Chicago Firefighters Claim Vehicle Searches Violate Fourth Amendment

Twenty-three Chicago firefighters have filed suit alleging that searches of their personal vehicles parked on city property violated their civil rights. The suit was filed last week in US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois by Matthew Anderson, Morris Bishop, Theophilus Boykin Jr., Patrick Casey, Mary Margaret Dempsey, Rory Hehir, Kevin Henrichsen, Cody Hrabak, Christopher Jackson, Joseph Johnson, Albert Labak, Tiffany Muehleis, Derrick Nash, Mark Nickel, Mark Obog, Kevin O’Grady, Michael Pagani, Jeffrey Rakowiecki, James Richard, Michael Roncal, Gabriel Santana, Scott Santoyo, and Timothy Tesch.

The searches occurred at the quarters of Engine 86 on February 27 and 28, 2025. According to the complaint the searches of 11 vehicles on February 27, 2025 and 12 vehicles on February 28, 2025, were based upon an anonymous tip that a firearm was present in one of the vehicles.

Quoting from the complaint:

• The Plaintiffs on duty that day requested union representation before the vehicle searches took place, but that request was denied
• Plaintiffs were then specifically told that if they did not cooperate with the vehicle searches, they would be disciplined.
• All Engine 86 members were then ordered to go to the parking lot and stand next to their personal vehicle with their car keys in hand.
• Defendants … searched each car, including the interior passenger areas, the glove compartment, and consoles. Defendants … also searched the trunks of some cars.
• Plaintiffs did not consent to the search of their personal vehicles by Defendants on February 27 and 28, 2025.
• Plaintiffs reasonably believed that if they did not cooperate with IAD’s vehicle searches, they would lose their jobs.
• Upon information and belief, Defendants conducted searches of Plaintiffs’ personal vehicles on February 27 and 28, 2025 based on an anonymous report that claimed someone who worked at Engine 86 was in possession of a firearm.
• Upon information and belief, the anonymous report that Defendants relied upon to search Plaintiffs’ personal vehicles did not provide the name of the Engine 86 personnel who allegedly brought a firearm to work.
• The Chicago Firearms Policy does not authorize the search of an employee’s personal property, but states that the “City reserves the right to authorize searches for prohibited weapons on its property when a violation is reported or when probable cause or reasonable suspicion is present. Refusal to permit such a search may result in discipline up to and including discharge.”
• The Chicago Firearms Policy “prohibits all non-peace officer employees from carrying or possessing firearms inside buildings owned or controlled by the City.”
• The Chicago Firearms Policy does not prohibit employees from carrying firearms in their personal vehicles. Instead, the Chicago Firearms Policy only prohibits the following:
  • While on duty, a City employee who has obtained a license to carry a concealed firearm in compliance with applicable state and federal laws may carry a concealed firearm in any area where firearms are not prohibited by federal, state, or local law.
  • It is a violation of this policy for an employee, while on or off duty, to carry, transfer, or store a firearm inside a building or that portion of a building owned or controlled by the City.
  • It is a violation of this policy for an employee, while on or off duty, to carry, transfer, or store a firearm inside a City-owned or leased vehicle.
  • It is violation of this policy for an employee, while on duty, to carry a firearm inside any private residence or residential building without express written consent from the owner.

The suit alleges that the city violated the firefighters’ Fourth Amendment rights and the analogous provision of the Illinois State Constitution. Here is a copy of the complaint: