JUDICIAL REFORM
As Thomas Jefferson considered the qualities required of judges, he said this new nation should seek citizens of the highest intellect and personal character for the duty. Equally important, he believed judges should be independent of any economic or political influences that might interfere with the broader goal of justice. Writing to George Wythe, regarded as the father of American jurisprudence, Jefferson stated judges "should always be men of learning and experience in the laws, of exemplary morals, great patience, calmness and attention; their minds should not be distracted with jarring interests; they should not be dependent upon any man or body of men."
Unfortunately, the judiciary in Illinois has not always achieved Jefferson's high aspirations. Illinois' judicial selection process requires elections at all levels. While elections are one of the hallmarks of our democracy, elections bring a particular brand of politics into the judicial branch of government. As a result, candidates' chances for success often have more to do with their political acumen, fundraising skills and relations with party power brokers than their judicial temperament. In addition, judicial elections in Illinois have become increasingly expensive and tainted by corrosive streams of large campaign contributions. In many cases, those donations come from special interests, litigants and attorneys who routinely appear before the court.
These modern realities raise serious questions about Illinois' ability to operate a judiciary populated with men and women of high intellect, character and independence. Consider:
Judicial candidates in many parts of the state tend to find success only after they demonstrate their loyalty as party foot soldiers and achieve an endorsement through the slating process. Party bosses have traditionally been more interested in the candidate's commitment to the party and ability to mobilize votes than his or her qualifications for the bench.
While most judges demonstrate high ethical and personal standards, Illinois' judicial branch has not been free of corruption. Notably, the Justice Department's "Operation Greylord" investigation within the Cook County's court system uncovered incidences of bribery, kickbacks, fraud, vote buying, voter intimidation, impersonation, political coercion, racketeering, obstruction of justice and trafficking of illegal drugs. In total, 92 officials were indicted, including 17 judges, 48 lawyers, 8 policemen, 10 deputy sheriffs, 8 court officials, and 1 state legislator. Nearly all were convicted.
Fundraising and spending have become essential in races for open seats on the Illinois Supreme Court and the various appellate courts. Spending in contested Supreme Court races has jumped 650 percent since 2000 and is expected to continue on this trajectory.
Fundraising for open Supreme Court and appellate court seats means gathering massive campaign contributions from special interests. The 2004 5th Judicial District race for a seat on the Illinois Supreme Court shattered previous national fundraising records for a state high court race. Republican Lloyd Karmeier, with backing from business interests, and Democrat Gordon Maag, with backing from trial lawyers, collectively spent $9.3 million. Two years later in the Fifth Appellate District, Republican incumbent Steve McGlynn and Democratic challenger Bruce Stewart collectively raised and spent $3.35 million. Again, the race was fueled by large donations from business interests and trial lawyers.
A recent survey revealed that 85 percent of voters believe campaign contributions influence the decisions made by Illinois judges.
ICPR favors reforms that seek to remove much of the money and party politics from the judicial selection process. A state-sponsored system for public financing of Supreme Court and appellate court elections would be a step in the right direction. Our issue profile on public financing describes this option.
ICPR also favors the formation of independent, non-partisan judicial review commissions. Such commissions could evaluate judges facing retention elections and first-time judicial candidates, and offer objective reviews of each candidate's fitness to serve. While a dozen different bar associations in Illinois perform this function, the standards and the constituencies for each group vary widely. A single, credible review organization would reduce confusion and provide voters with more useful information about each candidate's qualifications.
