Most of the time, the Liberty Justice Center is the one filing the lawsuit. This time, we’re on the receiving end.
So we’re doing what we do with our own cases: laying out the facts, sharing the court documents, explaining the legal issues, and letting people follow the case for themselves.
This lawsuit did not arise in a vacuum. It follows nearly two years of litigation in which the Liberty Justice Center has represented members of the Chicago Teachers Union who are seeking to enforce financial-reporting requirements contained in their union’s own Constitution and Bylaws.
On August 17, 2026, CTU filed a defamation lawsuit against the Liberty Justice Center based on LJC’s public commentary concerning CTU and the ongoing dispute over its financial audits. LJC disputes CTU’s allegations.
Here’s how we got here, what CTU is alleging, and why the case matters.
How We Got Here
The story begins with CTU members asking their union for financial audits.
CTU’s governing documents require the union’s Board of Trustees to procure an annual audit and require its Financial Secretary to furnish an annual “audited report.” The members represented by LJC contend that CTU failed for several years to meet those obligations.
October 2024 — CTU Members Sue Their Union
After seeking the financial reports from CTU, the Liberty Justice Center filed Weiss v. Chicago Teachers Union in Cook County Circuit Court on behalf of CTU members.
The lawsuit asks the court to enforce the financial-reporting obligations contained in CTU’s own Constitution and Bylaws.
The court docket reflects that the complaint was filed on October 9, 2024.
Read the Weiss Complaint.
Visit the Weiss v. Chicago Teachers Union Case Page.
2025 — CTU Tries to End the Case
CTU moved to dismiss the lawsuit.
Among other things, CTU argued that its full annual audits were available for members to inspect and that summary audit reports had been placed on a members-only website. CTU also argued that the lawsuit should be dismissed as moot.
The case continued.
March 20, 2026 — Court Rejects CTU’s Mootness Argument
After CTU made additional audit reports available, it again asked the court to end the case.
The court declined.
The court found that a live dispute remained because CTU continued to maintain that it was not obligated to provide full, unabridged audits each year. The court denied CTU’s motion for summary judgment and granted the plaintiffs’ cross-motion to compel discovery.
Read the March 20, 2026 Court Order.
May 2026 — CTU Again Seeks Summary Judgment
CTU then asked the court to decide the remaining dispute over what its Constitution and Bylaws actually require.
CTU argues that its governing documents distinguish between a complete annual audit that members may inspect and a shorter annual report that must be published.
The CTU members represented by LJC disagree. They argue that the requirement to furnish an annual “audited report” means what it says: a complete independent audit report, not merely a summary financial statement.
Read CTU’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
Read the Weiss Plaintiffs’ Response.
Summer 2026 — Discovery Continues
With the case still pending, the plaintiffs served discovery seeking documents concerning CTU’s audits, the timing of their completion, CTU’s communications with its auditors, and the manner in which financial information was provided to members.
CTU objected to a number of those requests and asserted, among other things, that much of the requested information was outside the remaining issues in the case.
The underlying audit litigation remains pending.
August 17, 2026 — CTU Sues Liberty Justice Center
CTU then filed a separate lawsuit against the Liberty Justice Center alleging defamation.
The complaint challenges public statements and communications concerning CTU and its financial audits and alleges that LJC knowingly or recklessly made false statements about the union.
Those are CTU’s allegations. They have not been adjudicated.
Rather than reproduce the statements CTU challenges here, we are providing the complaint itself so readers can review exactly what CTU alleges and the context in which those allegations were made.
Read CTU’s August 17, 2026 Complaint.
What CTU Says
According to its complaint, CTU maintains that the delays in finalizing several audit reports resulted from staffing turnover, complications arising from the COVID pandemic, and pension-related litigation.
CTU states that its reports for fiscal years 2020 through 2022 became available in December 2024, the fiscal year 2023 report became available in March 2025, and the fiscal year 2024 report became available in October 2025. CTU also alleges that it had communicated its explanations for those delays during the Weiss litigation.
CTU contends that LJC’s subsequent public commentary about the audit dispute was defamatory.
LJC disputes those allegations and will respond through the judicial process.
What the Court Record Shows
Whatever the parties ultimately prove in the defamation case, several facts about the underlying litigation are already part of the public court record.
CTU acknowledges that several years of audit reports were finalized and made available well after the fiscal years they covered.
CTU also attempted to end the Weiss litigation after making additional audit materials available.
On March 20, 2026, the court rejected that effort because an ongoing dispute remained over CTU’s future obligations under its governing documents. The court specifically noted that CTU continued to maintain that it was not required to provide full, unabridged audits each year.
And the parties continue to litigate what CTU’s Constitution and Bylaws require.
That history provides the context for the statements now challenged in CTU’s separate lawsuit against LJC.
Why This Case Matters
The Liberty Justice Center is a public-interest law firm. Litigation is only one part of that work. Explaining our cases, discussing the conduct that gave rise to them, and speaking publicly about issues of legal and public importance are also part of advocating for our clients.
CTU’s lawsuit therefore raises issues extending beyond a disagreement about financial audits. It raises questions about the freedom of lawyers and public-interest organizations to speak publicly about pending litigation, to criticize powerful institutions, and to discuss matters of public concern.
We intend to defend those principles while continuing to represent CTU members in the underlying Weiss litigation.
No results found.