The Judicial Circuits Districting Act of 2022 is 389 pages long... but most of of it---nearly all of it, really---consists of written descriptions of the many and various subcircuits set up in Cook County and in several other parts of the state.
So the 'meat' of the legislation, the part that isn't just a dense jumble of county, ward, township, precinct, tract, or block names or numbers (which is meant to be a written depiction of what is shown on the maps), doesn't begin until p. 354 of the statute, starting with §50. That's where all the terms and abbreviations are explained. Section 50(h) provides a means of figuring out what to do if the written descriptions of one subcircuit overlap the boundaries of another.
Section 52 of the Act amends §2A-1.1b of the Election Code (one of the recently enacted provisions setting up special rules for the forthcoming 2022 primary and general elections) but the changes made therein are of interest to those in Lake County and in far Downstate Madison and Bond Counties.
The stuff that's of primary interest to Cook County judicial wannabes, aspiring kingmakers (judgemakers?), and (dare I suggest?) voters, begins with §60 (at p. 362 if you're following along on a separate screen). This section amends several provisions of the Circuit Courts Act (705 ILCS 35/1 et seq.).
On initial reading, the amendments to §2 of the Circuit Courts Act might not seem to have any impact on Cook County. This is the provision that states that Cook County gets to elect 94 circuit judges. That has meant that the County of Cook gets 94 countywide judicial slots. But this changes dramatically as we work through the rest of the Act.
Section 2f of the Circuit Courts Act is amended by §60 of the Judicial Circuits Districting Act of 2022 to increase the number of Cook County subcircuits from 15 to 20, effective December 2, 2024. Meaning for certain sure that the forthcoming 2022 primary will be conducted under the old subcircuit map. In case you were worried. And there's a provision promising that we'll all do this again in 10 years. At least, that's the current plan.
Section 2f(b) refers to the 165 existing subcircuit judgeships created by the original subcircuit act. Actually, we never quite finished populating the original subcircuits; there are two sitting judges elected under the old (pre-1992) system whose vacancies, whenever they may occur, will be alloted to the 7th and 15th Subcircuits, respectively. The lottery procedure, by which the order of the allocation of subcircuit vacancies was determined, as new vacancies were created, was set out at §§2f(c)-(d) of the Circuit Courts Act. That procedure remains in place, under the new Act, until December 2, 2024.
Provision is made for the population of judgeships in the newly created Subcircuits 16-20 by adding §2f(d-5) to the Circuit Courts Act. This provision states:
All vacancies in circuit judgeships in the Circuit of Cook County, which are not allotted to Judicial Subcircuits 1 through 15 pursuant to subsection (c) of this Section [the vacancies that won't exist until the two remaining pre-1992 judges leave office], existing on or occurring on or after June 1, 2022 shall be allotted in numerical order to Judicial Subcircuits 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 until there are 11 resident judges to be elected from each of the those subcircuits (for a total of 55).
I'm not sure this is what the drafters intended, but I am sure this is what the statute says: There will be no more countywide Cook County judicial vacancies, effective June 1, 2022, until each of the new subcircuits is brought up to a full complement of 11 judges each. Existing subcircuit judges can serve out as long as they are retained, but when a subcircuit judge leaves the bench his or her vacancy will be a vacancy in that subcircuit... which under the new map may be in an entirely different part of the county.
At the moment, we have nine countywide vacancies to be filled in the 2022. I think we may safely assume that the drafters of the statute meant or assumed that these vacancies would be filled under the current system.
But each of those vacancies will, obviously, be "existing on... June 1, 2022." They exist now. They would not cease existing, in the ordinary course, until the first Monday in December of this year, when new judges are sworn in. But... look at what the statute says: The candidates recently slated for these vacancies by the Cook County Democratic Party may be in for a tremendous shock.
But even if we assume that these nine candidates will be permitted to run for the vacancies they were slated for, there will surely be no more countywide vacancies to fill for many years to come. We have nine countywide vacancies now; historically, that's about average. Sometimes we have more -- a dozen maybe. But it will take a while to get to 55.
And the remaining countywide vacancies, when they can be filled again, a decade or more hence, will be just about as rare as Appellate Court seats.
And if the slated nine candidates are able to run for the vacancies for which they've been slated, it will nevertheless be bad luck for the judicial hopefuls that were willing to wait in line for a vacancy -- because there aren't going to be any for a long, long while.
The Cook County Democratic Party has long gotten a great deal of money from persons hoping to be slated for a judgeship. There's the assessment, of course -- $40,000 or so -- but there's also all the event tickets and donations that hopefuls make in the hopes that they (and their legal skills of course) will be noticed by the powers that be. With this new statute, that income stream dries up, and will stay dry for a long time to come.
Look, I'm no election lawyer. This article is not giving legal advice to anyone. But I will venture this prediction: We are either heading for a lawsuit or a face-saving technical corrections statute on this new statute very soon. Maybe an amendatory veto. But I think there's a drafting problem here. I really do.
Posts
13 comments:
Jack,
What would be the basis for this lawsuit that you are talking about? That the party doesn't have the ability to extort money from judicial candidates?
For crying out loud, if the Cook County Democratic Party cannot raise money without assessments from judicial candidates - most of whom actually pay for their campaigns out of their own pockets, then they do not deserve to be in power.
The judicial subcircuits are designed to promote diversity on the bench. Are we really saying that the Cook County Democratic Party is willing to sacrifice diversity on the bench so that they can keep their assessments and candidate shake down system in place? That is the most corrupt thing I have ever heard and I have heard a lot of corrupt things in my life.
Don Harmon, Chris Welch and Toni Preckwinkle clearly don't discuss these matters with one another do they? If the Party is serious about protecting its 2022 slate, then passing this bill was a bad idea. People who were dissuaded by the cold weather and COVID will now feel compelled to run for that chance to win. Because 55 vacancies is a long time away. It's now or never for quite a few people who don't want to play the residency game but can't win -- for whatever reason - in their existing subcircuit.
How is going in numerical order 16-20 fair? They should be randomly drawn until 16-20 all get a vacancy then do it randomly again.
I have read the language and I also feel there is ambiguity.
It appears that beginning June of 2022 new vacancies created from current countywide judicial offices would begin to be directed to the new subcircuits (16 - 20). However, the new subcircuit map doesn't kick in until December of 2024. That seems to suggest that no only will there be no more countywide judicial elections for some time, but there also will not be any "new subcircuit" judicial elections until 2026, which will be the first time after December of 2024 that elections can be held.
Does that mean the Supreme Court can make appointments to the "new subcircuits" even though they haven't taken effect yet? If not, do these vacancies just sit in limbo? If so, do these initial appointments last until December 2026 which is the first time the vacancies can be filled by election? Seems like some important unanswered questions that need to be addressed by the legislature.
All I can say is the subcircuit system long ago deteriorated the quality of those elected to the bench. I've been around long enough to back this up with my own experiences as I am sure countless others could too. Diversity for diversity sake alone is never a good idea. Qualified, independent judges is what is needed. The so called diversity making the judiciary better as a whole is a misplaced concept. Judges are not supposed, or required, to put themselves in the shoes of the litigants, or their lawyers. They are supposed to apply the law to a set of facts. Period. The fact that a particular race, gender or ethnicity is important when making decisions flies in the face of judicial autonomy and their duty to not be influenced by their own personal experiences.
Ahem, Anon 1/7/2022 @ 2:42 -- careful. "Diversity for diversity sake" on the heels of commenting about subcircuits is always code for non-White judges are inferior. And take it from me, there are a bunch of dunces and dullards occupying the ranks of the Cook County judiciary and plenty of them are elected countywide and can trace their roots back to County Cork. Just sayin'.
I agree with Anon 2:52. Ever since they created the subcircuits, the quality of the judges elected from the subscircuits has been atrocious. But especially those whackos from the 3rd, 4th, 10th, 11th, 12th and 13th subs. I mean most of them were never in private practice and can't be airlifted off their barstools.
That's right, Jack. You're not an election lawyer. But you're welcome to play one on television the same way Calabrese plays a consultant on the political shows. lol
Ah, Anon 1/7/22 @3:56 p.m. -- A two-sided slam. Well-played. But... can you get me a gig?
Anon 1/7/22 @3:51 -- Just so you know, while later immigrants may have come from almost anywhere in the Auld Sod, I believe that most of those came to Chicago in the 19th Century and into the 20th were from County Mayo (God help us). As my grandmother explained it to me (she was the youngest of something like 11, but the only one born here), when a new family moved in, they would check out the parish to see whether anyone was there from their home village. At home, no one had anything -- the soil was nothing but rocks -- you built walls from the bigger ones -- and in the littler ones you planted your crop -- people didn't leave County Mayo (God help us) in droves because life was good or easy there! And chances are, at Mass on Sunday, you'd see one or more families from your home village and you were stuck telling the truth about your origins.
But -- sometimes -- after carefully checking out the parish and scouring the neighborhood, a person might find no one that he or she know from Home. Then that person was free to invent a more prosperous past -- such as hailing from County Cork where, legend had it, there was actual dirt in which crops might be planted. People in Cork were allegedly much more well-to-do. The newcomer who couldn't be ratted out by any of his new neighbors could put on some airs then and lord his imaginary better origins over said neighbors -- even though everyone had the same share of nothing here.
So I asked my grandmother where her people were from and, of course, she said from County Mayo (God help us). I never knew my grandfather; he'd died years before I was born. But I asked my grandmother where his people were from.
She didn't bat an eye. "From Cork," she assured me.
A little cultural context for you....
great tale, Jack
Countywide elections don't produce better judges. Look at 2020 where a candidate with no positive bar rating won.
Bar ratings do not determine whether or not a Judge is going to be a good Judge. There are quite a few Judges on the bench with stellar bar ratings but are horrible Judges.
Post a Comment