Monday, October 15, 2018

Injustice Watch offers useful tool for retention voters

Injustice Watch has a nifty Voters' Guide for persons looking for more information about Cook County Circuit Court judges on this year's retention ballot. Here is a link to that guide.

Injustice Watch certainly has a point of view. Some readers will applaud its advocacy, some may be far less enthusiastic. But there's no denying that, from a technical point of view, the Injustice Watch Voters' Guide is easy to navigate and chock-full of information. I'm jealous.

The Injustice Watch site uses "flags" to call attention to particular retention candidates; several candidates are flagged more than once. Here are the flags used on the Injustice Watch Voters' Guide:


I wonder about the use of "former prosecutor" or "former public defenders" as "flag" points. This is biographical information at most -- unless the judge in question has been unable to shed the role of advocate for the neutral judicial role. But, at that point, what was in the judge's past would not be the problem; it would be the judge's present behavior that would be worrisome. Injustice Watch has published a number of stories in this election cycle about a few judges who appear to 'lean' toward the State in criminal cases -- and these are all linked from the Voters' Guide -- but it has 'flagged' 16 former prosecutors (and nine former PDs). As it happens, and as these flags prove, service in the State's Attorney's Office or as a Public Defender is a frequent item in judicial résumés. Other well-worn paths to the bench go through the Attorney General's Office or the Chicago Corporation Counsel's Office. So... what's the significance of these two particular prior occupations supposed to be?

The Injustice Watch also offers 'side by side' comparisons of candidates seeking the five contested subcircuit vacancies (you'll have to scroll down a bit for these).

Here are some other posts (with links to sites) that retention voters (and voters in the contested subcircuit races) may find of interest:

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Injustice Watch is as non partisan as Bernie Sander's birthday party.

Take a look at all of the judges they are trying to get off the bench, especially with the Sun Times in the SJW's pocket.

Make sure if they want a judge removed, you vote the other way.

Anonymous said...

Beatriz Santiago, yet again, dodged a bullet . . . perhaps.

Anonymous said...

What’s SJW?

Anonymous said...

"Social Justice Warrior"

Anonymous said...

Jack, it looks like you are giving too much credit to Injustice Watch. They can not get their story right most of the time and are worst than the worst judges. Their stories most of the time is BS. They embellish on everything and on second thought, they are not journalists afterall

Anonymous said...

Suicidal Judicial Witchhunters

Anonymous said...

Satanic Jackbooted Wingnuts

Anonymous said...

Jack, be careful by embracing Injustice Watch with open arms, their stories are sometimes fabricated and they are very biased and vindictive. Just saying.

Anonymous said...

I used the Justice League of America Voter’s Guide. The chair of their committee is Anita “Wonder Woman” Alvarez. She has endorsed Coghlan and Boyle.

Anonymous said...

Junk reporting. How the hell five people who do not practice law are going to tell us whom to vote for. They try to intimidate people just for the fact that they have a plat form.

Anonymous said...

I have a platform it’s called “Justice Watch” and we crush the cockroaches who presume to tell Crook county how to steal. We know how to steal just fine and don’t need Romanucci, Loevy, Shiller or Bonjean to teach is how to do it better. And Tony Romanucci has better make sure his malpractice insurance is current given what happened with that Hernandez case.

Anonymous said...

We haven’t even finished with this election cycle and we Injustice Watch is already gearing up for 2020 with its latest target: Judge Jackie Portman-Brown. Read all about it in the Sun-Times. Perhaps another 5th Subcurcuit vacancy in 2022?

Anonymous said...

Vindictive, useless injustice watch scum. Journalists wanna be

Anonymous said...

TAKE THAT ANTI LATINAS. JUDGE SANTIAGO WAS RETAINED FOR 6 MORE YEARS. SHE WAS FOUND RECOMMENDED OR QUALIFIED BY ALL THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS. RICHLY DESERVED. THEY SHOULD ALL BE LIKE HER.