation (not within 24-hour rule). Roll call passed 13 ayes, 1 present, 3 absent.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Taiwan Simps detailed a three-year case in domestic relations court where he claimed he was transformed from petitioner to respondent in an order of protection. He expressed frustration with the system and stated he faces potential incarceration for refusing a behavioral clinical exam, despite being the victim.
• John McHugh criticized the child support system, stating he was ordered to pay support without being granted parenting time. He claimed that only 5% of guardian ad litem (GAL) fee invoices comply with Illinois Supreme Court Rule 755-506B, and he argued that the 1970 Illinois Constitution contains a "coup" that removes state immunity.
• Jennifer Barron, a domestic violence survivor, stated that the board and committee must act, as multiple agencies (DCFS, IDFPR, Judicial Inquiry Board, etc.) each claim the problem lies elsewhere. She urged the committee to hold public hearings, gather data, and examine how county-supported systems fail children and protective parents.
• Alina Crawley alleged systemic corruption, including fee extortion, suppression of free county resources for custody evaluations (Cook County Circuit Court Rule 13.4), and statutory fraud in parenting time allocations. She said that court officers ignore the 18-month Supreme Court timeline to maximize profits.
• Sarah Brown, a domestic violence survivor, reported being re-victimized by the court process and criticized the subcommittee of private attorneys that selects approved GALs. She stated that judges appoint certain attorneys repeatedly, raising concerns about transparency and conflict of interest.
• Diane Brown recounted disrespect from Judge Maritza Martinez and described an incident where an attorney told the judge a father was addicted to cocaine and the judge responded, "Can he use a patch?" She called for accountability and more court reporters.
• Anastasia (heard later via remote connection) shared a seven-and-a-half-year no-contact order against her despite no findings of abuse. She argued that GALs and other court-appointed professionals acquire too much power, turning normal family conflict into allegations of danger, and called for equal parental involvement as a default.

Discussion Items

• Office of the Chief Judge Presentation (Kate Nolan and Hannah Chelinski):

  • Explained the roles of GALs, child representatives, and attorneys for children. Noted that GALs are appointed in only about 5% of domestic relations cases (3,400 appointments of 62,000 cases per year), with the average appointment at 28 months into a case.
  • Described GAL oversight: attorneys must be in good standing, complete training, accept pro bono cases, and take annual education. The court-approved list includes a mentorship program. Complaints go to the ARDC (Attorney Registration and Discipline Committee) or Judicial Inquiry Board (JIB), which are independent bodies.
  • Addressed court reporter shortage: state and national shortage; only default prove-ups and in-camera child interviews are statutorily required to have court reporters. Technology (Zoom, OWL) is used but not yet deemed reliable enough for an official record under Supreme Court rules.
  • Stated that between domestic violence and domestic relations divisions, an exchange program has transferred 1,900 cases since 2022 to ensure consistency.
  • In response to Commissioner Stamps's questions: The office did not collect racial data on GAL appointments. The average time a judge serves in domestic relations is not tracked, but retention is high. ARDC complaints are confidential and processed independently; the office cannot track outcomes.
  • Commissioner Stamps and others pressed for more data on which judges appoint GALs most frequently and the demographics of families affected.

• Cook County Sheriff's Office Presentation (Git Tunayek):

  • Reported a 56.7% successful service rate for orders of protection from November 1, 2025, to February 28, 2026 (6,212 orders received). Same-day service attempts at 73%. For orders not served, average of 5 attempts made; 92.9% of failures due to no contact with respondent.
  • Outlined reforms since 2023: additional deputies, intelligence integration, the "grid" app for task assignment, and implementation of Karina's Law for firearm surrender (since May 2025, 844 surrender orders served, 75 firearms recovered).
  • In response to Commissioner Stamps: The Sheriff's Office does not capture racial data; demographic details come from the Clerk's Office. Questions about body attachments and private process servers are outside their purview.

• Cook County State's Attorney's Office Presentation (Eva Voizan):

  • Noted that the office does not have a role in domestic relations court but has access to domestic relations records (including orders of protection) by request. Access is not blanket but sufficient for detention hearings.
  • Offered to assist in training for justice partners.

• Clerk of the Circuit Court Presentation (Sam Williams and Ramesh Damascete):

  • Described improvements: overnight OP filing, transmittal reports sent to Sheriff three times daily, electronic scanning of documents, and immediate notification to domestic relations division when an OP is filed.
  • Stated no filing fees for orders of protection; fees for other filings are statutory. All judges have access to restricted documents via the case management system.
  • In response to Commissioner Degnan: Acknowledged missing data from a previous request (short form notifications, alias summons, etc.) and stated it is under review and validation.
  • In response to Commissioner Stamps: There are no fees for filing OPs; no one is jailed for inability to pay court fees.

• Public Guardian Presentation (Alpa Patel and Sarah Hawkins):

  • The Public Guardian's domestic relations division represents about 800 children at any time as child representative. Fees are $110 per hour, set internally about 20 years ago, with no sliding scale. They stated they do not bill for all hours worked and do not drop cases for non-payment.
  • Announced an expansion approved by Chief Judge Beach: hiring three more attorneys, a social worker, and a case manager to increase capacity.
  • In response to Commissioner Stamps and others: The $110/hour fee is significantly less than private GALs ($300–$400/hour). The office does not track average family income. No sliding scale is used, but they work with families individually.

Key Outcomes

• Resolution 253661 (proposed resolution calling for a hearing to consider measures for fair and equitable processing of domestic relations mediations and child representation) was approved by voice vote with 12 ayes and 5 absent. The motion was moved by Commissioner Miller and seconded by Commissioner Alma Anaya.
• The committee heard extensive public testimony and presentations from four county agencies. Several commissioners expressed intent to pursue legislative changes at the state level regarding GAL fees, data collection, and oversight.
• Commissioner Stamps committed to following up on data requests regarding judge GAL assignment patterns, demographics, and body attachments.
• Commissioner Degnan noted that missing data from her prior request risks losing outside funding opportunities and will follow up by Friday.
• The hearing was adjourned at approximately 4:00 PM after a roll call vote (12 ayes, 5 absent).