"The state's principal argument ... was that a budgetary crisis necessitated the modifications to the pension benefits, thus trumping the protections afforded by the pension protection clause. The state argued that its exercise of the police power was reasonable and necessary in light of the dramatic squeeze on the state's finances due to the recent recession, the poor condition of the economy, and the deterioration of the state's credit rating. In a 7-0 opinion, the court forcefully rejected that defense." [In re Pension Reform Litigation, No. 118585 (Ill. May 8, 2015)]