But, to summarize, the Council works with the other members of the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening (namely, the Arab American Bar Association, the Asian American Bar Association, the Black Women Lawyers Association, the Cook County Bar Association, the Decalogue Society of Lawyers, the Hellenic Bar Association, the Hispanic Lawyers’ Association of Illinois, the Illinois State Bar Association, the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago, the Puerto Rican Bar Association, and the Women’s Bar Association of Illinois) in investigating candidates.
Candidates seeking screening from the Alliance must complete a lengthy questionnaire (a questionnaire that is similar to, but sufficiently different from, the separate Chicago Bar Association questionnaire that completion of one will not suffice for the other). Investigators will be assigned by the Alliance from any of the member groups; thus, Council members are not necessarily involved in the vetting of any candidate's written application (calling references, reviewing written submissions, and so forth). When that phase of the investigation is completed, and after medical waivers and ARDC (or JIB) waivers are obtained, a hearing is scheduled for the applicant. All Alliance groups are asked to participate in these hearings. Each evaluator at the hearings will have the benefit of the Alliance investigators' work, even though the investigators may not be associated with the evaluator's bar group.
Each Alliance member evaluates a candidate according to its own criteria. The criteria for the Council’s evaluations are whether the candidate has demonstrated the ability to serve on the relevant court in the following categories:
The Council rates candidates as “highly qualified,” “well qualified,” “qualified,” or “not qualified.” If a candidate refuses to submit his or her credentials to the Council, that candidate is rated “not recommended” unless the Council is aware of credible information that would justify a “not qualified” rating. Because the Council believes that a willingness to participate in bar association and other public evaluations is a key indicator of fitness for public office, no candidate who refuses to be screened can be found “qualified.”
- fairness, including sensitivity to diversity and bias
- legal knowledge and skills (competence)
- integrity
- experience
- diligence
- impartiality
- judicial temperament
- respect for the rule of law
- independence from political and institutional influences
- professional conduct
- character
- community service
If a candidate has demonstrated the ability to perform the work required of a judge in all of these areas, the Council assigns a rating of “qualified.” If a candidate has demonstrated excellence in most of these areas, the Council assigns a rating of “well qualified.” If a candidate has demonstrated excellence in all of these areas, the Council assigns a rating of “highly qualified.” If a candidate has not demonstrated that he or she meets all of the criteria evaluated by the Council, the Council assigns a rating of “not qualified.”
The Council holds Supreme Court and Appellate Court candidates to higher standards than candidates for the Circuit Court. The Council does not evaluate candidates based on their substantive views of political or social issues. Nor does the Council take into account the particular race in which a candidate is running or the candidates against whom a candidate is running.
When a candidate is a sitting judge, the Council places special importance on interviews with attorneys who practice before the judge, particularly those who were not referred to the Council by the candidate. Most evaluations are based on information gathered and interviews held during the past few months. In cases where the Alliance evaluated candidates within the past five years, the Alliance requested updated information, but did not investigate or interview candidates again for the March 2020 primary, instead relying on the earlier results.
The Council takes the position that a very good lawyer may not be a judge. Accordingly, the Council cautions that, "it should be recognized and expected that we will rate some good lawyers 'not qualified.'"
With these preliminaries in mind, we begin reviewing the Council's evaluations of Cook County judicial candidates running in the March primary. This post will focus solely on the Council's review of candidates for the Supreme Court. In future posts we will cover the Council's evaluations of candidates for the Appellate Court and the various countywide and subcircuit Circuit Court vacancies.
Hon. Jesse G. Reyes -- Qualified
Hon. Jesse G. Reyes was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1984. Since 2012, he has served as a Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, Fourth Division. Previously he was a Cook County Circuit Judge, where his assignments included the Chancery Division’s Mortgage Foreclosure/Mechanics Lien Section (2005-2012); the Chancery Division, County Department and the First Municipal District, Municipal Department (2002-2005); the First Municipal District, First District (2001-2005, 1997-1999); and the Sixth Municipal District (Markham; 1999-2001).
Judge Reyes has good legal ability and has had substantial experience both as a trial judge and as an Appellate Court Justice. He is reported to be well prepared at oral argument and his opinions are reported to be well written and well-reasoned. The Council finds him Qualified for the Illinois Supreme Court.
Hon. P. Scott Neville, Jr. – Well Qualified
Hon. P. Scott Neville, Jr. was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1974. In 2018, he was appointed to serve as a Justice on the Illinois Supreme Court. He has also acted as a liaison to the IPI Civil Instructions Committee, the Illinois Rules of Evidence Committee, and the Pretrial Practices Committee. Previously, he served as Judge of the Appellate Court of Illinois (2004-2018) and as a Judge on the Cook County Circuit Court (1999-2004).
Justice Neville has been praised for his legal ability and for his diligence throughout his judicial career. His questioning during oral argument reflect his thorough preparation and understanding of the issues. He is generally praised for his integrity. Justice Neville has been involved in community activities and reform-minded efforts throughout his career. He is considered to be an excellent jurist with an understanding that judges can be active supporters of reforms aimed at improving the effectiveness and fairness of our courts. He actively works for improving the fairness and effectiveness of Illinois courts, and he is praised by social justice advocates for positions he has taken as a Supreme Court Justice. The Council finds him Well Qualified for the Illinois Supreme Court.
Hon. Sheldon A. Harris -- Qualified
Hon. Sheldon A. Harris was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1966. Since 2010, he has served as a Justice of the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District. Prior to that, he served as a Cook County Circuit Court Judge, where he was assigned to the Law Division, Trial Section (2008-2010), the First Municipal District (2005-2008), Mediation and Arbitration (2002-2005), the Chancery Division, as the designated pro bono mentor to attorneys representing litigants in the Circuit Court of Cook County under the CSA Access to Justice Pro Bono Project (2001-2002), and the Municipal and Divorce Division Supplemental and Miscellaneous Remedies (2000-2001), Prior to becoming a judge, he worked at his own law firm, Sheldon A. Harris and Associates (1974-2000), where he specialized in tort jury and non-jury litigation, and as Staff Attorney at the Legal Aid Bureau of Chicago (1966-1970).
Judge Harris is considered to be knowledgeable and hard-working. Those with experience in the Appellate Court say that he is attentive during oral arguments and that is opinions are well-reasoned and well-written. The Council finds him Qualified for the Supreme Court.
Hon. Cynthia Y. Cobbs -- Qualified
Hon. Cynthia Y. Cobbs was admitted to practice in 1988. In 2014, she was appointed to the First District Appellate Court, and she remains in that position. Originally, appointed as a Circuit Court Judge in 2011 and then elected in 2014, , her previous judicial duties included Forcible Entry and Detainer (2012-2015), Civil Jury Trials (2014), Pro Se Court (2012-2013), Small Claims/Debt Collector/Breach of Contract (2012), and Traffic Court (2011). Prior to becoming a judge, she served in a variety of positions at the Supreme Court of Illinois’s Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts, including Director of (2002-2011), Chief Legal Counsel (1999-2002), and Secretary to the Supreme Court Rules Committee (1997-1999). She is a member of a number of bar associations, including the Illinois State Bar Association, the Black Women Lawyer Association, and the Illinois Judicial Council, where she has served as Chair (2018-2019).
Judge Cobbs lacked litigation experience when she took the trial court bench, but has since established herself as both a solid trial court jurist and as an appellate court judge. She is praised for her legal ability and for always being prepared. She is reported to have good temperament. She is also praised for the quality of her written decisions. The Council finds her Qualified for the Illinois Supreme Court.
Hon. Margaret Stanton McBride – Well Qualified
Hon. Margaret Stanton McBride was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1976. Since 1998, she has served as a Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, where since 2018 she has been Presiding Judge of the Fourth Division. Prior to that, she served as a Cook County Circuit Court Judge, where her assignments included Presiding Judge, Third Municipal District (1997-1998); Chancery Division, Calendar 2 (1994-1997); Law Division, Jury Call (1992-1994); Criminal Division (1990-1992); and Traffic Court, Misdemeanor Branch Courts, and Felony Preliminary Hearing Courts, First Municipal District (1987-1990). Before becoming a judge, she served as an Assistant State’s Attorney in the Cook County State’s Attorney Office (for 10 years) and as an Associate at Egan & Keane, a general practice civil firm (for 9 months). Currently she serves as Elected Appellate Court Member of the Illinois Courts Commission (2007-present); a Member of the Illinois Supreme Court Judicial Performance Evaluation Committee (2011-present); Appointed Member of the Illinois Supreme Court Rules Committee (2012-present); and a Member of the Appellate Committee of the Illinois Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission (2015-present).
Justice McBride is considered to have excellent legal ability She is reported to be well prepared for each case and to have an outstanding grasp of the law and facts. She is praised for the quality of her written opinions. She is reported to be exceptionally hard-working. Respondents say she has very good temperament – polite but firm, She is highly respected for her work with Supreme Court reform-minded committees. She has an excellent reputation for leading initiatives that lead to meaningful reforms and she is highly praised for her integrity. The Council finds her Well Qualified for the Illinois Supreme Court.
Daniel A. Epstein – Not Recommended
Daniel A. Epstein was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 2015. Since April 2019, he has been running full-time as a candidate for the Illinois Supreme Court. Prior to that, he served as an Associate at Jenner & Block, where he worked as a litigator on appellate and post-conviction, criminal, insurance, government contracts, and commercial and business torts matters.
Alliance for Judicial Screening rules say that all candidates with fewer than 5 years of experience must be found Not Recommended. However, in light of the importance of Supreme Court Justice position, the Council also says the following:
Daniel Epstein is a respected lawyer dedicated to advancing the rule of law, but who has very little litigation experience. Law is a second career for him.
Mr. Epstein demonstrates maturity and the ability to formulate and advocate for ideas for reform of the justice system. He has published, law-related works. More than one respondent said that they would consider him Qualified for a trial judge seat, despite his lack of litigation experience because of his dedication to use the position of Illinois Supreme Court Justice to move forward an agenda of reforms seeking to make the lower courts more fair, effective, and efficient.
The Council recognizes that only part of the Illinois Supreme Court’s role is to improve access to and quality of the court system. Its role in deciding cases that include complex legal issues that affect state-wide policy as well as individual rights requires its Justices to have litigation experience in a variety of areas. While Mr. Epstein is to be admired for running a reform-minded campaign, he does not have that litigation experience. The Council finds him Not Qualified for the Illinois Supreme Court.
Hon. Nathaniel R. Howse, Jr. – Well Qualified
Hon. Nathaniel R. Howse, Jr. was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 1976. Since 2009, he has served as a Justice of the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District. Prior to that, he served as a Cook County Circuit Court Judge, where he was assigned to the County Division (2001-2009), where he presided over Tax Deed, Real Estate Tax, Civil Forfeiture, and Adoption cases; and the First Municipal District, where he heard supplemental proceedings to enforce judgments as well as extraordinary remedies (2000-2001); served as floater judge on general assignment (1999-2000); and presided over traffic cases (1998-1999).
Judge Howse is considered to have excellent legal ability and is reported to demonstrate a good grasp of complex issues. His written opinions are praised as being well-written, well-reasoned, and thorough. Respondents say he is always well prepared for oral argument. His integrity is highly respected and his temperament is reported to be even-tempered. The Council finds him Well Qualified for the Illinois Supreme Court.
doesn't a "well" or "highly" rating look like an endorsement?
ReplyDelete