Judicial Election Reform: Is It Time for an Illinois Performance Commission?

The State of Illinois elects its judges through partisan elections. Since 1977 Illinois judges have been required to maintain their judgeships through a retention election every six years. While the highly visible Illinois Supreme Court campaigns have warranted substantial attention, the process of electing trial judges has led to increasing levels of judicial campaign fundraising and thousands of hours of volunteer lawyer time used to conduct evaluations of judges seeking retention and judicial candidates seeking to be elected to fill judicial vacancies. Moreover, the public has seemingly lost faith and interest in the judicial election process. Sometimes fewer than 50% of voters cast their ballot for judges as opposed to the political offices that appear higher up on the November general election ballot.

It is time to change the way judges are retained in Illinois. Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice (Chicago Appleseed) and the Chicago Council of Lawyers (Council) are working with the League of Women Voters of Illinois to design, author, and seek passage of legislation that will create an Illinois Performance Commission that will oversee the judicial retention process in Illinois. Chicago Appleseed and the Council have assembled a planning committee, including Professor Ralph Brill, retired Circuit Court Judge Shelvin Singer, and attorneys Margo Alpert, Michelle Jordan, Ed Malone, and David Melton. Executive Director Malcolm Rich staffs the committee.

Chicago Appleseed in April 2003 released a report funded by the Joyce Foundation detailing the results of our comprehensive research effort regarding judicial elections in Cook County. The report identified an emerging political culture surrounding the election of judges. In this report we detailed the importance of reforms aimed at “leveling the playing field” – providing information to voters that they would deem credible and implementing a more effective means of delivering that information.

In 2004 and again in 2006, Chicago Appleseed sought to accomplish this with the use of our www.voteforjudges.org voter education campaign. Through this effort we concluded two things: First, voters will utilize judicial voter information if provided in a user-friendly way. In the 2006 general election, www.voteforjudges.org received 900,503 hits and there were 108,973 pages downloaded. Since 2004, when the website was launched, there have been nearly 3 million hits.

We received numerous messages of gratitude from voters for providing comprehensive information about judges. However, based on the feedback we received from this effort, many prospective judicial voters are demanding a better, easier process to help them decide how to vote.

We believe that the use of a Judicial Performance Commission for both appellate and trial court judges will provide information about judges seeking retention that voters will find more credible, thereby allowing voter education vehicles to be more effective. The Performance Commission concept also provides the option of utilizing a merit retention approach that will allow voters to focus on whether they want to retain judges that have been labeled as unqualified for retention by professionally conducted research overseen by the Performance Commission.

The Performance Commission concept exists in at least five states, using a variety of approaches. In general, commissions are appointed to oversee the comprehensive and objective evaluation of judges seeking retention. In Colorado, for example, for each judge, more than 200 persons are surveyed, including jurors, litigants, court personnel, probation officers, social service and law enforcement personnel, crime victims, and lawyers who appear before the judge. Resulting information, including a recommendation as to whether the judge should be retained is distributed widely through voter information guides.

The judicial election system in Illinois is in need of change and a judicial performance commission is the place to begin.

Any questions should be directed to Executive Director Malcolm Rich at malcolmrich@chicagoappleseed.org or 312-988-6552.

Legal Services Directory of Free and Low Cost Legal Services Now Available Online

The Legal Services Directory of Free and Low Cost Legal Services is a comprehensive listing of civil and criminal legal assistance agencies in the Chicagoland area that serve mainly low-income persons, persons with disabilities and senior citizens.  The Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice, with the assistance of the Chicago Council of Lawyers, has compiled and distributed this information every year since 1974.  Designed for low- to no income persons, this community publication is a valuable resource for those who need legal services, but do not have the means to pay for advice or representation.  In the past, the Legal Services Directory of Free and Low Cost Legal Services was available in public libraries, through community service organizations and by purchase.  Now, it is available free-of-charge here.

Organizations are listed alphabetically and cross-referenced by the services they offer for easy use.  This makes information easy to find, whether readers are looking for a service provider by name or by subject matter.   Hard copies of the Legal Services Directory of Free and Low Cost Legal Services are available for purchase through the Chicago Appleseed office. Call 312-988-6565 or click here to order your copy. 
 

Chicago Appleseed Releases Report Citing the Need for Significant Systemic Reform within the Cook County Criminal Justice System

An in-depth examination of Chicago’s criminal courtrooms finds a system that is victim to its own public policy and offers practical solutions for systemic reform.  

Chicago Appleseed has released A Report on Chicago’s Felony Courts, as part of the Criminal Justice Project – a research and advocacy effort being done jointly by Chicago Appleseed and the Chicago Council of Lawyers.

Criminal justice has become our de facto drug treatment and mental health system.  It is expected to punish and to rehabilitate, and to do both without adequate funding. Harmful, dangerous, and repeat offenders should be sent to prison, but our moral revulsion at other sorts of offenses, including many drug offenses, need not always result in imprisonment. If prison is the legislative mandate for most drug offenses, while we are unwilling to increase taxes significantly, law enforcement will be deprived of the resources needed to deal with violent crime.  At the same time, some non-violent drug offenders will be incarcerated, resulting in a lack of rehabilitation and the stigma of a felony conviction, and other drug cases will be dismissed for want of rehabilitative options.

With the cooperation of Presiding Judge Paul Biebel, State’s Attorney Richard Devine, and Public Defender Edwin Burnette, Chicago Appleseed conducted a two-year investigation of system-wide issues affecting the criminal courts. After hundreds of interviews and surveys, hundreds of hours of court watching,  and careful analysis of the literature, this project serves to shed light on the fundamental problems plaguing the system while at the same time offering meaningful and realistic solutions for change.

For full copy of the Report, CLICK HERE. For a copy of the Executive Summary, CLICK HERE.  Copies in both paper and electronic form are available.  Please contact Malcolm Rich at 312-988-6552 to order a copy or for more information.

This project is supported by a grant from the Chicago Community Trust.

Financial Access Brochures
The Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice has joined with the Appleseed Foundation and Appleseed affiliates in Nebraska and Texas to develop and distribute a series of brochures aimed at increasing awareness and access to financial institutions. Download and print the brochures here.

JULY 08
In this e-Newsletter:

• Council Receives the Legal Leadership Award
• 2008 Annual Luncheon Tickets Now on Sale!
• Introducing Our Summer Interns, Fellows and Staff