FWIW has followed up with the Supreme Court concerning the status of subcircuit vacancies.
An email received late yesterday afternoon from Chris Bonjean, Chief Communications Officer of the Illinois Courts, provides an explanation:
Last Monday, all Supreme, Appellate and At-Large Circuit vacancies for the State were certified per the Election Code. Subcircuit vacancies could not be certified, because pursuant to the recently enacted subcircuit legislation (Public Acts 102-693 and 102-1126) the Supreme Court must first enter several Orders to convert judgeships in several circuits and allot judgeships to their new subcircuits, where applicable. After those conversions/allotments are completed, the vacancies can be certified to the State Board of Elections.I know for a fact that, outside Cook County, a number of formerly countywide seats are being converted into new subcircuit seats. I don't pretend to know what paperwork is involved.
I will let you know once the subcircuit process is complete.
While I don't think any of these necessary conversions or allotments has anything to do with Cook County -- vacancies in our newly created subcircuits are allotted, presently, per statute, as new associate judge vacancies occur (at least until 10 such occur in any given election cycle) -- the Court is evidently taking the position that until it sorts out the new subcircuits everywhere, no subcircuit vacancies will be certified anywhere.
So we wait.
But an official list is coming.
Posts
5 comments:
The new subcircuits 16-20 in Cook County are not in effect until December 2, 2024. The law is pretty clear on this! 705 ILCS 35/2f.
Anon 8/18 @ 9:04 - Thank you for a great, thoughtful comment.
And I agree, you are quite correct. But the mechanisms are in place for electing as many as 10 persons to vacancies in these subcircuits as they come into existence along with the subcircuits on the first Monday in December 2024.
I think you could make a case the other way -- and not just an Internet, Twitter-X kind of case, but a credible, plausible argument grounded in the law -- and, you never know, someone just might file suit on this -- but, were I a betting person, I'd bet heavy against such a case getting very far. It would almost certainly fail on appeal.
My sense was -- reading the tea leaves and Twitter (it was definitely still Twitter then) -- that the first redistricting effort was met with dismay, even disdain, at the Supreme Court. I know nothing, and would not for a nanosecond claim access to any sort of proof, but I wonder whether that the statutory fixes that followed were... what word can I use here?... "dictated" is too strong, and would only offend people for nothing... perhaps "inspired" by the Court... presumably through mesne intermediaries... and perhaps things were lost in translation... but enough got through that the Court somehow (obliquely, for sure, and most indirectly) signaled a willingness to live with the result, even if still flawed. And I repeat: I am not saying this actually happened; I am merely speculating here.
Of course, it was amazing that all the appointed countywide judges got slated this time -- not that I'm connecting any dots -- or even saying that this is a dot.
The only opinion I will venture is that I think this whole judicial redistricting process would have gone far more smoothly if Mike Madigan were not otherwise occupied. Whatever other sins of commission or omission that are involved in the criminal case against him, Mr. Madigan, and/or the people he had working for him, understood the intricacies of statutory redistricting. Other than that opinion, the only other one I have is that, if anyone does file suit over the new subcircuits, it will be great for my page counts.
The intent of the General Assembly was that elections would be held in 2024 for the new judicial subcircuits so that the winners of those elections can be sworn into their seats on December 2, 2024. It is not a hard concept to follow, unless your interests are contrary to that interpretation of the law.
Rules of statutory interpretation stop at the text of the statute where it is clear. Until December 2, 2024, the Circuit of Cook County shall be divided into 15 units to be known as subcircuits. On and after December 2, 2024, the Circuit of Cook County is divided into 20 subcircuits as drawn by the General Assembly.
There can't be an election for a subcircuit that doesn't even exist until "on and after December 2, 2024."
Perhaps the legislature "intended" something else, but the plain language is pretty clear.
Anon 8/19 at 12:11 a.m. -- I'm not really disagreeing with you. You are making an argument I've made at other times, in other cases.
It's just... well, I bear the scars of other cases, on far less controversial subjects, where the courts have, in my opinion, gone out of their way to paper over legislative malpractice, giving perceived, or claimed legislative "intent" primacy over (what seemed to me to be) crystal-clear language in the statute at issue.
I could be wrong -- obviously -- I often am -- but my best guess, IF a challenge comes (and to my knowledge, none has yet been made), is that the statutory scheme would be upheld. Without a challenge, I don't think anyone need worry about any failure to recognize, and populate, the new subcircuits.
Post a Comment