.jpg)
Chief Justice Charles Freeman, 75,
wrote the opinion tossing a state law that says judges
75 or older cannot run for retention.
(Richard A. Chapman/
Sun-Times)
====================================
Next up
Illinois Supreme Court justices and
their next retention elections:
Charles Freeman, 75: 2010
Lloyd Karmeier, 69: 2014
Thomas Fitzgerald, 67: 2010
Rita Garman, 65: 2012
Anne Burke, 65: 2018
Robert Thomas, 56: 2010
Thomas Kilbride, 55: 2010
Judicial salaries in Illinois
Supreme Court justices: $196,322
Appellate justices: $184,774
Circuit Court judges: $169,555
Associate judges: $161,077
=================================
"I think it's a brilliant opinion, It really insightfully picks up the issues, analyzes them. My faith in the Supreme Court is restored," said William Maddux, 74, presiding judge of the Cook County Circuit Court Law Division. Maddux filed the lawsuit on behalf of himself and other judges in his situation, such as Freeman, who was first elected to the state's top court in 1990 and is up for retention next year.
But some judges, lawyers and judicial ethics experts asked why Freeman not only failed to recuse himself but authored the opinion that directly benefits him.
"It certainly has the appearance of impropriety. It diminishes the reputation of the judiciary and calls into question the integrity of the procedures. It brings the administration of justice into disrepute and causes the citizens to question the integrity of the process," said William Schroeder, a law professor at Southern Illinois University.
"It might have been the better part of discretion if Judge Freeman had not written the decision in the case, but, even so, I don't think this is a situation where he had to disqualify himself from hearing the case," said DePaul University Law Professor Jeffrey Shaman.
Thursday's ruling overturned what a judge in a 1992 dissent called "an absurd result," in which Illinois judges who reach 75 cannot run for retention but can run for election.
Had Freeman recused himself, the case would have gone the other way. Four of the state's seven justices voted to overturn the lower court's decision barring older judges from running for retention. One judge did not participate, and two dissented. It takes four judges to overturn a lower court ruling.
Freeman did not comment directly, but Supreme Court spokesman Joe Tybor said, "I really think it's presumptuous to say it would 'benefit' Freeman."
Freeman's accountant told him that with his pension, he would make more money if he retires. Maddux's attorney David Novoselsky said that was true for all the older judges who save taxpayers money by staying on the bench instead of leaving and drawing their generous pensions.
"It's really the voters in Illinois who benefit," Tybor said.
Still, it means Freeman has no opponents if he runs for retention, instead of having to raise money and campaign against opponents in an election.
Justice Lloyd Karmeier, 69, wrote in dissent that the contested election is "more arduous" than a retention election which requires a mere 60 percent "yes" votes for a judge to keep his or her seat. No Illinois supreme court justice has ever lost a retention election. Legislators could reasonably argue that the "rigors" of a general election better test whether a 75-year-old still has "the stamina and ability to fulfill the requirements for office" than the simpler retention election, wrote Karmeier, who survived one of the state's most rigorous and costly elections to win his seat five years ago.
"People who become 75 don't just go to the old folks home. We're still doing things," Maddux said. "People are aging better than they used to. I play golf, hit the treadmill and I still go hunting in the fall and winter."
U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, 89, still vigorously questions lawyers appearing before the nation's highest court. There is no retirement age for federal judges.
Freeman, who counted as friends such disparate Chicago politicians as Edward Vrdolyak and the late Mayor Harold Washington, was the first African-American elected to the state supreme court. He has faced criticism for some of the judges he has appointed to the circuit court, such as George J.W. Smith, convicted of financial fraud.[rc]
© Copyright 2009 Digital Chicago, Inc
June 19, 2009
USA: Never too old to be a judge
.
CHICAGO, Illinois / The Chicago Sun-Times / June 19, 2009
SUPREME COURT
Justices throw out age limit on when judges can seek retention
By Abdon M. Pallasch, Political Reporter
apallasch@suntimes.com
A 75-year-old can be a fine judge if Charles Freeman says so himself -- and he does.
Freeman, 75, authored a Supreme Court of Illinois opinion Thursday throwing out a state law that would have blocked him and other older judges from running for retention, saying it violated the constitution’s “equal protection” clause.
.jpg)
Chief Justice Charles Freeman, 75,
wrote the opinion tossing a state law that says judges
75 or older cannot run for retention.
(Richard A. Chapman/
Sun-Times)
====================================
Next up
Illinois Supreme Court justices and
their next retention elections:
Charles Freeman, 75: 2010
Lloyd Karmeier, 69: 2014
Thomas Fitzgerald, 67: 2010
Rita Garman, 65: 2012
Anne Burke, 65: 2018
Robert Thomas, 56: 2010
Thomas Kilbride, 55: 2010
Judicial salaries in Illinois
Supreme Court justices: $196,322
Appellate justices: $184,774
Circuit Court judges: $169,555
Associate judges: $161,077
=================================
"I think it's a brilliant opinion, It really insightfully picks up the issues, analyzes them. My faith in the Supreme Court is restored," said William Maddux, 74, presiding judge of the Cook County Circuit Court Law Division. Maddux filed the lawsuit on behalf of himself and other judges in his situation, such as Freeman, who was first elected to the state's top court in 1990 and is up for retention next year.
But some judges, lawyers and judicial ethics experts asked why Freeman not only failed to recuse himself but authored the opinion that directly benefits him.
"It certainly has the appearance of impropriety. It diminishes the reputation of the judiciary and calls into question the integrity of the procedures. It brings the administration of justice into disrepute and causes the citizens to question the integrity of the process," said William Schroeder, a law professor at Southern Illinois University.
"It might have been the better part of discretion if Judge Freeman had not written the decision in the case, but, even so, I don't think this is a situation where he had to disqualify himself from hearing the case," said DePaul University Law Professor Jeffrey Shaman.
Thursday's ruling overturned what a judge in a 1992 dissent called "an absurd result," in which Illinois judges who reach 75 cannot run for retention but can run for election.
Had Freeman recused himself, the case would have gone the other way. Four of the state's seven justices voted to overturn the lower court's decision barring older judges from running for retention. One judge did not participate, and two dissented. It takes four judges to overturn a lower court ruling.
Freeman did not comment directly, but Supreme Court spokesman Joe Tybor said, "I really think it's presumptuous to say it would 'benefit' Freeman."
Freeman's accountant told him that with his pension, he would make more money if he retires. Maddux's attorney David Novoselsky said that was true for all the older judges who save taxpayers money by staying on the bench instead of leaving and drawing their generous pensions.
"It's really the voters in Illinois who benefit," Tybor said.
Still, it means Freeman has no opponents if he runs for retention, instead of having to raise money and campaign against opponents in an election.
Justice Lloyd Karmeier, 69, wrote in dissent that the contested election is "more arduous" than a retention election which requires a mere 60 percent "yes" votes for a judge to keep his or her seat. No Illinois supreme court justice has ever lost a retention election. Legislators could reasonably argue that the "rigors" of a general election better test whether a 75-year-old still has "the stamina and ability to fulfill the requirements for office" than the simpler retention election, wrote Karmeier, who survived one of the state's most rigorous and costly elections to win his seat five years ago.
"People who become 75 don't just go to the old folks home. We're still doing things," Maddux said. "People are aging better than they used to. I play golf, hit the treadmill and I still go hunting in the fall and winter."
U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, 89, still vigorously questions lawyers appearing before the nation's highest court. There is no retirement age for federal judges.
Freeman, who counted as friends such disparate Chicago politicians as Edward Vrdolyak and the late Mayor Harold Washington, was the first African-American elected to the state supreme court. He has faced criticism for some of the judges he has appointed to the circuit court, such as George J.W. Smith, convicted of financial fraud.[rc]
© Copyright 2009 Digital Chicago, Inc
Chief Justice Charles Freeman, 75,
wrote the opinion tossing a state law that says judges
75 or older cannot run for retention.
(Richard A. Chapman/
Sun-Times)
====================================
Next up
Illinois Supreme Court justices and
their next retention elections:
Charles Freeman, 75: 2010
Lloyd Karmeier, 69: 2014
Thomas Fitzgerald, 67: 2010
Rita Garman, 65: 2012
Anne Burke, 65: 2018
Robert Thomas, 56: 2010
Thomas Kilbride, 55: 2010
Judicial salaries in Illinois
Supreme Court justices: $196,322
Appellate justices: $184,774
Circuit Court judges: $169,555
Associate judges: $161,077
=================================
"I think it's a brilliant opinion, It really insightfully picks up the issues, analyzes them. My faith in the Supreme Court is restored," said William Maddux, 74, presiding judge of the Cook County Circuit Court Law Division. Maddux filed the lawsuit on behalf of himself and other judges in his situation, such as Freeman, who was first elected to the state's top court in 1990 and is up for retention next year.
But some judges, lawyers and judicial ethics experts asked why Freeman not only failed to recuse himself but authored the opinion that directly benefits him.
"It certainly has the appearance of impropriety. It diminishes the reputation of the judiciary and calls into question the integrity of the procedures. It brings the administration of justice into disrepute and causes the citizens to question the integrity of the process," said William Schroeder, a law professor at Southern Illinois University.
"It might have been the better part of discretion if Judge Freeman had not written the decision in the case, but, even so, I don't think this is a situation where he had to disqualify himself from hearing the case," said DePaul University Law Professor Jeffrey Shaman.
Thursday's ruling overturned what a judge in a 1992 dissent called "an absurd result," in which Illinois judges who reach 75 cannot run for retention but can run for election.
Had Freeman recused himself, the case would have gone the other way. Four of the state's seven justices voted to overturn the lower court's decision barring older judges from running for retention. One judge did not participate, and two dissented. It takes four judges to overturn a lower court ruling.
Freeman did not comment directly, but Supreme Court spokesman Joe Tybor said, "I really think it's presumptuous to say it would 'benefit' Freeman."
Freeman's accountant told him that with his pension, he would make more money if he retires. Maddux's attorney David Novoselsky said that was true for all the older judges who save taxpayers money by staying on the bench instead of leaving and drawing their generous pensions.
"It's really the voters in Illinois who benefit," Tybor said.
Still, it means Freeman has no opponents if he runs for retention, instead of having to raise money and campaign against opponents in an election.
Justice Lloyd Karmeier, 69, wrote in dissent that the contested election is "more arduous" than a retention election which requires a mere 60 percent "yes" votes for a judge to keep his or her seat. No Illinois supreme court justice has ever lost a retention election. Legislators could reasonably argue that the "rigors" of a general election better test whether a 75-year-old still has "the stamina and ability to fulfill the requirements for office" than the simpler retention election, wrote Karmeier, who survived one of the state's most rigorous and costly elections to win his seat five years ago.
"People who become 75 don't just go to the old folks home. We're still doing things," Maddux said. "People are aging better than they used to. I play golf, hit the treadmill and I still go hunting in the fall and winter."
U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, 89, still vigorously questions lawyers appearing before the nation's highest court. There is no retirement age for federal judges.
Freeman, who counted as friends such disparate Chicago politicians as Edward Vrdolyak and the late Mayor Harold Washington, was the first African-American elected to the state supreme court. He has faced criticism for some of the judges he has appointed to the circuit court, such as George J.W. Smith, convicted of financial fraud.[rc]
© Copyright 2009 Digital Chicago, Inc
