Prominent Chicago defense lawyer Thomas Durkin, a zealous advocate for clients, has died at 78
Durkin died Monday after a brief battle with cancer, said a daughter, Alanna Durkin Richer, an Associated Press journalist in Washington.
Durkin participated in some of Chicago's highest-profile court cases, but his influence spanned beyond the city through his representation of Guantanamo Bay detainees, lectures at law schools across the country and legal essays and news media interviews in which he sounded the alarm about the perils of unchecked government power.
His career was driven by a conviction that all defendants, no matter their alleged crime or society's perception of them, were entitled to a rigorous defense and to the protection of their constitutionally afforded civil rights. So committed was he to the defense of the unpopular that the headline of a 2016 Wall Street Journal article described him as a 'terror suspect's best hope in court.'
'I don't do this because I think my clients are wonderful people who should be exonerated,' he was quoted in the story as saying. 'I do it because I think I have a role in the system.'
Durkin was born on the South Side of Chicago to a steel mill worker who saved enough money to put his son through the University of Notre Dame, where he graduated in 1968 and whose home football games he rarely missed. He later received a law degree from the University of San Francisco, where he was exposed to criminal defense by serving as a student adviser at a local public defender's office.
Returning to Chicago, he clerked for Judge James Parsons of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois before entering private practice with a specialty in federal criminal cases. From 1978 through 1984, he served as a federal prosecutor in Chicago.
Over more than 40 years in private practice, he cultivated a reputation as one of the country's foremost advocates of defendants other attorneys would pass on representing.
'He took on the most challenging, controversial and complex cases that other lawyers would run away from,' said Joshua Herman, an attorney who worked on national security matters with Durkin. 'Above all, he valued the rule of law the most and raised his strongest objections to what he saw as abuses of power.'
Durkin's clients included Adel Daoud, who was accused in a plot to bomb a Chicago bar, and Mohammed Hamzah Khan, who as a teenager was arrested on charges of conspiring to provide support to the Islamic State. He won an acquittal on terrorism charges for Jared Chase, one of the so-called NATO 3 defendants accused of plotting to bomb the 2012 NATO summit in Chicago, and he represented Matthew Hale, a white supremacist leader accused of domestic terrorism offenses for soliciting the murder of a federal judge.
'I used to tell him he was my favorite 'cause' lawyer,' said Dan Webb, a former U.S. Attorney in Chicago who said he had known Durkin for more than 40 years and spoke to him just a week ago for a case they were working on together. 'When he got committed to a cause, he would not stop until he accomplished his goal.'
He also was a go-to lawyer for numerous local elected officials who found themselves in legal trouble.
The work, Durkin said, appealed not only to his commitment to civil liberties but stimulated him intellectually and spiritually as well.
'I think these are the cases of our day. They point out all the problems that terrorism has spawned, with the reaction on our side, both good and bad. I find them fascinating,' he said in a 2014 Chicago Reader piece. 'There are some days I find it hard to believe that people are paying me to be involved in what I'm involved in. There's a tremendous amount of history you have to learn, which I enjoy. There's a lot of theology you have to understand, which I enjoy.'
Beyond Chicago, he did legal work for detainees at Guantanamo Bay, including helping represent Ramzi bin al-Shibh, an accused facilitator of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, and representing others who have since been returned to their home countries. His experiences there, he said, helped show him the 'dark side' of American intelligence.
'I think I've been involved in some pretty wild stuff around here but I've never been involved in anything as wild as this,' he said in a 2009 Chicago television interview.
Since 1984, he operated a law practice, Durkin & Roberts, with his wife, Janis Roberts, whose own legal career he was proud to pay tribute to.
'Without Roberts,' he has said, 'there is no Durkin.'
Besides his wife and his daughter Alanna, he is survived by five other children: Erin Pieplow, Krista Mussa, Catherine Durkin Stewart, James Stewart and Matthew Stewart, and 15 grandchildren.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I Asked ChatGPT What Would Happen If Billionaires Paid Taxes at the Same Rate as the Upper Middle Class
There are many questions that don't have simple answers, either because they're too complex or they're hypothetical. One such question is what it might mean for billionaires to pay taxes at the same rate as the upper middle class, whose income starts, on average, at around $168,000, depending on where you live. Find Out: Read Next: ChatGPT may not be an oracle, but it can analyze information and offer trends and patterns, so I asked it what would happen if billionaires were required to pay anywhere near as much as the upper middle class. Here's what it said. A Fatter Government Larder For starters, ChatGPT said that if billionaires paid taxes like the upper middle class, the government would bring in a lot more money — potentially hundreds of billions of dollars more every year. 'That's because most billionaires don't make their money from salaries like upper-middle-class workers do. Instead, they grow their wealth through investments–stocks, real estate, and businesses–which are often taxed at much lower rates or not taxed at all until the assets are sold,' ChatGPT told me. Billionaire income is largely derived from capital appreciation, not wages. In other words, they make money on their money through interest. And as of yet, the U.S. tax code doesn't tax 'unrealized capital gains' so until you sell your assets, you could amass millions in appreciation and not pay a dime on it, ChatGPT shared. Learn More: What Do Billionaires Pay in Taxes? Right now, many billionaires pay an effective tax rate of around 8% or less, thanks to loopholes and tax strategies. Meanwhile, upper-middle-class households earning, say, $250,000 might pay around 20% to 24% of their income in taxes. (Keep in mind that the government doesn't apply one tax bracket to all income. You pay tax in layers, according to the IRS. As your income goes up, the tax rate on the next layer of income is higher. So you pay 12% on the first $47,150, then 22% on $47,151 to $100,525 and so on). So, if billionaires were taxed at the same rate as those upper-middle-class wage earners, 'it would level the playing field–and raise a ton of revenue that could be used for things like infrastructure, education or healthcare,' ChatGPT said. The Impact on Wealth Equality I wondered if taxing billionaires could have any kind of impact on wealth equality, as well. While it wouldn't put more money in other people's pockets, 'it could increase trust in the tax system, showing that the wealthiest aren't playing by a different set of rules,' ChatGPT said. It would also help curb 'the accumulation of dynastic wealth,' where the richest families essentially hoard wealth for generations without contributing proportionally to the system. But it's not a magic bullet. 'Wealth inequality is rooted in more than just taxes–wages, education access, housing costs, and corporate ownership all play a role,' ChatGPT said. Billionaires paying taxes doesn't stop them from being billionaires, either, it pointed out. Taxing Billionaires Is Not That Simple While in theory billionaires paying higher taxes 'would shift a much bigger share of the tax burden onto the very wealthy,' ChatGPT wrote, billionaires are not as liquid as they may seem. 'A lot of billionaire wealth is tied up in things like stocks they don't sell, so taxing that would require big changes to how the tax code works.' Also, billionaires are good at finding loopholes and account strategies — it might be hard to enforce. What's a Good Middle Ground? We don't live in a black and white world, however. There's got to be a middle ground, so I asked ChatGPT if there is a way to tax billionaires more, even if it's not quite how the upper middle class are taxed. A likely compromise would come from a policy decision, which isn't likely to be forthcoming anytime soon. President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill only offered more tax breaks to the wealthiest. However, policy proposals that have been floated, include: A minimum tax on billionaires where they might pay around 20% of their overall income Limiting deductions and closing tax loopholes that allow them to significantly reduce taxable income Tax unrealized gains (those assets that have only earned but not yet been sold), gradually. ChatGPT agreed that billionaires could pay more than they currently do, even if they don't pay exactly what upper-middle-class workers pay in percentage terms. 'The key is to design policies that are fair, enforceable, and politically feasible.' I asked how realistic such policy proposals are, and ChatGPT told me what I already knew: They're 'moderately realistic' but only with the 'right political alignment.' More From GOBankingRates 9 Downsizing Tips for the Middle Class To Save on Monthly Expenses This article originally appeared on I Asked ChatGPT What Would Happen If Billionaires Paid Taxes at the Same Rate as the Upper Middle Class Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Inicia sesión para acceder a tu portafolio Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New poll finds 96% Idaho voters say public lands should remain in public hands
More than 60% of the land in Idaho is public land, including this high altitude lake at the base of Thompson Peak in the Sawtooth Wilderness. (Photo by Clark Corbin/Idaho Capital Sun) Ninety-six percent of all registered voters in Idaho believe that public lands should remain in public hands, according to a new poll paid for by Conservation Voters for Idaho. The poll was conducted in the aftermath of a federal proposal from U.S. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to make millions of acres of public land in the U.S., including in Idaho, available to be sold off. The poll specifically asked Idaho voters questions about Idaho public lands and who they support in Idaho's 2026 U.S. Senate race. Alexis Pickering, executive director of Conservation Voters for Idaho, said she has never in her career seen Idahoans from all sides of the political spectrum unite behind a single issue like they have behind public lands this year. 'It really is clear that voters are unified in keeping public lands in public hands,' Pickering said in a phone interview Wednesday. 'It demonstrates that Idaho voters are very cognizant of this fight right now,' Pickering said. 'They are very engaged, and they are not going to sit this out.' More than 60% of the land in Idaho is public land of some form. The polling firm Change Research conducted the poll among 1,027 registered Idaho voters from July 15-17. The margin of error was 3.2%, according to Change Research. One poll question asked voters, 'Did you support or oppose the amendment to sell off over 3 million acres of public land across 11 Western states, including Idaho?' – with 87% of respondents saying they opposed it. Battles over public lands loom even after sell-off proposal fails Another poll question asked voters which statement came closest to their opinion: Public lands in Idaho, where people enjoy outdoor activities such as fishing, hunting, hiking, camping, and biking, should remain public and be protected so that everyone can keep enjoying them. Public lands in Idaho, where people enjoy outdoor activities such as fishing, hunting, hiking, camping, and biking, should be made available for purchase and private ownership. Ninety-six percent of Idaho registered voters said public lands should remain public, including 97% of registered Democrats and 95% of registered Republicans, the poll found. Lee withdrew his amendment to sell public lands after a public backlash and three of Idaho's four members of Congress provided public opposition from within the Republican Party to selling public lands. Even though the public lands amendment was withdrawn, Pickering said the issue isn't going away. She said Conservation Voters for Idaho plans to highlight public lands as a central issue and continue to hold elected officials accountable for keeping public lands public. Pickering also said the public is deeply invested in the issue and knows Lee could file another proposal to sell public lands. She compared the proposal to sell public lands to waking a sleeping bear. 'Now that they have woken the bear, it will be really hard to get that bear back in hibernation mode,' Pickering said. Three of Idaho's four members of Congress, U.S. Sens. Jim Risch and Mike Crapo and U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson, all R-Idaho, provided public Republican opposition to the proposal to sell off public lands, the Sun previously reported. On June 20, Risch and Crapo, both announced they were opposed to the provision in the budget reconciliation process to sell off public lands. Simpson co-sponsored the Public Lands in Public Hands Act. Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Russ Fulcher, R-Idaho, opposed the Public Lands in Public Hands Act, the Utah News Dispatch reported. In a phone interview with the Idaho Capital Sun earlier this month, Fulcher said, 'public land should remain public, but the control, management should be local stakeholders, not the federal government.' Polling data shows that Risch received a 10% bump in support among all registered voters after they learned Risch provided opposition to the proposal to sell off public lands, up from 41% to 51%. Among registered Republican voters only, Risch's support increased from 60% to 72% after voters learned Risch provided opposition to the proposal to sell off public lands. The poll only asked voters about Risch's upcoming U.S. Senate race, where he faces re-election in 2026. The poll did not ask about Crapo, Simpson or Fulcher, Pickering said. Idaho Capital Sun is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Idaho Capital Sun maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Christina Lords for questions: info@ Solve the daily Crossword
Fox News
23 minutes ago
- Fox News
Piedmont Park murder remains unsolved, perplexes authorities
Fox News correspondent Madison Scarpino discusses the continued questions surrounding the Piedmont Park murder on 'Fox News Live.'
