Former prosecutors say Chicago U.S. attorney’s leadership failed

More than 100 former federal prosecutors who once worked in Chicago and Rockford issued a sweeping rebuke of U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros, saying the office is facing a “failure of leadership” tied to leadership departures, grand jury irregularities, unusually

When more than 100 former federal prosecutors put their names to a statement Monday, they did more than criticize one man. They described a Chicago federal justice system they once served—now strained. unsettled. and. in their view. no longer operating with the rules they believed defined their work.

The group, including 111 signatories who identify as Democrats, Republicans and independents, delivered an extraordinary rebuke of U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros. All of them are now acting as private citizens. They said the U.S. Attorney’s Office has suffered “a failure of leadership” despite “a renowned history of excellence pursuing justice.”.

They pointed to what they described as an exodus of leadership from Boutros’ office. grand jury irregularities. an unusual number of collapsed cases. and a breach of trust with judges. “These matters raise questions about whether there is a failure of leadership in the office we deeply respect and whether once-forbidden political considerations are infecting prosecutorial decisions. ” they wrote. “The answer to both questions, in our view, is yes.”.

The statement lands amid fallout from the collapse of the so-called “Broadview Six” case. which fell apart after apparent prosecutorial misconduct during grand jury proceedings. Boutros’ office initially secured a conspiracy indictment against six Operation Midway Blitz protesters. Later, the case was pared down to misdemeanor charges against four of them.

A Boutros spokesperson could not be reached for comment.

The former prosecutors’ rebuke also follows a statement from Boutros last week in which he accused unnamed individuals of having “capitalized on the opportunity to attempt to destabilize the office. distract us from our mission. and wreak discord among our once-united [federal prosecutor] and law enforcement community under the guise that they love or even really care about this incredible and storied office.”.

For the former prosecutors, the question is whether that internal tension—between the top federal prosecutor in Chicago and the community of people who once worked under him—has grown into something more consequential.

The “Broadview Six” case is the most visible part of a wider unraveling tied to Midway Blitz, the unprecedented Trump administration deportation campaign that pummeled Chicago last fall.

Boutros was appointed to his job on a temporary basis by former Attorney General Pam Bondi in April 2025. In the following summer, Chicago’s federal judges picked Boutros to continue in the role on a more permanent basis.

In their Monday statement. the former prosecutors said that for decades their office earned “a reputation for winning significant cases while playing by the rules.” They urged that the next few months be used to restore that reputation—but they made clear what they believe would be required. They said it will take “candor from U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros; the courage to stand above and apart from political fealty; and a willingness to address the failures that have occurred.” They added: “It will require action. not mere words.”.

They began by quoting U.S. District Judge April Perry, who presides over the “Broadview Six” case. A former federal prosecutor in Chicago herself, Perry told Boutros’ team May 21 that, “your sole goal is to do justice. Your client is justice itself.”

The signatories then laid out four areas of concern.

First was leadership turnover. They said the departure of “many senior. experienced leaders and prosecutors in the office” has been a defining change since Boutros arrived. with most department heads leaving over that period. “Turnover always occurs,” they wrote, “but the volume of veteran prosecutors leaving the office over the last year is extraordinary. The challenge is exacerbated by the hiring of new [federal prosecutors] who require time to fully grow into their jobs but will be without an abundance of valuable mentors.”.

Boutros has said that “some people left because I told them I was going to demote them. Some people left because they came into my office and they said that they strongly dislike this administration and cannot work for this administration.”

Second, they pointed to Boutros’ appearance before the grand jury panel that handed up the indictment against the “Broadview Six” later that same day. They said Boutros released his remarks to grand jurors in an unusual special report last week.

In those remarks, Boutros told the panel they are the “conscience of the community” and urged them to listen to the evidence. He also asked: “if there’s anyone here who is struggling with a certain type of cases, such as the immigration cases or other cases … I would ask that you raise your hand.”

The former prosecutors called that an “extraordinary step,” adding that Boutros’ request came after the panel had already rejected the “Broadview Six” case once.

“The message he delivered effectively signaled that the head of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is unhappy with us and we did something wrong,” the former prosecutors wrote. “That message is inappropriate.”

Third, they cited what they described as a poor conviction rate in Midway Blitz prosecutions. They said that of 33 known defendants in such cases, only two have pleaded guilty. Twenty-four people have been cleared, and five others have struck deals putting their charges on track for dismissal. They said grand jurors rejected criminal charges against at least three of those defendants—on top of the panel’s initial rejection of the “Broadview Six” case.

“The pattern and timing of charging decisions. public rhetoric surrounding the operation. and the extraordinary collapse rate of these prosecutions raise at least the appearance that improper considerations supplanted the office’s historical exercise of prosecutorial discretion free from political influence. ” the former prosecutors wrote.

Boutros, in his defense, has said the office’s traditional protocols didn’t work because “we were dealing with an out-of-town group” of hundreds of law enforcement agents in an unprecedented situation.

The last concern was trust with judges. They suggested this reference is tied to the apparent effort to redact misconduct out of grand jury transcripts provided to Perry by federal prosecutors. Perry told Boutros’ team last month that “trust has been broken.”

“When judges increasingly call into question the motivation or candor of prosecutors and agents, that is a sure sign the standard has been compromised,” the former prosecutors wrote. “The abuse of trust is devastating and reversing that tide must be a top priority of the office’s leadership.”

Taken together, the statements Monday do not read like separate complaints. The former prosecutors’ claims tie leadership departures. an unprecedented grand jury message. falling outcomes in Midway Blitz cases. and a judges’ trust breakdown into one narrative—one they believe is now visible in the courthouse corridors and in the stalled prosecutions that keep forcing the system back into the same argument: what justice is supposed to look like when it’s carried out.

Andrew Boutros U.S. Attorney Chicago Broadview Six Operation Midway Blitz grand jury Pam Bondi April Perry Midway Blitz federal prosecutors