Illinois' Porno Judge ... and More

If you use your employer’s computer and internet to access pornographic sites at work, you’ll probably be fired. Will County policies prohibit this conduct. That didn’t stop Judge Joseph Polito (pictured here) from frequently using his court computer to access pornography while at work. In 2013, Illinois’ Judicial Inquiry Board suspended him 60 days without pay. Why was the judicial board more lenient than many employers? What confidence can the public have in a judge who returns after a 60 day suspension?

The Chicago Sun-Times tried for months to have Will County’s Chief Judge, Gerald Kinney, reveal records that would expose Judge Polito’s misconduct. Judge Kinney stonewalled those efforts, claiming that judicial records were exempt under state FOIA laws. He was eventually overruled by the Illinois Attorney General, a ruling that led to public disclosure of Judge Polito’s misbehavior. Judge Kinney faced no discipline for keeping Will County citizens in the dark about their fallen judge. Doesn’t a judge owe citizens a higher duty than covering for a colleague who is viewing porn at his courthouse computer?

Judge Scott Drazewski and Judge Rebecca Foley (McLean County) had an extramarital affair at work.  During that time, Judge Drazewski presided over cases where Judge Foley’s husband represented local clients. When the attorney-husband learned of the affair, he filed a complaint that alleged that Judge Drazewski failed to disclose the personal relationship, to the possible detriment of people he represented. The Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board suspended Judge Drazewski for four months without pay, and censured Judge Foley.

Why was the board lenient? Judges hold positions of extraordinary trust. If they lack good personal judgment, this undermines public trust. Numerous court cases involve some aspect of an extramarital affair. These cases include division of marital property, child visitation and custody, alimony, contested wills, family partnerships, domestic abuse, stalking and more. Can anyone appearing before these judges in these types of cases feel confident about the integrity of their court?

In 2005, Judge Kurt Klein (DeKalb County) publicly endorsed another judicial candidate. The Judicial Inquiry Board found that he violated the Judicial Code that restricts a judge from campaigning for others. Judge Klein received a mild punishment— a reprimand. If the Board censured him, it would have made a stronger message about the Code’s campaign restrictions on judges.

On August 26^th, Justice Robert Steigmann donated $1,000 to a Republican candidate—a current assistant public defender— for state’s attorney in Champaign County. This was his second $1,000 donation to the candidate. In a radio interview, he explained that he was within the rules of the Illinois Supreme Court. He is correct—but he failed to mention that Illinois last modified its judicial rules for political campaigns in the mid-1990s. Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana and Kentucky—our adjoining states— have newer and stricter rules. Why is Illinois more lax than our neighbors?

Not even in Cook County, where Democrats have a virtual monopoly on power, do sitting judges donate to candidates for state’s attorney. When a judge donates to a candidate for prosecutor, is this patronage? Would the candidate ask the judge for advice on prosecuting cases or setting prosecuting priorities? Would defendants perceive this as a fair and neutral court system? Would they perceive Justice Steigmann as a co-prosecutor?

Illinois has outdated and lax judicial standards. It has a judicial board that coddles wayward judges— Democrats and Republicans alike. These examples lower the reputation of many good judges. But Illinois has judges who put their selfish interests ahead of the public interest. The job of reforming Illinois courts belongs to the state supreme court. When will they act?