Near the end of the dramatic hearing last May when she revealed apparent wrongdoing by the feds in the case of the “Broadview Six,” U.S. District Judge April Perry said her priority was to make sure the defendants would “never have to come back” to the Dirksen Federal Courthouse.
As for the lawyers: She said they’d “meet again later” to talk sanctions.
The time has apparently come. Perry announced Wednesday she’ll hear arguments Oct. 1 on the potential consequences of last May’s “Broadview Six” revelations, including whether to name an independent special counsel to investigate U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros and others.
The arguments follow four months of questions, frustration and debate over the ramifications of alleged misconduct by the Chicago area’s premier prosecutor’s office.
They also come one year after another high-profile hearing in Perry’s courtroom, over whether President Donald Trump could deploy National Guard troops in Illinois against the will of local elected officials. Perry blocked that deployment in a ruling that withstood challenges all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Now, if the National Guard hearing is any indication, Perry will not sit passively by as attorneys rehash arguments they’ve laid out in nearly 200 pages of court filings since June. Instead, she’ll likely probe and test their positions, as she determines what should be done about a discovery that triggered a credibility crisis for Boutros unlike any faced by his recent predecessors.
It’s not clear whether Perry will announce a ruling Oct. 1. She’s called for oral argument but has made no mention of testimony. Still, the hearing could prove crucial after multiple judges this summer questioned whether they could continue to trust Boutros’ office.
Aside from a special counsel, attorneys for the former “Broadview Six” defendants have asked Perry to award attorneys’ fees, allow further fact-finding and force Boutros’ office to hand over communications with Justice Department officials in Washington.
Along the way, they pointed to an admission by Boutros that since last fall, he’s been in possession of an October 2025 grand jury transcript that documented some of the apparent misconduct by one of his prosecutors.
Before defense attorneys even made their requests, Perry on May 21 told them, “what I think rears its head again is this idea of vindictive prosecution.” She also raised the possibility of sanctions for prosecutorial misconduct, ethical violations and “lack of candor to the court.”
“That is a separate issue from how you all proceed … and the motions that you bring,” she said, “and it will be dealt with separately.”
The “Broadview Six” prosecution revolved around an Operation Midway Blitz protest on Sept. 26, 2025. Prosecutors alleged a crowd pushed and damaged a federal agent’s SUV outside an immigration facility in west suburban Broadview. But from that crowd, only six people were charged with conspiring to impede a federal agent.
Most of the six were involved in local Democratic politics, raising questions about selective prosecution.
Those charged were then-congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh, Oak Park village trustee Brian Straw, then-Cook County Board candidate Catherine “Cat” Sharp, 45th Ward Democratic committeeperson Michael Rabbitt, musician Joselyn Walsh and Abughazaleh campaign worker Andre Martin.
The one-year anniversary of their protest is Saturday.
The feds dropped charges against Walsh and Sharp in March. Then, on the eve of trial in late May, defense attorneys convinced Perry to review unredacted transcripts of grand jury proceedings in the case. The feds had previously given her redacted versions.
Perry later said she was “incredibly shocked” to find three types of prosecutorial misconduct in the unredacted transcripts. Assistant U.S. Attorney Sheri Mecklenburg is accused of speaking with grand jurors outside the grand jury room and of excusing grand jurors who didn’t agree with the feds’ case.
She’s also accused of a forbidden practice known as “vouching.” It occurs when prosecutors put their personal credibility on the line to support criminal charges. Grand jurors are expected to hand up indictments based on evidence, not the goodwill of a prosecutor who already has the upper hand in the grand jury room.
Perry also mentioned a fourth concern: The alleged misconduct had been redacted out of the transcripts initially given to her by the feds. She called that “the most problematic” issue of all.
Assistant U.S. Attorney William Hogan took responsibility for the redactions.
Boutros personally dropped the charges against the four defendants who nearly went to trial. He’s since acknowledged “mistakes were made.” But he said he’s implemented reforms to prevent them from happening again. He noted his office is not accused of explicitly violating any order from Perry regarding the grand jury transcripts.
Still, he admitted the “better course” would have been to give her unredacted copies of the grand jury transcripts in the first place.