Friday, July 28, 2023

James P. Crawley plans 2024 judicial bid

James Patrick ("Jim") Crawley has announced his candidacy for Cook County Judge.

Admitted to practice in Illinois since 1990, according to ARDC, Crawley currently serves as litigation counsel for a transit division of the Regional Transportation Authority handling a wide range of cases.

Prior to attending St. Louis University Law School, Crawley served as an aide to former Illinois U.S. Senator Paul Simon. In law school, he worked in a clinic providing free legal services to the homeless, and as a law clerk for the Federal Public Defender. Crawley was a member of the editorial staff of the St. Louis University Public Law Review, a publication focused on public interest law.

Crawley served as an intern to the Honorable Myron H. Bright, Justice for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Also, while still in law school, Crawley served as a staff member of the first pro bono legal clinic in the nation to provide free legal services to people with HIV/AIDS at the height of the AIDS crisis. He was among the team of attorneys and law students who litigated the federal landmark case of Weaver v. Reagan, 886 F.2d 194 (8th Cir. 1989), a ruling that held that the state could not deny Medicaid coverage of the drug AZT to AIDS patients who were eligible for Medicaid and whose physicians had certified that AZT was medically necessary treatment. That landmark ruling continues to serve as legal precedent that the state must prove a rational basis to deny terminally ill individuals with available life-prolonging treatment.

Crawley returned to Chicago following law school and has served as an attorney in both public and private practice handling complex litigation in both state and federal courts. In addition to being licensed in Illinois, Crawley is a member of the General and Trial bars for the U.S. District Court for the Northern and Central Districts of Illinois, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. In 2005, he was sworn-in by Chief Justice John Roberts to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court. Crawley is a member of numerous bar associations, including the Chicago Bar Association, the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association, the Decalogue Society of Lawyers, the Chicago Council of Lawyers, and the Women’s Bar Association of Illinois.

Throughout his career, Jim has continued to work for his community and those in need. He served on the board of directors for Jane Addams Hull House and AIDS Care, the first residential home in Chicago for persons living with AIDS. For several years, Jim served on the Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chicago Police Department to facilitate community policing and open channels for dialogue between citizens and the police department.

Crawley was appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court to serve two terms on the Supreme Court Committee for Judicial Performance. He also served on the Commission for Access to Justice subcommittee charged with creating uniform forms for use by unrepresented litigants to ensure that the court system serves all persons, not only those that can afford an attorney. He has twice served as mentor to new attorneys under the Supreme Court’s attorney mentoring program. Crawley's commitment to the bar includes serving as a peer counselor to other attorneys under the court’s Lawyers Assistance Program. In addition to his current practice, Jim serves as court-appointed arbitrator in the Law Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County and is assigned both commercial and tort cases. Earlier this year, Jim received mediator certification through Northwestern University’s internationally recognized mediator training program.

This is Crawley’s third attempt at being elected judge; he ran countywide in 2014 and 2020. In the 2016 election cycle, Crawley sought slating for a 10th Subcircuit vacancy, but did not appear on the ballot.

As a member of the LGBTQ community, Crawley notes that his serving as a judge would bring diversity to the bench and help ensure that the make-up of the judiciary reflects the people it serves. He resides in Jefferson Park on Chicago’s northwest side with his spouse of 22-years, and their two dogs, Max and Harry.

Debjani Desai campaign website launches


A campaign website has been launched in support of Judge Debjani Desai's effort to hold her seat on the Cook County bench. That's a link to the new site in the preceding sentence; a link will be added to the Candidate List on this site's Sidebar as soon as it is set up.

The Illinois Supreme Court appointed Desai to the countywide Propes vacancy just last month; she was sworn in on July 14.

Desai's campaign bio stresses her pre-judicial career, culminating in her service as General Counsel for the Illinois Comptroller. It also mentions that Desai has served as a special prosecutor in child protection cases in Juvenile Court, an adjunct professor teaching counseling and negotiations at UIC Law, and as mock trial coach for high school and college teams.

Desai received a CBA Vanguard Award in 2022. She was a Short List finalist in the most recent round of associate judge selections.

Judicial candidates not mentioned in this... but may be interested anyway

Updated August 5, 2023 to add registration link
This Candidate Forum is set for Monday, August 7, at 6:00 p.m., at City's Edge, 5310 W. Devon... so shortly before the actual slating meeting.

The sponsoring groups, the 39th Ward Democrats, the 41st Ward Democrats, the 45th Ward Democrats, and the 50th Ward Democratic Organization are presenting candidates for State's Attorney, Clerk of the Circuit Court, and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District... but will there be competing candidates presented for these offices?

Anyway... the flyer itself serves as a striking visual reminder of the low, low place judicial candidates place in the traditional political hierarchy... certainly below MWRD trustees... effectively beneath mention. But the event may provide an opportunity for judicial candidates nonetheless. At least an opportunity to see, and be seen.

To register for this event, click on this link.

Friday, July 21, 2023

CBA, Public Defender offer CLE incentives for Driver's License Resinstatement Expo volunteers

The Pilsen Neighbors Community Council, Law Office of the Cook County Public Defender, Illinois Secretary of State, the Chicago Bar Association (CBA), and other partners are hosting a Driver's License Reinstatement Expo on Saturday, September 16, 2023 at Malcolm X College.

Volunteer attorneys are needed to provide free onsite counseling to individuals looking to reinstate their drivers' licenses. Attorneys will interpret SOS Driving Abstracts, verify information, and provide instruction on clearing suspensions.

There are three two-hour shifts available: 8:30 to 11:30 a.m. (Shift 1); 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. (Shift 2); and 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. (Shift 3).

In order to entice more volunteers to step forward, the CBA will provide a voucher good for a three-hour CLE seminar to all attorney volunteers.

And -- just as was said in the old Ginsu Knives commercial -- wait! that's not all: The Cook County Public Defender’s office will provide free training on interpreting abstracts via Zoom on August 16 or August 30, 2023, from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. Two IL MCLE credit will be provided for attendance at the training.

To sign-up for training, a volunteer shift, or more information, please email Danita Ivory at danita.ivory@cookcountyil.gov.

Thursday, July 20, 2023

Cook County judge inducted into the Stanley Goldstein Treatment Court Hall of Fame

Cook County Circuit Court Judge Charles P. Burns was inducted into the Stanley Goldstein Treatment Court Hall of Fame by All Rise, formerly known as the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, at its Rise 23 convention last month in Houston, Texas.

Named for the nation’s first drug court judge, the Stanley Goldstein Treatment Court Hall of Fame is the highest honor bestowed by All Rise, the leading training, membership, and advocacy organization for treatment courts. Judge Burns was inducted by outgoing board chair Judge Karen Freeman-Wilson (ret.), the President and CEO of the Chicago Urban League.

"Judge Burns is a leader, mentor, and visionary within the treatment court community," said Judge Freeman-Wilson. "Under his leadership, the Rehabilitative Alternative Probation and Woman's Rehabilitative Alternative Probation treatment courts have been recognized as national mentor courts by the Bureau of Justice Assistance three times, and his innovative approach to equity and inclusion, trauma-informed care, medication for opioid use disorders, employment assistance, and criminal record relief has significantly enhanced program outcomes. It is an honor to induct him into the treatment court hall of fame."

In accepting the induction, Judge Burns said, "I am humbled and honored by this award, though the real recipients of this award are our participants who courageously address their substance use. Their transition to productive and admired citizens is nothing short of amazing. They are the real faces of criminal justice reform." Judge Burns thanked his drug court team and partners for their passion and tireless devotion to changing lives.

Following the award, Judge Burns participated in a panel discussion highlighting his program's innovative approach to assisting treatment court participants with finding housing. Joining him onstage was Melissa Fitzgerald, All Rise Director of Strategic Engagement, Johnny Washington, a housing voucher recipient, and Sarah Kaufman, Cook County Assistant State's Attorney.

Since 2018 the Cook County treatment court, known as the Rehabilitative Alternative Probation Program, has partnered with the Cook County Housing Authority to provide housing vouchers to participants and graduates. The program has thus far placed 16 individuals in housing and is considered a national model for addressing housing instability for treatment court participants.

About the RAP Program
Judge Charles Burns' (W)RAP program is an alternative sentencing approach for individuals who have committed non-violent drug related offenses. (W)RAP is a two-year felony drug treatment program that provides access to treatment as an alternative to being sentenced to prison. The goal of this program is to assist individuals in their recovery from drugs and/or alcohol addiction. This program offers support, services, and accountability to help participants readjust to the community as a sober and changed person. There are two separate programs -- a men's program and a women's program -- that are identically structured, but offers gender specific services to best meet the needs of the participant. While in the program, participants complete substance use treatment with frequent drug and alcohol screens, appear in court, attend regular self-help support groups, as well as any other treatment or counseling recommended by the (W)RAP team. The program has established community partnerships to assist participants to locate and obtain interim and long-term housing, to help furnish newly obtained housing, offers career employment and financial credit services, mental health counseling and trauma informed treatment. Upon graduation of the program, the participant's probation is terminated satisfactorily, their cases dismissed, and their convictions expunged.

About All Rise
All Rise describes itself as the leading training, membership, and advocacy organization for advancing justice system responses to individuals with substance use and mental health disorders. All Rise aims to impact every stage of the justice system, from first contact with law enforcement to corrections and reentry, and works with public health leaders to improve treatment outcomes for justice-involved individuals. Through its four divisions -- the Treatment Court Institute, Impaired Driving Solutions, Justice for Vets, and the Center for Advancing Justice -- All Rise provides training and technical assistance at the local and national level, advocates for federal and state funding, and collaborates with public and private entities. All Rise works in every U.S. state and territory and in countries throughout the world.

Wednesday, July 19, 2023

Maureen Ward Kirby appointed Acting Presiding Judge of the County Division

Press release issued last evening by the Office of Cook County Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans. The link from the text was added by FWIW.
The Hon. Maureen Ward Kirby has been named Acting Presiding Judge of the County Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans said.

Judge Ward Kirby has been a judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County since 2007. Prior to joining the bench, she was a partner at Bell, Boyd & Lloyd, handling complex commercial litigation cases, and was a law clerk to the Honorable James H. Alesia of the Northern District of Illinois. When in private practice, she was admitted to the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Circuit Courts of Appeal, and was a member of the trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois.

Judge Ward Kirby replaces the Hon. Rena Marie Van Tine, who was appointed a justice with the First District Appellate Court. Judge Van Tine was the state’s first female Asian-American presiding judge.

“Judge Ward Kirby has had many years of experience as a judge, and is a leader and educator regarding issues of mental health and addiction,” said Judge Evans. “I am confident that the County Division will benefit from her leadership.”

Since September 2009, Judge Ward Kirby has been assigned to the County Division, where she hears election, tax, civil mental health, adoption, and other matters. She has presided over hundreds of civil trials seeking involuntary admission to a mental health facility or involuntary treatment, supervises the Agreed Outpatient Treatment call, has finalized thousands of adoption cases, and has extensive experience involving tax litigation and election disputes.

“I am honored to serve with the wonderful group of judges and committed lawyers in this division,” Judge Ward Kirby said. “County handles cases that impact people’s lives in such profound ways, whether it be adoption, mental health or elections, and we in the division will continue to administer justice fairly, efficiently, and with humility. I thank Chief Judge Evans for his confidence in me.”

Prior to joining the County Division, Judge Ward Kirby was first assigned to Traffic Court in the First Municipal Division and then transferred to the Domestic Relations Division. In that assignment she heard the high volume civil independent orders of protection call at 555 W. Harrison prior to the creation of the Domestic Violence Division.

Judge Ward Kirby is also a frequent lecturer on civil mental health law, is a member of the Illinois Mental Health Task Force, and currently serves on the Illinois Supreme Court Special Advisory Committee for Justice and Mental Health Planning. She has presented to her colleagues at the biennial Judicial Education Conference on interacting with litigants with mental health challenges, involuntary commitment proceedings, and the opioid epidemic. She also has educated her colleagues on emergency mental health orders and outpatient treatment orders.

Judge Ward Kirby is a certified Supreme Court of Illinois new judge judicial mentor. She graduated magna cum laude from Boston College and from Loyola University of Chicago Law School.
Judge Kirby was appointed to the bench in 2007, as the Court's press release notes; she was elected to a countywide vacancy in 2008.

And for those who do practice regularly in our criminal courts...

The Supreme Court entered this Order yesterday, changing the effective date of a host of revisions to the Supreme Court Rules which would have gone into effect on January 1, 2023 but, now, pursuant to Rowe v. Raoul, 2023 IL 129248, will go into effect on September 18.

Isn't cash bail or no cash bail really beside the point?

Non-lawyers hearing about yesterday's Illinois Supreme Court decision in Rowe v. Raoul, 2023 IL 129248, may wonder why, since the Court found Public Acts 101-652 and 102-1104 (eff. Jan. 1, 2023) to be constitutional, the Court stayed implementation of these measures for an additional 60 days, until September 18.

The Supreme Court did not explain its reasons, but it is not unreasonable to guess that time is needed to give courts time to figure out new practices and procedures consistent with the new laws. While these measures enjoyed wide support among statewide elected officials and officials in a few counties, including Cook County, of course, these measures were actively opposed by most prosecutors and law enforcement agencies around the State. Anyone who watched the oral argument in this case before the Supreme Court presumably came away with the impression, as I did, that the Supreme Court was likely to uphold what is colloquially referred to as the SAFE-T Act -- but I've drawn the wrong conclusions from watching oral arguments before -- and, until yesterday morning, the opponents of the Act could still harbor hope.

Now, all these one-time opponents of the law must learn to live with and function under it.

Politicians and even their less responsible siblings, TV and social media talking heads, are, according to their chosen "silos", aghast or aglow about the Supreme Court's decision. In the former category, a Twitterer calling herself Lisa Marie says the "justice system is now a joke." Downstate Congressperson Mary Miller cries that the "Illinois Supreme Court [has] erased the rights of crime victims." Dan Proft warns ominously, "Get ready for more of that big-city livin', suburbanites."

On the other hand, the embedded Tweet shows Gov. Pritzker and Speaker Welch rejoicing upon learning of the Supreme Court's decision. In a celebratory statement, Cook County Board President (and County Democratic Party Chair) Toni Preckwinkle enthused, "By ending money bond, we have taken a significant step forward in dismantling a system that disproportionately impacts our Black and Brown communities." ABC-7 collected a number of reactions to the decision, including this quote from Mayor Brandon Johnson: "Cash bail does not make communities safer, and it never has; it has simply exacerbated existing inequities and disparities in the criminal legal system. Pretrial detention, as a result of the inability to pay bail, further decimates communities that have long been most impacted by mass incarceration, and the destabilization of households and families."

But this statement yesterday, from Gov. Pritzker, may turn out to be the most important: "We can now move forward with historic reform to ensure pre-trial detainment is determined by the danger an individual poses to the community instead of by their ability to pay their way out of jail."

Because that is the bottom line: Under the new law, will judges be able to detain truly dangerous persons while they await trial? I would find it hard to believe that any judge (any judge, that is, even remotely faithful to his or her oath) ever deliberately released someone on bail knowing that said person was certain to commit another, possibly more heinous, offense. And yet -- obviously -- persons free on bail have been accused of serious crimes. It happens now with "affordable bail" and it happened before "affordable bail" became a watchword. Cash bail has never been an ironclad guarantee against further criminal conduct by those inclined to commit crimes.

The only way to guarantee (or, if you will, "ensure") that no accused person commits another offense while waiting for trial is to detain everyone, always. And no one wants that. Reasonable people may differ on how danger to the community may be measured. But -- and pardon my ignorance, for I never did practice regularly in our criminal courts -- wasn't this a sticking point with cash bail, too?

In other words, we're all going to have to see how the new system works in actual practice.

If it turns out to be Armageddon, or The Purge, or whatever the fearmongers predict, you can bet that judges will take the blame. The fearmongers already are blaming the justices of the Supreme Court. But, if things turn out badly, the very pols now praising the SAFE-T Act to the skies will not hesitate to insist that judges screwed up the implementation.

Now, judges must follow the law. I know there are some in both silos who insist that judges do not in fact do this, but I am confident (to take a relevant example) that both the five Supreme Court justices who upheld the SAFE-T Act yesterday and the two dissenters were fully confident of their own compliance with Rule 1.1 of the new Code of Judicial Conduct. Moreover, I am convinced that the five justices in the majority and the two dissenting judges each thought their colleagues on the other side wrong, but also fully compliant with the overriding command to follow the law.

Non-lawyers sometimes seem to have a hard time with this. But lawyers understand, or should understand, that, when our Supreme Court speaks on a matter within its authority, discussion is over and remains over, at least for the foreseeable future. The Illinois Supreme Court had the final word on the SAFE-T Act, and it has spoken. There is an old expression most lawyers know: The Supreme Court is not final because it is always right, but it is right because it is always final.

So the law enforcement agencies, the prosecutors, and the judges -- especially the judges -- will have to learn how to work with these new measures, whether they like them or not. And the Supreme Court has given all of them, those who supported the SAFE-T Act, and those who opposed it, 60 additional days to figure out how.

From my non-specialist perspective, cash bail or no cash bail seems really beside the point. Cash bail was merely a tool -- one tool -- that judges had for detaining dangerous persons before trial. The real issue here is whether the SAFE-T Act provides our judges with sufficient other tools "to ensure," as Gov. Pritzker promised, that "pre-trial detainment is determined by the danger an individual poses to the community."

If some judges find that the SAFE-T Act does not provide sufficient tools for this purpose, those judges must nevertheless follow the law as required by Rule 2.4(A) of the Code of Judicial Conduct, "[un]swayed by public clamor or fear of criticism." Comment 1 to that rule instructs that judges must "decide cases according to the law and facts, without regard to whether particular laws or litigants are popular or unpopular with the public, the media, government officials, or the judge's friends or family."

But their hands are not tied. Although judges can not make public comments about pending matters under Rule 2.10, they can explain their actions in the course of announcing their decisions. If a judge finds, under the law, that he or she can not order pretrial detention for someone who in their view is likely to reoffend, an explanation of the provisions that were considered and deemed insufficient for this purpose would be helpful. Moreover, under Rule 3.2(A) and Rule 3.2(B), judges are permitted to voluntarily appear and consult with executive and legislative bodies "in connection with matters concerning the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice," and "in connection with matters about which the judge acquired knowledge or expertise in the course of the judge's legal duties." See also, comment 2 to Rule 2.1, "judges are encouraged to participate in activites that promote public understanding of and confidence in the justice system."

Judges did not create the SAFE-T Act. Five Illinois Supreme Court justices upheld its constitutionality. They did not attest to the wisdom or virtue or utility of the SAFE-T Act, however, because, unless a statute is actually unconstitutional, "The wisdom of the enactment of any law is vested in the discretion of the Legislature, and courts cannot declare the laws invalid because they are unwise or unreasonable." People ex rel. Shultz v. Russel, 294 Ill. 283, 286 (1920).

The SAFE-T Act may usher in a new Golden Age, as the activists and politicians who imagined it insist. It may prove a disaster. Most likely, it will prove not as transformative as its drafters hoped, or as terrible as its detractors feared. Who knows? In raw numbers, pretrial detentions may actually go up without cash bail. But cash bail is not the issue. Public safety is.

Tuesday, July 18, 2023

Campaign website launched for Justice Cynthia Y. Cobbs

Supporters of Cynthia Y. Cobbs' bid to remain on the Appellate Court have launched a campaign website on her behalf. That's a link to the campaign website in the preceding sentence; FWIW will eventually set up a separate list of Appellate Court candidates in this site's Sidebar, and this link will be included. Justice Cobbs also has a campaign Facebook page.

Technically, Justice Cobbs is a Circuit Court judge, appointed by the Supreme Court to the county bench in 2011 and elected in 2014, but she has been serving on the Appellate Court pursuant to assignment by the Supreme Court since 2015. She was a candidate for the Illinois Supreme Court in 2020.

Cobbs' campaign bio notes her long service with the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts, rising to the position of Director in 2002, "becoming the first African American and the first woman to serve in that capacity."

Cobbs currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Illinois Judges Association and on the Board of Directors for South Suburban PADS.

Gonzalez campaign announces two kickoff events

Supporters of Dawn Gonzalez's 11th Subcircuit judicial bid are planning two campaign kickoff events in the next couple of weeks.

The first is set for Thursday, July 27, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m., at a private residence in Oak Park. The second is set for Wednesday, August 2, also from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m., in the 12th Floor Terrace Lounge (pictured above) at 161 N. Clark Street.

Donations are not required for either event, organizers say, but reservations (to gonzalez4judge@gmail.com) are.

Of course, for those inclined to support the campaign monetarily, there are suggested contribution levels for either event (Friend - $100, Neighbor - $250, Supporter - $500, or Benefactor - $1,000). The donation link for the downtown event is here.

Update: Alon Stein to seek 12th Subcircuit vacancy

Last month, FWIW reported that Alon Stein had announced plans to run for judge in the 2024 Primary.

Now we can add that a campaign website has been launched on Stein's behalf. That is a link to the new site in the preceding sentence; a link will be added to the list in the Sidebar on this site when that is prepared (which, apparently, given the increasing number of declared candidates, will have to be soon). (The initial FWIW post carried a link to Stein's campaign Facebook page.)

The other new item we can add at this time is that Stein has announced, and his website confirms, that he will be focusing his efforts on a 12th Subcircuit vacancy. One page of the new website lists a lengthy campaign committee, listing three former Appellate Court justices as Honorary Committee Co-Chairs. The complete list of Co-Chairs includes Hon. Grace Dickler (ret.), Hon. Robert Gordon (ret.), Hon. Bill Taylor (ret.), Hon. Marvin Leavitt (ret.), Hon. Carol Ronen (Democratic State Central Committee), and 58th Dist. St. Rep. Bob Morgan.

Deidre Dyer campaign website goes online

A campaign website has been launched in support of Deidre Dyer's anticipated 2024 judicial bid. That's a link to the new website in the preceding sentence; there is also a campaign Facebook page.

The Illinois Supreme Court appointed Judge Dyer to the countywide Hubbard vacancy in April of this year.

Dyer's campaign bio notes that, prior to her appointment, she was a Deputy Supervisor at the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office handling complex financial crimes, public corruption, and consumer fraud cases. According to the campaign bio, Dyer has also worked as an Assistant Illinois Attorney General in the Special Prosecutions Bureau and was also a supervising attorney for the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. In 2020, according to the campaign bio, Dyer was named prosecuting partner of the year by the National Insurance Crime Bureau.

Dyer has also served as a member of Hazel Crest's Planning and Zoning Board and as a member of the Lansing Christian School parent board, according to her campaign bio. She is a former Sunday School Teacher at Jubilee Faith Community Church and, during the Pandemic, helped organize virtual services at Salem Lutheran Church. Dyer is a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., is fluent in French (she studied at the Sorbonne), and (also in college) was a DJ on the Illinois Wesleyan University radio station, WESN.

Thursday, July 13, 2023

Illinois Latino Judges Association Installation set for July 26

The Illinois Latino Judges Association will hold its Installation ceremony, welcoming Appellate Court Justice David R. Navarro as its new President, on Wednesday, July 26, from 5:30 to 8:00 p.m., at the National Museum of Mexican Art, 1852 W. 19th St.

ILJA Members will be admitted free; tickets for non-members are $50 apiece. Event tickets (and ILJA memberships) are available from this link.

That QR code in the graphic above may do something, too, but I make no promises....

Van Tine appointed to the Appellate Court; Walker gets put in an 'up or out' seat

Meteoric may not be quite the right word to describe Rena Marie Van Tine's judicial career arc. After all, she has served in the judiciary since 2001, when she was appointed an associate judge.

On the other hand, in just the past two years, Van Tine was appointed a full circuit judge (in 2021), slated and victorious in the 2022 primary, named as Acting Presiding Judge of the County Division, and now, effective July 18, assigned to duty in the Appellate Court. Viewing just these last couple of years, "meteoric" seems almost too tame a term.

Van Tine's elevation comes about because Justice Eileen O'Neill Burke has resigned her seat on the Appellate Court -- but Van Tine was not appointed to replace her.

Justice Carl A. Walker, a Circuit Court judge serving by assignment on the Appellate Court since 2018 was reassigned, pursuant to a separate Supreme Court Order, to Justice Burke's vacancy.

Justice Walker keeps his existing case load; Judge Van Tine will assume Justice Burke's cases but, technically, it is Walker who is temporarily filling Burke's vacancy.

The good news for Justice Walker is that he takes Burke's vacancy by reassignment, not appointment. Like an appointment, this reassignment will terminate on December 2, 2024 when Burke's elected successor takes office. However, since he sits only by assignment, should he not seek and secure Justice Burke's seat in the forthcoming election, Justice Walker will still be a Circuit Court judge.

Justice Walker now joins his colleagues Cynthia Y. Cobbs and Mary L. Mikva in 'up or out' slots on the Appellate bench. Each must run for, and win election to, the Appellate Court in order to continue serving on that court. All three did appear at the Democratic Party's recent judicial pre-slating meeting. The current Who Sits Where post has been updated accordingly.

The Supreme Court's press release concerning Van Tine's elevation is available at this link.

Justice Walker was elected to a 1st Subcircuit vacancy in 2006.

Justice Burke was elected to the Appellate Court in 2016; she was appointed to that court earlier that same year, after securing the Democratic nomination in an uncontested primary. She was elected to the Circuit Court in 2008.

Wednesday, July 05, 2023

Who Sits Where: Star-Spangled Banner Edition

Updated July 13, 2023

On a recent family vacation, I had the privilege of participating in the flag-raising ceremony at Ft. McHenry in Baltimore. This is a picture of that flag flying over the fort. It is the same size as the original flag raised on the morning of September 14, 1814. The broad stripes and bright stars (15 of each) of the original inspired lawyer Francis Scott Key to write a poem, "The Defense of Fort McHenry," which could be sung to the tune of a popular English drinking song, "To Anacreon in Heaven."

The first stanza of that poem became our National Anthem, although not until 1931. True fact, and one I didn't learn until embarassingly late in life: The last two words of same are not "play ball."

A lot of folks in Baltimore were watching the Brits bombard Ft. McHenry through the perilous fight on September 13, 1814, but Francis Scott Key had a unique, if uncomfortable, vantage point: He was interned by the British, on a truce ship, under the watchful eyes of a detachment of Royal Marines, right in the heart of the British fleet raining rockets and bombs at the fort.

Key was there in a professional capacity, having successfully negotiated the release of Dr. William Beanes who, with two other Maryland physicians, had rounded up and jailed a bunch of British stragglers and deserters that stopped to loot deserted farms near Beanes' home in Upper Marlboro while marching back from the August 24 burning of Washington D.C. The small posse of physicians didn't catch all the miscreants; some skedaddled back to camp and informed the chain of command about the fate of their lagging brothers.

The British commanders ordered the arrest of all three doctors, but they were particularly peeved with Dr. Beanes. He was about the only man left in town when the Brits marched through on their way to burn Washington; the senior officers had dined with Dr. Beanes on that occasion and had formed the opinion that he was sympathetic to their cause. The National Park Service's Ft. McHenry website states that Dr. Beanes had promised the Brits he would not interfere with British operations. The Brits seemed to think that rounding up looters constituted interference. It is also possible that the stragglers who escaped capture exaggerated Barnes' martial behavior, while (perhaps understandably) minimizing their own fault in the affair. In any event, the Brits were quite miffed to find out that Dr. Beanes was not as friendly as they thought; while they released the two other doctors arrested with Beanes before the end of August, the Brits wanted to bring Beanes back to Halifax and try him as a spy.

Most of us, I hope, learned at least the outline of this story while still in school. But the story as told to school children gives short shrift to Key's careful, lawyerly preparations for his mission.

First, Key tracked down President Madison and secured his permission for the venture. Next, apparently pursuant to the President's advice, he made arrangements to go out to the fleet with Prisoner Exchange Colonel John Stuart Skinner. Skinner would have been known to the British from past negotiations.

Finally, and perhaps decisively, as it turned out, Key went to Bladensburg, Maryland, the site of the Americans' humiliating defeat on August 24, that had left Washington open, unprotected, and ripe for burning.

Complete as the British victory had been, there were (of course) several British casualties. Key met with the American doctors who were treating the enemy wounded. He solicited letters from the British casualties to carry with him on his mission to the British fleet. The NPS website says he got a sackful. And Key made sure that the letters found their way to the British Army commander, the doomed Maj. Gen. Robert Ross.

Negotiations did not go smoothly at first. While Key and his party were invited to dine with senior British officers on board the fleet's flagship, Col. Skinner got into a beef with Admiral Edward Codrington over the fact that the Brits had burned Skinner's house. General Ross was present for the luncheon, too, and offered the opinion that Dr. Beanes was no gentleman and should not be released for any reason.

On the other hand, Ross had read the letters penned by the British prisoners at Bladensburg praising the humane treatment they had received from their American captors. According to the NPS website, "Ross expressed his relief and gratitude about the kind treatment his men had received, and stated that for this reason, and no other, he would consent to the release of Dr. Beanes."

But there was still the battle to be fought over the fate of Baltimore. And inasmuch as battle plans had been freely discussed at the luncheon attended by Key and Skinner, the Brits felt it prudent to detain them (and the now-liberated Dr. Beanes), albeit on the ship on which Key and Skinner had come, under the eyes, and bayonets, of the Royal Marines.

The bombardment raged all day and all night on September 13, capped by a driving rainstorm -- you can follow the links in this post to find out precisely which British ships were responsible for the rockets' red glare and which were responsible for the bombs bursting in air -- but the bottom line was this: Between the rain and fog and smoke from the artillery on both sides, Key and his fellow detainees could not initially see, by the dawn's early light, on the morning of September 14, when the bombardment ceased, the flag they had seen at the twilight's last gleaming and only occasionally thereafter, when illuminated by rockets and bombs. They may well have asked one another, "Oh, say, can you see...?"

On that morning of September 14, though still threatened by the guns of the British fleet, the commander of Ft. McHenry, Maj. George Armistead, ordered his men to conduct their usual flag-raising ceremony and to fly, on this particular morning, the largest flag they had available, much larger than the 'storm flag' flown during the battle. The flag selected for that morning was one that that Armistead had commissioned when he assumed command of the fort, a flag "so large that the British would have no difficulty seeing it from a distance." The post band played "Yankee Doodle."

The morning that I was there, the ranger noted that, now and again, some visitor will ask why the band played "Yankee Doodle" and not "The Star-Spangled Banner."

Hopefully no one to whom such a question might occur is planning a campaign for the Cook County Circuit Court.

And with that abrupt transition, we return to the ostensible purpose of this post, namely the updated, and wholly unofficial, list of Cook County judicial vacancies.

Some of the judges whose vacancies are listed below may still be coming into work -- but, according to information received, they have advised of their intent to leave, thus creating the vacancy.

Any and all errors of omission or commission in the following list are mine alone and I am grateful for additions and corrections provided. This list will be updated periodically as events warrant.

Supreme Court Vacancy

Vacancy of the Hon. Anne M. Burke -- Joy V. Cunningham

Appellate Court Vacancies

Vacancy of the Hon. Maureen E. Connors -- Mary L. Mikva
Vacancy of the Hon. Joy V. Cunningham -- Cynthia Y. Cobbs
Vacancy of the Hon. Eileen O'Neill Burke -- Carl A. Walker

Countywide Circuit Court Vacancies

Vacancy of the Hon. Vincent Gaughan -- Corrine Cantwell Heggie
Vacancy of the Hon. Catherine Haberkorn -- Sarah Rodak Johnson
Vacancy of the Hon. Arnette Hubbard -- Deidre M. Dyer
Vacancy of the Hon. Marcia Maras -- Arlene Y. Coleman-Romeo
Vacancy of the Hon. Raymond W. Mitchell -- Neil H. Cohen
Vacancy of the Hon. Timothy P. Murphy -- Edward J. Underhill
Vacancy of the Hon. Lorna Propes -- Debjani D. Desai
Vacancy of the Hon. William Raines -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Laura M. Sullivan -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Debra B. Walker -- Chloé G. Pedersen

Subcircuit Vacancies

3rd Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. Edward S. Harmening -- Unfilled

4th Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. Peter A. Felice -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Edward J. King -- Phillip J. Fowler
Vacancy of the Hon. Edward M. Maloney -- Unfilled

5th Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. Casandra Lewis -- Unfilled

7th Subcircuit
"A" Vacancy* -- Owens J. Shelby

8th Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. Ann Collins-Dole -- Unfilled

10th Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. Clare E. McWilliams -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Gregory J. Wojkowski -- James S. Murphy-Aguilu

11th Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. Ann Finley Collins -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Paula M. Daleo -- Unfilled

12th Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. Grace G. Dickler -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Marguerite Quinn -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Andrea M. Schleifer -- Unfilled

13th Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. Samuel J. Betar III -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Ketki Shroff Steffen -- Unfilled

14th Subcircuit
Vacancy of the Hon. James N. O'Hara -- Unfilled
Vacancy of the Hon. Daniel J. Pierce -- Unfilled

15th Subcircuit
"A" Vacancy** -- Unfilled

Vacancies in the new 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th Subcircuits will come into existence as associate judges leave office. No more than 10 such vacancies will be created in any one election cycle -- a maximum of two, that is, in each of the new five subcircuits.

---------------------------------------------------------
*  This is the vacancy assigned to the 7th Subcircuit upon the resignation of Judge Irwin J. Solganick. Or upon the resignation of Judge Michael Toomin. See, note post.
**  This is the vacancy assigned to the 15th Subcircuit upon the resignation of Judge Michael P. Toomin. Or upon the resignation of Judge Irwin J. Solganick. It works either way. And, if I ever figure out which is correct, I'll update accordingly.

Tuesday, July 04, 2023

New and pretty much expected developments in recent stories

In the category of expected, as opposed to unexpected, developments in a couple of different stories:

Last Thursday, the Illinois Supreme Court entered an Order 'terminating' its appointment of retired Judge Patricia H. Martin as an advisor to the Supreme Court Committee on Juvenile Courts. Under the circumstances, this was an entirely predictable development.

Also last Thursday, Chief Judge Timothy C. Evans banished Judge William H. Hooks to "restricted duties or duties other than judicial duties" (colloquially referred to as 'judge's jail') while inquiries are made into allegations made about Judge Hooks. The Chief Judge's statement, issued with the June 28 Order, notes that the Circuit Court's Executive Committee has referred the matter to the Judicial Inquiry Board, "which has the authority to investigate the matter." This order is consistent with the Circuit Court's pracitce in a number of recent situations where judges have been accused of inappropriate conduct or statements.

The actual outcome of any JIB inquiry will not be publicly known unless the JIB brings charges against Judge Hooks before the Illinois Courts Commission. There is nothing mysterious, and certainly nothing nefarious about this. It is the way the process works; that's how it is supposed to work under the Illinois Constitution. But, anyway, here's a link to the Chief Judge's Order.

These stories don't really mean much in the grand scheme of things. If news is defined as man bites dog, not dog bites man, stories like these come pretty close to the latter. Either story would be much bigger if the courts in question had not taken these actions.