"ComEd Four" decision sets stage for Madigan appeal
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Photo illustration: Lindsey Bailey/Axios. Photo: Bloomberg via Getty Images
An appellate court ruling granting a new trial to two members of the "ComEd Four" could have implications for former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan's case.
The latest: A federal appeals court ordered on Tuesday that former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore and lobbyist Michael McClain be released from prison and granted a new trial.
- The other two defendants did not appeal their convictions and have served their jail time.
- The stunning reversal came just hours after the court heard the attorneys' arguments.
Why it matters: The ComEd Four were convicted of conspiring to bribe then-Illinois House Speaker Madigan, and were part of the broader case prosecutors built against Madigan.
- Madigan is serving his 7.5-year sentence in a federal penitentiary in West Virginia.
State of play: Defense teams argued that political corruption and bribery rules have changed since a 2024 Supreme Court decision redefining what qualifies as an explicit quid pro quo in public corruption cases.
- In the cases of Pramaggiore and McClain, the judges agreed, ruling that the jury might have reached a different verdict under a different understanding.
- Late last week, Madigan's lawyers argued before a different appeals court, asking the court to either vacate his conviction or grant him a new trial, claiming that prosecutors similarly stretched federal bribery and fraud statutes to secure his conviction.
Yes, but: The judge in Madigan's trial had already stripped the core bribery counts after the SCOTUS decision. Instead, Madigan was convicted on 10 counts of racketeering, wire fraud and other political corruption charges.
Zoom out: The retrial order raises questions about the aggressive corruption prosecutions brought by then-U.S. Attorney John Lausch, who was the Illinois U.S. Attorney for the Northern District between 2017 and 2023.
- Lausch's office was aggressive in pursuing Madigan, the ComEd Four and Ald. Ed Burke for political corruption. These high-profile cases took years to try and get convictions.
- All of the defense teams argued that currying favor and using quid pro quo tactics were part of the rough-and-tumble business of Illinois politics.
- Juries disagreed.
What's next: It's unclear whether federal prosecutors will retry Pramaggiore and McClain. The decision will fall to U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros, who took office last year.
The bottom line: The appeals court could rule on Madigan's case as soon as this summer. It will be a decision that could further clarify how the Supreme Court's ruling narrowing bribery standards applies in major corruption cases.