A Win for Property Owners!
2026 is the year of great change, especially for landlords! Some might consider that unfortunate. I mean, who likes those greedy bastards? But for property owners dealing with unauthorized occupants, one recent change could be particularly helpful. For example, if you are a hardworking middle-class individual who just happens to own a second home, which you never do anything with, and someone decides to move in without your consent, you now have another tool in your arsenal to evict them as quickly as possible. At least if you're in Illinois. That's an important distinction.
But even if you are not an Illinoisan, it is good to know about this bill because if a similar one is passed in your state, it could benefit you significantly. And this is entirely possible as a July 2025 analysis identified 23 states that had enacted laws all with similar goals of criminalizing squatting.
As for the specific bill I will be talking about, that is the ‘Squatter Bill’ or Senate Bill 1563 (Public Act 104-0029) which went into effect on January 1, 2026. The bill, signed into law by the 43rd governor of Illinois Democrat JB Pritzker, added a new subsection to the Eviction Article of the Code of Civil Procedure, 735 ILCS 5/9-102. The added language states that nothing in the Eviction Article can be used to stop law enforcement from charging criminal trespass under the criminal trespass law 720 ILCS 5/21-3.
In simpler terms, the bill clarifies that the civil eviction process does not prevent law enforcement from enforcing Illinois' existing criminal trespass law. If someone is unlawfully occupying a property and the circumstances meet the requirements for criminal trespass, police can intervene rather than being automatically required to wait for the completion of a civil eviction proceeding.
This law could turn out to be very beneficial because squatters can be a big pain in the ass. This was true for Marco Velazquez who in May 2025 discovered two people living on a property he owned, allegedly claiming they had purchased the property. Police reportedly told him they could not remove them and that he would need to pursue the matter through civil court. Velazquez ultimately paid the alleged occupants $4,300 to leave, half of the $8,000 they had supposedly paid for the property. While this incident did not directly lead to the bill being proposed and passed, it is mentioned in regard to the bill in one article.
However, the law does not mean that every person accused of squatting can simply be removed at an owner's request. In practice, however, the situation can still become complicated when an occupant claims to have a legal right to live on the property, such as by producing a lease or other documentation. Furthermore, as seen in the case of Mary Welch, if the alleged squatter was residing on the property starting before the law went into
place, the civil eviction process is still the only route available.
The effects of the law can already be seen in individual cases. In January 2026, two people accused of squatting in a Chicago home belonging to Sheri Klaas were arrested and charged with trespassing. While one case cannot establish that the ‘Squatter Bill’ has significantly benefited homeowners and produced a statewide increase in trespass arrests, it does show how criminal trespass enforcement can provide an alternative to relying exclusively on civil eviction proceedings.
Ultimately, the ‘Squatter Bill’ was intended to address a gap between civil eviction proceedings and criminal trespass enforcement. While it has been nine months since it was enacted, there are few examples to determine its broader statewide effects. Nonetheless, the cases that are available suggest that the law can give property owners another avenue for addressing unauthorized occupants. At the same time, the experiences of homeowners like Mary Welch show that the law does not eliminate every obstacle to removing an alleged squatter.
Comments