Last summer, Kendall Robinson was in his car when his parking job drew the attention of south suburban police officers, according to Robinson and court records.

When the officers approached, they found a pistol, records show. And though Robinson said he had a firearm owners identification card, he did not have a concealed carry license, so he was arrested.

“I didn’t need that on me,” said Robinson, who has a baby daughter. “I didn’t need that record.”

After a year of hard work in a Cook County restorative justice court, Robinson will likely avoid that gun arrest marring his record, but he is among a dwindling population of gun offenders working toward a second chance in community courts that seek to offer a gentler version of justice.

Making good on a campaign promise, State’s Attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke has stopped approving gun possession cases for participation in the court, instead sending other types of offenses, such as retail theft, burglary and criminal damage to property.

Burke’s office says the move is in line with her oft-stated concerns: “For us, it’s guns, guns, guns. Every single day,” said Yvette Loizon, chief of policy at the state’s attorney’s office.

And in response to Tribune questions about the shift, Loizon pointed out that the office has sought to address cases like Robinson’s when Burke lobbied for a state law that makes it easier, in certain cases, for people who have been arrested for carrying guns illegally to obtain a firearm permit.

But for those who see the restorative justice courts as a promising experiment in addressing one of the county’s most intractable problems, Burke’s changes veer the program off track.

Already the courts have seen a decrease in participants as stakeholders scramble to figure out which cases best fit a paradigm that can be long, arduous and include deeply personal work in the form of peace circles. Last year, the state’s attorney’s office on average referred around 14 cases a month, compared to around nine each month so far this year, according to figures from the office.

With a national spotlight on Chicago’s gun violence problem, supporters point to an internal study that showed the courts aligned with decreased rates of recidivism — which they see as an encouraging development in the search for solutions to persistent violence.

But amid the policy changes and reduced numbers, some stakeholders say the courts — which have been touted and criticized — are left in a place where they are trying to find footing in a new atmosphere.

“I think there is a conversation right now trying to figure out what will fill the gap,” said Cook County Public Defender Sharone Mitchell, Jr.

Fewer cases

One morning last month, the mood was celebratory in a crowded gymnasium in Sauk Village, where a group of participants graduated from the newest restorative justice court.

Robinson beamed, taking photos with his fellow graduates.

“I know there has been a change and transformation that has occurred because of this program,” said Judge Ieshia Gray, who oversees the Sauk Village court. “I remember you all when you first came into this program and it feels good to know you are going to leave as better men.”

This year’s admissions to the program, though, are lagging behind previous years.

So far in 2025, the state’s attorney’s office has made 69 referrals to the programs, according to figures from the office.

Last year, the office made 172 referrals.

The state’s attorney’s office did not provide information about charges, and the Office of the Chief Judge declined to provide any data about the courts.

According to previously released numbers, between 2020 and 2022, more than 200 people were admitted to the restorative justice programs in Cook County, more than 80% on weapons possession charges.

“No public defender is interested in sending those cases there because the (courts) are just much more onerous,” said Naomi Johnson, co-executive director for the Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts, speaking of offenses such as retail theft. “As a result there just aren’t a lot of cases entering.”

With the removal of gun possession cases, the organization called for a diversion program that is “tailored to the needs of people who possess guns.”

A study by the courts found that about 13% of participants who had been released from the program for at least a year were charged with a new offense, compared with about 65% in a peer control group of defendants with similar characteristics and charges. That spurred calls from lawmakers to ask for courts in their own districts, as Chief Judge Timothy Evans set his sights on expansion.

Another study released last year from the Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts, though, also critiqued aspects of the program, advising the county to take on reforms before further expanding.

During a July 30 budget hearing, County Board Commissioner Jessica Vásquez asked Evans why there has been a decrease in cases sent to restorative justice courts, including one in her district and if he attributes it to Burke.

“I can tell you what she told me. … When she ran for her position she told the public she didn’t think gun cases should be sent to a restorative justice court. She didn’t like the circle system,” Evans said. “I’m convinced if she came to see how it works that we might be able to convince her to change her mind.”

The first restorative justice court opened as a pilot in North Lawndale in 2017, and the program later expanded to three more sites in Englewood, Avondale and lastly, the first suburban court in Sauk Village.

Program eligibility rules allow participation from young adults accused of low-level, nonviolent crimes.

Rooted in an old concept practiced in many Indigenous communities, the programs use a peace circle format to address harm done to the community, asking participants to acknowledge and atone for the harm their actions have caused while also providing social services and dismissing the case if the program is completed.

It’s meant as an intervention — to put someone on a different path before it’s too late.

Fred Cooper, who oversees peace circles for the court in Englewood, estimates that he is seeing about half the participants he saw in previous years, even as he touts the progress he said he sees in the young adults who participate.

“It gives them a chance to talk about the trauma they’ve been through,” Cooper said. “It gives them a chance to have a voice and build relationships.”

What works for gun violence?

Robinson too found participating in the peace circles to be meaningful.

It started out awkward, he said, and then became eye-opening as he heard stories from other young men.

They even worked through their own trauma when the Sauk Village program lost one of their own to gun violence when a participant was shot and killed as his case proceeded.

“It just hurt me because he had an opportunity to get out,” he said,” and sadly it went the opposite way.”

During the budget hearing, Evans said that Burke has signaled a willingness to once again begin including gun cases in the courts as long as the individuals don’t participate in the peace circles, a change Evans said the court is willing to try.

Loizon said the office is collaborating with the courts to find the best way forward.

She said the office’s position is that cases such as burglary, which is a nonviolent offense that has a victim, is a better fit for the peace circle program than gun possession cases.

But Sharlyn Grace, senior policy adviser at the Cook County public defender’s office said a tenet of the restorative justice courts is addressing the harm to the community that comes with illegal guns.

“It’s a conversation about community and about how what happened impacts the community as a whole,” she said.

Ultimately, though, the courts and other diversion programs seem to be at the center of a philosophical divide about how best to address gun violence: offering support in the hopes of putting someone on a different path, or getting people off the street.

In one recent gun case, a Cook County judge questioned why an 18-year-old man with no criminal history was being sent for a short prison stint for a first-time gun possession case, according to court records. The prosecutor’s reason, per the records — in line with Burke’s position — was that the gun he was found with had an extended magazine.

“I will go along with the agreement of the parties because that’s what it is,” said Judge Maria Kuriakos Ciesil, “but I am saddened that an 18-year-old with no background is standing before me pleading guilty (and) that is going on his record, that’s now going to affect this young, emerging adult going forward.”