The voting is by secret ballot, and judges cast their ballots in a process that is independently administered by the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts — an arm of the Illinois Supreme Court.
I write in response to two stories published Sunday that addressed the process in which circuit judges vote whether to retain sitting associate judges for new four-year terms.
The first story immediately set a tone that there is something wrong with the process, deeming it “insiders-only balloting.” This left readers with a perception that lacks the necessary context of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 39, which establishes this exact process for all circuit courts throughout the state.
The voting is by secret ballot, and judges cast their ballots in a process that is independently administered by the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts — an arm of the Illinois Supreme Court.
The second story targets several judges with a common theme that the judges had decisions reversed by the Illinois Appellate Court.
Well, that is part of the court process that plays out every day in the United States.
In matters before the trial and appeals courts, it is common that two competent lawyers will make different arguments based on the same set of facts and the law. The same concept applies to the judiciary, as a trial judge may make a decision that the Appellate Court reverses.
It’s also possible that the case will be heard by the Illinois Supreme Court, which may agree with the trial judge’s decision and disagree with the appellate court. And to further demonstrate the room for disagreement in the justice system, two state appellate courts may offer conflicting decisions on the same issue, which leads to the possibility that the Illinois Supreme Court will resolve the matter.
Neither Illinois Appellate Court nor Illinois Supreme Court decisions are required to be unanimous.
Our system of justice is built with all of this in mind, and it provides remedies for litigants to pursue when they disagree with court decisions and guidance on when those decisions are final.
Timothy C. Evans, chief judge, Circuit Court of Cook County
SEND LETTERS TO: letters@suntimes.com. Please include your neighborhood or hometown and a phone number for verification purposes.
Mitch McConnell is no hypocrite
Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was called a hypocrite for saying he would confirm any Supreme Court nominee selected by President Trump in 2020 after stealing a Supreme Court seat from President Obama during his last year in office.
McConnell is not a hypocrite. A hypocrite claims to have moral standards to which his behavior does not conform. McConnell has no detectable moral standards.
Bob Barth, Edgewater
As carbon dioxide levels skyrocket so do the environmental consequences
Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have skyrocketed to the unprecedented level of 415 ppm according to an article in USA Today dated May 13, 2019.
This is the highest recorded level in human history and will ultimately lead to catastrophic consequences.
We need to reduce carbon dioxide levels and the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act (H.R. 763) does just that. This policy will:
- Reduce emissions by at least 40% in the first 12 years through technology innovation and ingenuity.
- Improve health and saves lives.
- Create 1.2 million new jobs.
- Put money back into people’s pockets each month in the form of a carbon dividend.
Please contact your representatives and ask them to support this bill. We must reduce carbon dioxide levels or face the prospect of an earth that will someday become uninhabitable.
It is our moral responsibility to do so!
Joseph Reitmeyer, Mount Prospect
‘A woman should not be forced to have an abortion or denied one’
A woman’s decision to terminate a pregnancy should be a private matter between a woman, her doctor and her husband or the father of the unborn.
And it is nobody else’s business.
At no time should a woman’s decision be bandied about publicly by politicians, religious leaders and busybodies. They should all stop trying to impose their will and beliefs on women. Nor should the issue be the subject of debate in the media, the courts and legislative bodies.
A woman should not be forced to have an abortion or denied one.
Forcing women to deliver babies they do not want or unable to care for often ends up with kids abandoned, neglected and cast aside. There are many examples of single mothers trying to raise children and are unable to make ends meet and are forced to seek aid. They are often branded shiftless and lazy and told to get a job.
Instead of focusing on the unborn and dipping into another’s business, these busybodies should mind their own business and concentrate on the born and see that they are nurtured, nourished and protected.
Ned L. McCray, Tinley Park
