In defense of how judges are chosen — and how they rule — in Illinois
The voting is by secret ballot, and judges cast their ballots in a process that is independently administered by the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts — an arm of the Illinois Supreme Court.
I write in response to two stories published Sunday that addressed the process in which circuit judges vote whether to retain sitting associate judges for new four-year terms.
The first story immediately set a tone that there is something wrong with the process, deeming it “insiders-only balloting.” This left readers with a perception that lacks the necessary context of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 39, which establishes this exact process for all circuit courts throughout the state.
The voting is by secret ballot, and judges cast their ballots in a process that is independently administered by the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts — an arm of the Illinois Supreme Court.
Well, that is part of the court process that plays out every day in the United States.
In matters before the trial and appeals courts, it is common that two competent lawyers will make different arguments based on the same set of facts and the law. The same concept applies to the judiciary, as a trial judge may make a decision that the Appellate Court reverses.
It’s also possible that the case will be heard by the Illinois Supreme Court, which may agree with the trial judge’s decision and disagree with the appellate court. And to further demonstrate the room for disagreement in the justice system, two state appellate courts may offer conflicting decisions on the same issue, which leads to the possibility that the Illinois Supreme Court will resolve the matter.
Neither Illinois Appellate Court nor Illinois Supreme Court decisions are required to be unanimous.
Our system of justice is built with all of this in mind, and it provides remedies for litigants to pursue when they disagree with court decisions and guidance on when those decisions are final.
Republish this article for free under a Creative Commons license.
Thank you for your interest in republishing our work
We welcome and encourage other news organizations to republish our reporting on the Cook County court system. Unless otherwise noted, all our work is available for republishing under the following conditions:
Contact editor@injusticewatch.org to let us know that you are republishing our work.
Do not change the story or the headline, except for house style or to reflect changes in time or location (e.g., “yesterday” can be changed to “last week”, or “Springfield, Illinois, can be changed to “Springfield” or “here”).
Stories must include the byline of the reporter(s), including any publishing partners. We prefer the format: “By Reporter Name, Injustice Watch.”
Include this language and links at the top of the story: “This story was produced by Injustice Watch, a nonprofit newsroom in Chicago that investigates issues of equity and justice in the Cook County court system. Sign up here to get their weekly newsletter.”
Copy the HTML using this “republication tool,” including the parse.ly tracking information.
You cannot republish our photographs or illustrations without specific permission. Email editor@injusticewatch.org to request permission.
If you use canonical metadata, use the Injustice Watch URL as the canonical link.
You may include our content on webpages with ads, but you cannot sell ads specifically against our content. If you’re a nonprofit, you can’t state or imply that donations to your organization support Injustice Watch’s work.
You can’t republish our work wholesale or automatically. You must select stories to publish individually.
You can’t sell our material separately or syndicate it. This includes publishing or syndicating our work on platforms or apps, such as Apple News, Google News, etc.
If we send you a request to remove our content from your website, you must agree to do so immediately.
Please note, we will not provide indemnification if you are located or publishing outside the United States, but you may contact us to obtain a license and indemnification on a case-by-case basis.
John Seasly was a reporter at Injustice Watch from 2017 to 2020, where he covered judges, the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on the courts, and the death penalty.
In defense of how judges are chosen — and how they rule — in Illinois
Share this:
This was submitted to the Chicago Sun-Times in response to articles by Injustice Watch.
I write in response to two stories published Sunday that addressed the process in which circuit judges vote whether to retain sitting associate judges for new four-year terms.
The first story immediately set a tone that there is something wrong with the process, deeming it “insiders-only balloting.” This left readers with a perception that lacks the necessary context of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 39, which establishes this exact process for all circuit courts throughout the state.
The voting is by secret ballot, and judges cast their ballots in a process that is independently administered by the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts — an arm of the Illinois Supreme Court.
The second story targets several judges with a common theme that the judges had decisions reversed by the Illinois Appellate Court.
Well, that is part of the court process that plays out every day in the United States.
In matters before the trial and appeals courts, it is common that two competent lawyers will make different arguments based on the same set of facts and the law. The same concept applies to the judiciary, as a trial judge may make a decision that the Appellate Court reverses.
It’s also possible that the case will be heard by the Illinois Supreme Court, which may agree with the trial judge’s decision and disagree with the appellate court. And to further demonstrate the room for disagreement in the justice system, two state appellate courts may offer conflicting decisions on the same issue, which leads to the possibility that the Illinois Supreme Court will resolve the matter.
Neither Illinois Appellate Court nor Illinois Supreme Court decisions are required to be unanimous.
Our system of justice is built with all of this in mind, and it provides remedies for litigants to pursue when they disagree with court decisions and guidance on when those decisions are final.
John Seasly
John Seasly was a reporter at Injustice Watch from 2017 to 2020, where he covered judges, the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on the courts, and the death penalty.
More by John Seasly