Tuesday, July 19, 2016

Illinois’ Political Judges: Why They Aren’t Accountable to the Public


Most states use a “Model Code” to regulate judicial conduct, including how judges communicate their political ideas and how judges solicit campaign donations. Illinois has no such regulation—the last time it did anything in this regard was 1994 (The Model Code was revised in 2007 to take account of the hyper-growth of money in judicial campaigns.)
Consider this direct comparison between the more stringent ABA Model Code and Illinois Code:
American Bar Ass’n, Side-by-Side Text Comparison, 2007 Model Code of Judicial Conduct with Comparable Provisions of 1990 Code, at http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/cpr/pic/new_old.authcheckdam.pdf, stating:
            Rule 1.2, Canon 2, Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary
A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety (emphasis added).
In contrast, see the less restrictive language in Illinois Judicial Ethics Committee, Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 62, Canon 2:
A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All of the Judge’s Activities
A. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should conduct himself or herself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

The ABA Code uses the mandatory “shall,” while Illinois, by stating “should,” deprives its Code of sharp teeth for enforcement. Nothing in the Illinois Code mentions the need for the independence of courts— a serious omission in a climate of high-octane campaign donations fueled by special interest groups. The ABA Code, in contrast, strictly enjoins judges to maintain their independence. (Photo of Justice Steigmann, right, who defended his view on WDWS that judges "should not be philosophical or political eunuchs".)

No comments: