Wednesday, September 14, 2022

Three judicial stories; which one is the most important?

The first, and I believe the most widely-reported of these three big stories, concerns the resignation of Chief Justice Anne M. Burke. (Read her very gracious letter of resignation.)

Burke has decided to retire, effective November 30.

Burke was appointed to the Illinois Supreme Court in 2006, when Justice Mary Ann McMorrow retired. She won election to that seat in 2008 and was retained in 2018. Before going to law school, Burke taught physical education at the Chicago Park District. There she took part in a new program that offered children and young adults with mental and physical differences the opportunity to learn the skills to participate in sports. Having recognized the positive impact that sports competition had on her students, she championed the idea of a city-wide competition. This ultimately led to the creation of the Chicago Special Olympics in 1968, which grew to become the International Special Olympics, reaching tens of millions in 192 nations across the globe. Chief Justice Burke later served as a Director of the International Special Olympics and remains involved with the Chicago Special Olympics organization to this day.

Later, while serving as a Justice of Illinois Appellate Court, Burke served on a lay National Review Board of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. That Board pushed the American bishops to adopt a zero-tolerance policy toward child abusers. Burke became interim chair of that Board in 2003. (For more than you may have ever wanted to know about the history of the National Review Board, see, Michael R. Merz, "A History of the National Review Board.") Merz writes that "Justice Burke had a leadership role from the beginning of the Board’s work. Her papers from that work reflect her diplomatic skills, attention to detail, and passionate commitment to the Board’s work."

The Supreme Court has chosen Appellate Court Justice Joy V. Cunningham to fill the vacancy created by Burke's resignation, until Burke's successor is elected in 2024.

Cunningham's interim appointment makes her the automatic frontrunner for the Burke vacancy in 2024. But, if history is any guide, she will face several opponents and a tough primary contest if she chooses to seek to hold her place on the Court. For example, in 2012, when Justice Mary Jane Theis was seeking to hold the Supreme Court seat to which she had been appointed, Justice Cunningham also sought that vacancy.

Cunningham was elected to the Illinois Appellate Court in 2006. At the time of her election to that court, Cunningham was Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary at Northwestern Memorial Healthcare. She served as an associate judge from 1997-2000, when she left the bench for Northwestern. She served as Associate General Counsel for Loyola University from 1986 to 1996. Early in her legal career she served as a judicial law clerk to Glen Johnson of the Illinois Appellate Court. She is a past president of the Chicago Bar Association.

Burke's resignation and Cunningham's appointment is big story, surely. But this was not even the only big story to emerge from the beginning of the Supreme Court's September term: On Monday, the Supreme Court announced that Justice Mary Jane Theis will become the new Chief Justice of the Illinois Supreme Court when Chief Justice Burke's term ends on October 25.

Justice Theis will be the fourth woman to serve as Chief Justice following the late Justice McMorrow, Justice Rita B. Garman, and Justice Burke. She will be the 122nd Chief Justice in Illinois history. (For the Court's press release marking her selection, click here.)

Theis will become Chief of a Supreme Court that has been almost entirely reconstituted in just a few short years.

By the end of the year, no matter the outcome of the November elections, Justice P. Scott Neville, Jr. will be the second longest-tenured member of the Court. Although elected in 2020, Neville has served since June 15, 2018, when he was appointed to the vacancy of the late Justice Charles Freeman.

If he wins election from the newly redrawn Third Judicial District, Justice Michael J. Burke would be the next longest serving member of the Court. He joined the Supreme Court on March 1, 2020 -- just before Covid interrupted all our lives and livelihoods -- replacing Justice Robert R. Thomas. (Burke's opponent on the November ballot is Third District Appellate Court Justice Mary Kay O'Brien.)

Justice David K. Overstreet would be either the third- or fourth-longest serving Justice of the Supreme Court depending on how Justice Michael Burke fares in November. Overstreet was elected in 2020, along with Justice Neville, but Overstreet did not serve on the Court prior to his election.

Justice Lisa Holder White joined the Court only this past July 8, upon the resignation of Justice Garman. Justice Cunningham will join the court on December 1, mere days before the winner of the contested election in the Second Judicial District (Elizabeth Rochford or Mark Curran) is sworn into office.

In many times and places, this near-complete institutional turnover would be a major news story... but that is apparently not the case here.

In any event, it is not the third story I promised at the outset:

That third story comes from the Circuit Court of Cook County where, yesterday, Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans won his eighth term as chief.

Without apparent formal opposition. Unopposed.

Evans was first elected Chief Judge in 2001 -- and re-elected in 2004, 2007, 2010, 2013, 2016, 2019, and, now, yesterday.

Evans was first elected to the Circuit Court in 1992. He became Presiding Judge of the Law Division in 2000, where he served until his first election as chief.

This third story has garnered probably the least outside attention -- but many FWIW readers may think this last one the most important....

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Here's a thought: How about Evans and the Supreme Court think about the public and appoint some of these primary winners who don't have opponents in November? I practice in a Division that's short on judges. It sounds absurd when I tell my clients I can't even get a date to present their motion until mid-November.

Anonymous said...

They don’t need to be appointed early. There are enough judges. Just make them go to work.

Anonymous said...

You have no idea what your talking about. The system is down 40+ judges.