tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post3062478171507808423..comments2024-03-26T13:05:52.830-05:00Comments on For What It's Worth: Lesbian and Gay Bar Association President pens open letter to Gov.-elect Rauner about Mr. Rauner's retention ballot choicesJack Leyhanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15884163579967286888noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-35412600510849773352015-01-07T12:47:23.964-06:002015-01-07T12:47:23.964-06:00Anon 12/18/14 wrote, "Rauner, a republican, v...Anon 12/18/14 wrote, "Rauner, a republican, voted not to retain a slate of almost all democratic judges. Isn't that his right?"<br /><br />Judges run for retention on a non-partisan basis -- they do not run as Republicans or Democrats. Traditionally, the Democratic Party has expressed support for the entire retention slate -- even for those judges (and there are some) elected as Republicans.<br /><br />Judges seeking retention are limited by the Canons of Judicial Ethics, and specifically by Supreme Court Rule 67, in what they can and can't do -- and, basically, except at retention time, judges can't be politically active. You'll hear judges grouse, from time to time, about how they've 'lost' their First Amendment rights while in judicial service. That is not to say that judges don't have political opinions. However, a judge who becomes an overt political political partisan -- publicly expressing those opinions except within the narrow bounds provided by Rule 67 -- will run the risk of disciplinary action, and possible removal from the bench.<br /><br />While I'm sure we could both think of exceptions, Anon, judicial candidates are the least partisan candidates on any given ballot. We can also both think of a number of good judges who ran first as Republicans (losing) subsequently winning election as Democrats. That's not hypocrisy either -- that's a recognition of reality -- and a firm grasp of reality is a useful quality in a judge.<br /><br />Now, as for Mr. Rauner choosing to vote against the entire retention slate... <i>of course</i> that is his right. I personally don't think it was a very smart thing to do, and I think it was a particularly bad idea for him to reveal his contempt for the judiciary to the world at large. And I truly hope he didn't do it because he thought he was voting against "Democrats."Jack Leyhanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15884163579967286888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-86630042056337082162014-12-24T13:52:35.699-06:002014-12-24T13:52:35.699-06:00Changing judges at each election would be a good t...Changing judges at each election would be a good thing. There is not a shortage of people who can apply the law wisely and competently. Look at the 2014 Blackhawks. None of them will be on the team in 2024. Change is good. PAZAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-84676868561156737302014-12-18T15:42:44.143-06:002014-12-18T15:42:44.143-06:00Rauner is sly as a fox. Now that he has publicly ...Rauner is sly as a fox. Now that he has publicly indicated that he voted "no" on ever retention judge, has Rauner created a conflict forcing these vary (democratic) judges to recuse themselves when he has a matter before them. Maybe Bruce is looking for a way to force suits against him to "friendlier" counties.<br /><br />Also, I'm a bit perplexed why a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization like LAGBAC would interject itself in this matter. Rauner, a republican, voted not to retain a slate of almost all democratic judges. Isn't that his right? If a liberal lived in a conservative county with all conservative judges, wouldn't he or she have the same right to vote "no" on retention? Tax-exempt LAGBAC only seems worried that Republican Bruce Rauner voted against retaining a bunch of Democratic judges. I wonder if LAGBAC would be equally outraged if Shelia Simon voted not to retain all the republican judges on her ballot in Southern Illinois? I suspect that would be acceptable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-85141173267792636752014-11-25T23:41:21.194-06:002014-11-25T23:41:21.194-06:00It could be that Mr. Rained has the right to cast ...It could be that Mr. Rained has the right to cast his ballot any way he likes. It is one of our Constitutional rights is it not? Many years ago LAGBAC only gave positive bar ratings to judicial candidates whom they felt were sympathetic to gay rights and ignored all other aspects of their qualifications. This is how your organization cast its ballot. Breakout your old Constitutional Law book from Law School and learn something before you pen another ridiculous self righteous letter. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-58783316482895508262014-11-19T09:06:19.974-06:002014-11-19T09:06:19.974-06:00This posting was noted on the Capitol Fax blog whi...This posting was noted on the Capitol Fax blog which resulted in about 140 comments. As to Anonymous at 11-18 at 9:42 pm. while he does have a right to vote exactly as he wants, the fact that Rauner voted no for every judge seems to show the same contempt he has for the judicial branch as he has for legislative branch. It's all about him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-62766583042221445152014-11-18T21:42:43.943-06:002014-11-18T21:42:43.943-06:00It's called voting. He was not the Governor at...It's called voting. He was not the Governor at the time. He has the right to vote exactly how he wants without the president of a special interest group publicly calling him out. That's the answer I would give you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-30966910252690383462014-11-17T15:58:02.132-06:002014-11-17T15:58:02.132-06:0010 Ill. Comp. Stat 5/29-9 states that “any person ...10 Ill. Comp. Stat 5/29-9 states that “any person who knowingly marks his ballot or casts his vote on a voting machine or voting device so that it can be observed by another person, and any person who knowingly observes another person lawfully marking a ballot or lawfully casting his vote on a voting machine or voting device, shall be guilty of a Class 4 felony.” Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-39779671177172931302014-11-17T13:59:50.971-06:002014-11-17T13:59:50.971-06:00Whether Rauner intended to vote for all judges out...Whether Rauner intended to vote for all judges out of office or not, as President of any bar of lawyers, you should be working to improve the bar within your organization and the ABA across the state. Politicians come and go, but if voters choose to remove all judges or retain, it takes 4 years of law school and assuming plenty of continued education to maintain a level of non-bias, educated to the law decision making to make a good judge. It all starts with the schools and again, I state, non-bias for all of Illinois. Thanks for the letter but I wouldnlike to hear what improvments has the Illinois bar done to teach better law - interpretations and judgeship. Is there a metic or is law school an extension of Illinois political cronyism? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-75304386143311340412014-11-17T11:52:55.708-06:002014-11-17T11:52:55.708-06:00No retention judge has ever lost, so I wouldn'...No retention judge has ever lost, so I wouldn't get too worked up about it. I consider it a civic duty to thoughtlessly cancel out the vote of another thoughtless voter who voted for them all.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13398730540934226860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24546933.post-11600650421439028592014-11-17T09:52:53.477-06:002014-11-17T09:52:53.477-06:00Outstanding letter. Thank you for writing it and ...Outstanding letter. Thank you for writing it and tank you for publicizing it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com