Illinois Courts In Better Shape Today

When I was a boy, unschooled local justices of the peace were infamous for working with  small-town cops to set up speed traps to fleece unsuspecting motorists. Not a very reassuring  introduction to our state’s justice system. Things have improved much since then, yet vigilance  and some changes are still warranted. 

In 1969, two Illinois supreme court justices were forced to resign for accepting stock in a  new bank at bargain-basement prices from a fellow who at the same time was receiving a  favorable court ruling from these same justices. 

Much worse, in the late 1980s and early ’90s, 15 state judges and more than 100 court  personnel in Cook County were convicted by federal prosecutors for facilitating and accepting  bribes, even bribes to dismiss murder cases.  

Justice was for sale back then, at least in some courtrooms. 

Recently I sat down with the circuit judge who sits in my county, among others. Judge  Scott Shore has a wealth of varied experience from 23 years on the bench, including death  penalty cases. Shore is an editor of one of several specialized books for Illinois judges that  provide guidance on the bench for issues that come before the judges. 

Shore reports that today the justice system in Illinois is in good shape. He credits much to  extensive education programs for judges. 

Active on the state judiciary’s education committee, Judge Shore notes that judges are  required to complete continuing judicial education programs and regularly attend judicial  education conferences and seminars. 

New judges are provided mentors, and all judges go through performance evaluations by  their peers. 

For the most part, justice is not delayed in downstate Illinois, though the massive Cook  County court system is still working on this issue. 

Many jurisdictions have created specialized courts for drug, mental health, veterans, and  DUI cases. Judges meet with social service providers, counsel, and defendants to try to shape solutions outside incarceration. 

“We have to look outside the jailhouse for remedies,” says Shore. He makes a plea for  allowing a judge to use expert discretion in seeking alternatives to long sentences.  “From the bench, I see many people who should have been spared the court process, but  who haven’t received medical, psychological, legal and other support they needed.” In the real world, few cases go to trial anymore. Most are mediated or negotiated by  parties or their counsel, either outside privately or inside the judicial process, as in plea  bargaining. 

Shore feels the plea bargaining process generally nets a fair and equitable result. “Ninety-five percent of cases are resolved by agreement,” says the judge, “equally  satisfactory or equally unsatisfactory to both sides.” 

“If not for civil settlements and plea bargaining,” says Shore, “we would need 20 times  the number of courts and jurors. We would overwhelm the system without the bargaining  process.”

There is potential, I think, for abuse of this process, which is conducted privately. I worry  about cases where a prosecutor “punishes” a defendant by filing harsh charges if the defendant  does not plead guilty.  

Shore disputes this, pointing out a judge has the discretion to accept or reject a plea. Judicial selection is another key process in the system, one that I think could use some  fixing. In one recent state supreme court contest in southern Illinois, $10 million was spent by  interest groups on behalf of the candidates. Justice should not be for sale, or for purchase. In Illinois we elect circuit, appellate and supreme court judges. (Associate circuit judges,  who have the same authority as circuit judges and represent about half of all judges, are  appointed through election by the circuit judges in the respective districts.) Let’s be honest, most of us don’t know what we are doing when we vote for judges. No  system for selecting judges is perfect. However, appointment of all federal judges by the  President, with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate, seems to work well.  I think we would have a stronger system, not a perfect one, if all state judges were  appointed, as in Missouri and a number of states, rather than subject to the electoral process. The sense I received from Scott Shore is that the third branch of government is today  functioning much better than I recall from the past.  

Nevertheless, constant vigilance of this little-understood branch is needed from journalists, federal investigators, court watchers and the judges themselves to ensure that justice  is blind—and fair and balanced.