Federal prosecutors in Chicago have decided to retract their plans to seek a $3.1 million forfeiture judgment against former Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan, referring to this decision as a matter of discretion.
The announcement was made in a two-page status update submitted to U.S. District Judge John Blakey on Friday.
In this update, prosecutors affirmed their commitment to the legal arguments presented on March 28, where they initially argued for the forfeiture of the $3.1 million.
However, the government stated, “the government has decided to no longer seek a forfeiture judgment” in Madigan’s case.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah Streicker clarified that this decision does not reflect any changes concerning other issues or briefings in this case.
“This decision is independent from any other issue or briefing in this matter,” she wrote in the update.
The recent move by federal prosecutors is likely to eliminate the need for a scheduled forfeiture hearing set for June 9, pending Judge Blakey’s response to their status update.
As for the sentencing hearing for Madigan, it remains on the calendar for June 13, where he is expected to face a potential prison sentence.
Prosecutors are anticipated to present their sentencing recommendation for Madigan on May 30.
The reasons behind the prosecutors’ withdrawal of the forfeiture request remain unclear.
However, it is noteworthy that the U.S. Attorney’s Office is now under new leadership, with Andrew Boutros taking the helm as acting U.S. attorney on April 7, just over a week after the forfeiture request was made.
Madigan holds the distinction of being the longest-serving state House leader in the United States.
In February, a jury convicted him of conspiring to accept bribes from ComEd during periods when legislation was being deliberated in Springfield.
Additionally, he was found guilty of a scheme aimed at placing former 25th Ward Alderman Danny Solis on a state board in return for Solis’ assistance in securing private business for Madigan’s law firm.
Nevertheless, during the trial, Madigan was acquitted of some counts, and the jury failed to reach a unanimous decision on others.
Most notably, the jurors could not reach a consensus regarding a broader racketeering conspiracy accusation that alleged Madigan had transformed his political organization into a criminal enterprise.
This partial verdict emerged after a lengthy four-month trial, which involved over 60 witnesses and spanned nearly 65 hours of jury deliberation over the course of 11 days.
Streicker had argued in March that Madigan should be liable for the $1.3 million paid to five of his political allies by ComEd, alongside the $1.8 million paid to a sixth ally’s firm.
The jury had confirmed that ComEd disbursed these funds to Madigan’s associates as part of an illegal initiative to influence Madigan while key legislation was progressing through Illinois’ legislature.
In her previous statements, Streicker emphasized that Madigan should forfeit these amounts, stating he had both controlled and benefitted from the bribes despite the payments not being made directly to him.
Furthermore, she insisted that in the event funds were not available to satisfy the court’s judgment, the federal authorities should be allowed to identify or locate substitute assets for forfeiture.
image source from：https://chicago.suntimes.com/madigan-trial-news/2025/04/27/feds-michael-madigan-corruption-case-cash-forfeiture
