Illinois Compiled Statutes
105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c (2026)
Whistle Blower Protection
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c)
Sec. 34-2.4c.
Whistle Blower Protection.
(a) In any case involving the disclosure of information by an employee of
the board of education or a local school council member, which the employee or
member reasonably believes evidences (1) a violation of any law, rule,
regulation, or policy, or (2) waste, fraud, mismanagement, abuse of authority,
or a danger to the health or safety of students or the public, the identity of
the employee or members may not be disclosed without the written consent of the
employee or member during any investigation of the information or related
matters.
(b) No disciplinary action may be taken against any employee or local
school council member for the disclosure of information by that employee or
local school council member that evidences (1) a violation of
any law, rule, regulation, or policy, or (2) waste, fraud, mismanagement, abuse
of authority, or a danger to the health or safety of a student or the public.
For the purposes of this Section, disciplinary action means any retaliatory
action taken against an employee or local school council member by the board of
education, employees of the board of education, local school councils, or
exclusive bargaining representatives of employees, including, but not limited
to, reprimand, suspension, discharge, demotion, involuntary transfer,
harassment, or denial of promotion or voluntary transfer.
(c) A violation of this Section shall be a Class A misdemeanor.
(Source: P.A. 89-15, eff. 5-30-95.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 2001–2014 · leading case: Cunliffe v. Wright, 51 F. Supp. 3d 721 (N.D. Ill. 2014).
Cunliffe v. Wright, 51 F. Supp. 3d 721 (N.D. Ill. 2014). “Cunliffe also has failed to state a claim on Count XIII, in which she asserts a claim for “Whistle Blower Protection 105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c” against all Defendants.”
Diadenko v. Folino, 890 F. Supp. 2d 975 (N.D. Ill. 2012). “” 105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c(b). A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.”
Burke v. Chicago Sch. Reform Bd. of Trs., 169 F. Supp. 2d 843 (N.D. Ill. 2001). “Burke also makes a state law claim for retaliation in violation of Illinois law, 105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c as well as retaliatory discharge (Count V).”
Prato v. Vallas (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c (West 1998). The record also supports the hearing officer's finding that particular students were harmed by plaintiff's conduct regarding students requiring special services and who resided in a shelter.”
— 105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c(b) — 2 cases
Cunliffe v. Wright, 51 F. Supp. 3d 721 (N.D. Ill. 2014). “Cunliffe also has failed to state a claim on Count XIII, in which she asserts a claim for “Whistle Blower Protection 105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c” against all Defendants.”
Diadenko v. Folino, 890 F. Supp. 2d 975 (N.D. Ill. 2012). “” 105 ILCS 5/34-2.4c(b). A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.
|