Michael McClain’s lawyers want him tried separately from ex-House Speaker Madigan

Lawyers for Michael McClain, longtime confidant of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, want McClain's upcoming corruption trial to be separated from Madigan's.

In a filing Friday, McClain’s defense lawyers argue that on top of facing federal prosecutors, McClain will also be facing “The Madigan Second Prosecutors,” contending that Madigan’s apparent defense strategy, which is redacted from the filing, involves blaming McClain.

The two are set to be tried together beginning Oct. 8 on similar charges of racketeering, bribery, fraud and attempted extortion.

McClain’s lawyers also assert that lawyers for Madigan won’t have the same legal restraints as federal prosecutors, such as disclosing information to the defense, when presenting evidence.

“Mr. McClain will be in effect prosecuted by ambush by a team of prosecutors who will be able to spring otherwise undisclosed testimony, witnesses, and exhibits against him throughout the trial,” McClain’s lawyers wrote.

Madigan, 82, served in the House for half a century, from 1971 to 2021, acting as speaker of the House for all but two of those years.

McClain, 76, was a lawmaker for 10 years with Madigan before becoming a longtime lobbyist and close ally of Madigan.

McClain is awaiting sentencing in a separate case in which he was found guilty of a nearly decade-long conspiracy to bribe Madigan in favor of legislation beneficial to ComEd. Also awaiting sentencing in that case is former ComEd CEO Anne Pramaggiore, ex-ComEd lobbyist John Hooker and onetime City Club President Jay Doherty.

Their sentencing, along with McClain’s and Madigan’s trial, had been on hold pending a Supreme Court ruling in a public corruption case in Indiana. Supreme Court justices ruled last month in the case that a crucial federal bribery law aimed at state and local officials does not criminalize after-the-fact rewards known as “gratuities.”

Madigan’s defense team used that Supreme Court ruling this week to argue that 14 of the 23 counts against him should be tossed out before trial.