CONDUCT OF A JUDGE

Judges must not be partisan in any manner.  Their job is to form an opinion after evaluating all the facts in a case and make a decision by applying the laws of their jurisdiction.  Judges must be capable of making rational, dispassionate, and wise decisions, but only after  careful consideration and a strong analysis of the reasoning behind the laws. Their verdicts must be made by listening and examining all of the factual evidence presented, and should not be biased by any political affiliation or personal feelings. Judges must follow strict ethical guidelines or be subject to removal.  I emphasize the meaning behind the judicial role so deeply, because of what took place at the Cook County Democratic Party slating during the March primary for Illinois Supreme Court Justice last week in Chicago.

The authority for the Supreme Court in Illinois is granted in Article VI of the current Illinois Constitution (1970)  

Rule 799 of the court created a Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism to ensure that all of those involved in the practice of the law as lawyers or as judges should conduct themselves in an ethical and unbiased manner.  

Rule 799. Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism

(a) Purpose

The Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism is hereby established in order to promote among the lawyers and judges of Illinois principles of integrity, professionalism and civility; to foster commitment to the elimination of bias and divisiveness within the legal and judicial systems; and to ensure that those systems provide equitable, effective and efficient resolution of problems and disputes for the people of Illinois.

To be able to follow principles of “integrity, elimination of bias and divisiveness,” a judge must make decisions based solely on the laws and not on personal emotions or loyalty. 

All of what we have learned leads to what upset me so much at the Cook County slating.  One of the candidates for the Supreme Court seat, Justice Mary Jane Theis, based her plea to be slated (selected to have committeemen circulate her name and urge people to vote for her) by telling the committeemen how the two other candidates, Joy Cunningham and Aurelia Pucinski, were not loyal Democrats.  The Sun-Times quoted Theis as saying, 

 “They chose to run against your candidate and defeat your candidate.  [Pucinski] twice defeated your judicial candidates … She ran against your candidate for Cook County Board president as a Republican. I have more respect for the Democratic Party.”

Theis made it clear that her loyalty to the Democratic Party was paramount to her, and she was selected by the group as the “chosen” candidate. What bothers me so much about Theis’ position is that as a judge, she is supposed to be unbiased.  Her statements at slating sent a message that on hard-core Democratic issues like gun control and abortion, her vote on the Supreme Court would be slanted toward what the party platform required, not what the law is.

No matter what one’s personal political party affiliation is; do the citizens of Illinois want to know that their Supreme Court Justice has already decided how she will rule even before she actually hears a case? Or do they want someone with an unbiased, open mind? That is really what the election should be about and it is why Lady Justice is depicted wearing a blind-fold.

Background disclaimer:  One of the candidates for the Supreme Court spot is current Illinois Appellate Court Judge Joy Cunningham.  She is a friend of mine and sits on the board of the Chicago Legal Clinic with me.  My posting today has nothing to do with my support of Justice Cunningham and everything to do with how the political system works in Illinois.