Robert Gettleman

Robert Gettleman

Do you have a photo that could go here? Click here to submit it for this profile!

---

Nonpartisan

United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (senior status)

Tenure

2009 - Present

Years in position

15

Prior offices

United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

---

Education

Bachelor's

Boston University, 1965

Law

Northwestern University School of Law, 1968

Personal

Birthplace

Atlantic City, N.J.

Contact

Official website

Robert William Gettleman is an Article III federal judge in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. He joined the court in 1994 after being nominated by President Bill Clinton. On May 5, 2009 Gettleman assumed senior status.

Early life and education

Gettleman received his undergraduate degree in 1965 from Boston University. He earned his J.D. from Northwestern University Law School in 1968.

Professional career

From 1868 to 1970, Gettleman served as a law clerk for two former federal court of appeals judges, Latham Castle and Luther Swygert in the United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit. From 1970 to 1994, Gettleman was a private practice attorney in Chicago.

Judicial career

Northern District of Illinois

Upon the recommendation of former Illinois U.S. Senator Carol Mosley Braun, Gettleman was nominated to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois by President Bill Clinton on August 16, 1994, to a seat on the court vacated by John F. Grady. Gettleman was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on October 7, 1994, and received his commission on October 11, 1994. He assumed senior status on May 5, 2009.

Noteworthy cases

Elim Romanian Pentecostal Church v. Pritzker (2020)

See also: Lawsuits about state actions and policies in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020-2021

Elim Romanian Pentecostal Church v. Pritzker: On May 16, 2020, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied a motion for a temporary stay against Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s (D) Executive Order 2020-32, which generally barred gatherings of more than 10 people, including religious gatherings. In an unsigned order, the panel wrote, "The Executive Order does not discriminate against religious activities, nor does it show hostility toward religion. It appears instead to impose neutral and generally applicable rules."

The panel did grant the plaintiffs' motion for an expedited appeal. The suit originated in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs, Elim Romanian Pentecostal Church and Logos Baptist Ministries, alleged that the governor's order violated their First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. They motioned for an injunction barring enforcement of the order. On May 13, 2020, Judge Robert Gettleman rejected the motion, writing in his order, "Plaintiffs’ request for an injunction, and their blatant refusal to follow the mandates of the Order are both ill-founded and selfish. An injunction would risk the lives of plaintiffs’ congregants, as well as the lives of their family members, friends, co-workers and other members of their communities with whom they come in contact. Their interest in communal services cannot and does not outweigh the health and safety of the public."

Gettleman finds public-sector unions do not owe refunds for previously paid agency fees (2019)

See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

On March 18, Gettleman found that public-sector unions cannot be required to refund agency fees paid to them before the Supreme Court of the United States issued its 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME. In that ruling, the high court held that public-sector unions cannot compel non-member workers to pay agency fees covering the costs of non-political union activities. The plaintiff was Mark Janus, a former Illinois state government worker who also filed as the plaintiff in Janus v. AFSCME. The defendant was the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the union to which Janus paid agency fees when he worked for the state. In 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its ruling in Harris v. Quinn, striking down an Illinois statute compelling a specific class of home healthcare workers to pay fees to the Service Employees International Union. In this case, the workers in question were not employed directly by the state but did receive state funds indirectly via subsidy payments. Janus argued the high court's ruling in Harris suggested the ultimate unconstitutionality of agency fees. Janus argued unions were not acting in good faith when they continued to collect agency fees and, therefore, should be held liable for refunds. Gettleman rejected this argument: "Defendants' action [sic] were in accord with a constitutionally valid state statute. Nothing presented by plaintiff prevents application of that defense to defendant AFSCME. Defendant AFSCME followed the law and could not reasonably anticipate that the law would change.”

Abbott Labs allegedly attempts to avoid paying employee benefits (2012)

See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Myla Nauman, et al., v. Abbott Laboratories, and Hospira Inc.,, 04-cv-7199)

In July of 2008, Gettleman presided over a case involving Abbott Laboratories and Hospira. The case involved whether Hospira deprived payments of health and retirement security benefits to employees and retirees and also called into question if the case violated EIRSA (Employment Insurance Retirement Security Act). Judge Gettleman denied Abbott's and Hospira's motions for a summary judgment because he concluded that there were genuine disputes between plaintiffs' and defendants' versions of the facts that needed to be resolved at trial. "The Court's ruling clears the last remaining hurdle for the plaintiffs to seek restitution for Abbott Labs' violations of federal law that caused 10,000 people to lose valuable retirement benefits," said Steven Sprenger, counsel for the plaintiffs at the law firm Sprenger + Lang. "We are anxious to get this case to trial as quickly as possible."

To reach this stage, plaintiffs have had to overcome Abbott's and Hospira's "scorched earth" defense of the claims that has strung out the litigation for almost four years since their complaint was filed in November 2004. First, Judge Gettleman denied defendants' motions to dismiss the claims. Then, in December 2005, he granted plaintiffs' motion to certify a class of about 10,000 persons, a decision that the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals refused to disturb when challenged by defendants. And now, after the discovery process has been completed, he denied defendants' motions for summary judgment. On February 3, 2012, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision ending the case.

Required moment of silence ruled unconstitutional (2011)

See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Dawn S. Sherman, a minor, through Robert I Sherman, v. Township High School District 2014, et al., 1:07-cv-06048)

In November of 2007, Gettleman issued a preliminary injunction barring a suburban school district in the Chicago-land region from implementing a recent Illinois law mandating a moment of silence at the start of classes, calling the statute too vague and "likely unconstitutional."

U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman made the decision at a hearing on a lawsuit brought by local atheist activist Rob Sherman over issues related to the separation of church and state. Sherman sued Township High School District 214, in which his daughter is a freshman at Buffalo Grove High School. Gettleman said the Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act isn't specific enough about what is a "moment" and when it should take place. It also may cross the line into unconstitutionality by giving students a choice to pray, the judge said. The statute states that students shall be given an opportunity for silent prayer or reflection on the anticipated activities of the day. That would in essence tell a child "you've got to think about praying," Gettleman said.

In May of 2008, Gettleman ruled the statewide ban fully unconstitutional, barring all Illinois school districts from a mandated moment of silence. After an appeal to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals the ruling was remanded back to the lower court for further review.

Kevin Trudeau: infomercial fraudster case (2010)

See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Federal Trade Commission, v. Kevin Trudeau, 1:03-cv-03904)

Judge Gettleman was the presiding judge in the case of famed television pitchman Kevin Trudeau. Trudeau was sued by the Federal Trade Commission over deceptive business practices. The judge found Trudeau in contempt of court on February 10, 2010 after failing to show up in court on short notice to explain why thousands of his customers sent him e-mails in support of Trudeau. As a result of the actions, the judge has asked Trudeau to come up with $50,000 for bail and to surrender his passport on February 11, 2010.

Gettleman sentenced Trudeau to 30 days in prison on February 17, 2010 and Trudeau was ordered to turn himself in to federal authorities by February 18, 2010. Trudeau's attorney filed an emergency appeal to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Only hours before Trudeau was expected to report to the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Chicago to begin serving his sentence, the Seventh Circuit reversed Judge Gettleman's ruling. As an order of the Seventh Circuit ruling, Trudeau was expected to post bail and surrender his passport along with no contact via e-mail with Judge Gettleman. The Seventh Circuit scheduled another hearing for February 23, 2010. Judge Gettleman dismissed a request from Trudeau to travel to Canada for business engagements on February 24, 2010. Gettleman ordered that Trudeau had to remain in the Northern District of Illinois while the Seventh Circuit deliberated on his appeal. A three-judge panel from the Seventh Circuit ordered, on May 20, 2010, the contempt of court conviction issued by the judge to be thrown out.

In the initial case, Trudeau was found guilty of consumer fraud and fined $36.7 million dollars, a number reached by multiplying the number of books he sold through his infomercial by their cost. Trudeau appealed this ruling to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals where the ruling was affirmed.

Red light camera suit (2009)

See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Parveen Idris, et al. v. City of Chicago, et al., 1:06-cv-06085)

In January of 2008, Robert Gettleman dismissed a lawsuit that challenged the constitutionality of the City of Chicago's method of using cameras to ticket drivers who fail to obey red lights, according to the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin. Judge Gettlemam ruled that the plaintiffs complaint failed to state claims based on equal protection and substantive due process. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Gettleman's ruling on January 5, 2009.

Chicago Sanitation Commish. corruption trial (2009)

See also: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ((dead link) United States, v. Alfred Sanchez and Aaron Delvalle, 07-cr-0149)

On December 22, 2009, Judge Gettleman issued an order that former Chicago Streets Commissioner Al Sanchez should be have a new trial after evidence found that a government witness lied during his first trial. In ordering a new trial, Gettleman also threw out the conviction of Al Sanchez. What led to Sanchez having his conviction thrown out was Brian Gabriel lying to a judge about the criminal activity in which he engaged.

After Sanchez's new trial, which began on July 6, 2010, he was found guilty again. He was sentenced to 30 month in prison. Sanchez appealed the ruling to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the lower court's ruling.

See also

• United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

External links

• Gettleman Biography from the Federal Judicial Center

Footnotes

Political offices
Preceded by: John F. Grady	Northern District of Illinois 1994–2009 Seat #8	Succeeded by: Gary Feinerman