Nearly
16 years ago, two men with deep ties to Cook County politics used
support from the county's powerful Democratic Party organization
to ascend to the highest court in the state.
Today,
Charles Freeman, a longtime friend of ex-Mayor Harold Washington,
still sits on the Illinois Supreme Court. And the building that
houses the court in Chicago is named in honor of the other man,
Michael Bilandic, a former Chicago mayor himself.
The
selection this week of Anne Burke, wife of powerful Chicago Ald.
Ed Burke (14th), to the state's highest court has drawn new public
attention to the long-standing role of politics in the state's
judicial system.
Many
of the justices who have served on the state Supreme Court once
stood, hat in hand, before political party leaders as they sought
selection for a county judgeship that became a steppingstone.
Freeman and Bilandic, Appellate Court judges in 1990, sought the
backing of Cook County Democratic Party leaders when they successfully
ran for the Supreme Court.
Freeman
defeated Mary Ann McMorrow in the Democratic primary in 1990.
Two years later, McMorrow got the backing of the Democratic Party
organization and won a seat on the high court. McMorrow, the first
woman to serve on the Supreme Court, announced Wednesday that
she was stepping down and had recommended Burke as her replacement.
"The
idea that we get our judges from Mt. Sinai is just not the case,"
said Abner Mikva, a former federal judge and congressman who acknowledges
politics and knowing then-President Jimmy Carter played a role
in his selection to the federal bench. "They've all come through
some political process at some point. But what matters most is
what you do once you get there."
The
state's Supreme Court has a rich tradition of political power
players and connected lawyers finding their way to the state's
highest court. These range from Freeman and Bilandic to Seymour
Simon, a former ally of Mayor Richard J. Daley before he became
an independent, and Ben Miller, a well-known central Illinois
Republican when he joined the court.
But
under the state's system, citizens--and those who come before
the court--have to trust that the state's top judges can be impartial
even though they are elected in a partisan contest and must stand
before voters every 10 years to seek retention on a nonpartisan
ballot.
The
seven justices, who represent each region of the state, often
have a significant impact on many political decisions.
In
1991, for instance, the court tossed out a GOP-drawn map of state
legislative districts. And in 1982, the Democratic Simon was the
swing vote that all but assured Republican Gov. Jim Thompson's
narrow victory over Democrat Adlai E. Stevenson III. Simon sided
with Republican justices in ruling the state's recount statute
was unconstitutional. Stevenson was trailing Thompson by about
5,000 votes and was seeking a recount.
"The
decisions judges make aren't political. The selection of judges
is political," Simon said Thursday. "But you can remain independent."
In
recent years, politicians and interest groups have ratcheted up
the pressure in influencing races for open seats on the court.
Six
years ago, the head of the state Democratic Party, House Speaker
Michael Madigan, poured in hundreds of thousands of dollars from
campaign funds he controls to help Democrat Thomas Kilbride defeat
Republican Carl Hawkinson for the seat being vacated by Justice
James Heiple, a Republican. The victory at the time gave Democrats
a 5-2 edge on the court.
Two
years ago, Illinois was the site of what has been described as
the most expensive state judicial race in the nation. Trial lawyers
and the business interests who opposed them spent more than $9
million trying to elect the candidate they thought would best
represent their interests. Republican Lloyd Karmeier, who was
backed by business groups who want to restrict lawsuits, won.
That narrowed the partisan split on the court to 4-3 in favor
of the Democrats.
"The
tradition of partisan politics in Illinois has always extended
to the courts," said Jim Nowlan, a professor of politics and public
policy at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. "After
election to the courts, it is hoped justices will turn a blind
eye to partisan politics and possibly many do, but politics is
always there."
But
several officials with legal groups said Thursday that the constant
presence of politics within the judicial system doesn't necessarily
mean a judge will side with a certain group or political organization.
"I
happen to be maybe naive or idealistic, but I don't think any
justice is beholden to anybody," said Ed Murnane, president of
the Illinois Civil Justice League, which supported Karmeier. "But
you might be able to tell how they'll vote based on what you know
and what their beliefs are."
Some
groups, including the Chicago Council of Lawyers and former Justice
Simon--have called for changing the state constitution to replace
the requirement for electing judges with a merit-based system,
similar to those in at least two dozen states.
Under
such plans, prospective judges would have to be approved by an
independent panel.
"I
think the political leaders don't want to see merit selection,"
Simon said.
Opponents
of merit selection say politics would still seep into the process.
If
the state had merit selection, Simon said, Burke would have been
approved by an independent body.
"She
has a fine history and she'll make a fine Supreme Court judge,"
he said.
Copyright
© 2006, Chicago
Tribune