Several lawyers groups on Tuesday renewed calls for an end to the election of Circuit Court judges in Illinois, following revelations that powerful Democrats engineered a primary election victory for a judicial candidate less than five years out of law school.
“This is a call to arms for a merit selection system,” said Kerry Peck, president of the Chicago Bar Association.
The Tribune reported Tuesday that Joyce Murphy, a South Side lawyer who declined to cooperate with routine pre-election screenings conducted by bar groups, had bested a four-candidate field for a judicial vacancy after state House Speaker Michael Madigan and former Cook County Assessor Thomas Hynes threw their clout behind her in mid-campaign.
Though Democratic slatemakers had earlier voted to back a different candidate ranked “highly qualified” by the Chicago Bar Association, party sources said Madigan and Hynes moved to Murphy’s camp after lobbying from Robert Shaw, a commissioner on the county agency that handles tax appeals. Shaw’s top assistant at the agency, the Board of Review, is Murphy’s husband.
Murphy, who faces no opposition on the November general election ballot, has filed appearances in only 25 Circuit Court cases during her brief stint in private practice. A lawyer who once supervised Murphy said she now handles tax appeals and has appeared before the agency for which her husband works.
As a judge, she will earn nearly $127,000 a year.
Paul Mollica, president of the Chicago Council of Lawyers, said “it’s hard to picture” a judicial candidate with Murphy’s meager experience “that would ever have enough judgment and trial experience and other assets to really sit on the bench and do a responsible job.”
Mollica said that given Murphy’s scant legal resume, even a low-profile assignment on the Circuit Court could prove challenging.
“There’s scarcely a court where a hot divorce or a serious criminal matter may not come to her,” Mollica said.
Murphy could not be reached for comment on Tuesday.
In a brief interview last week, however, Murphy said she believes that she has “more than enough experience” to be a good judge. Her supporters describe her as possessing a quick intellect and growing legal acumen.
Murphy’s victory, while a testament to the power of the powerful Democrats who supported her, is also an example of why court-reform advocates have waged a long and so far frustrating campaign to bring Illinois in line with many other states by replacing the election of judges with a system of merit selection.
Allan Sobel, executive vice president of the American Judicature Society, said his organization believes that the merit selection of judges is the best way of ensuring qualified candidates land on the bench.
Sobel said that while he can’t comment on whether Murphy will make a good judge, he said there would be fewer questions about candidates’ abilities if they were chosen by an impartial panel.
“Nominating commissions ensure that only the most qualified applicants are chosen and that unqualified applicants are weeded out,” Sobel said.
While bar groups said that Murphy’s success in the primary underscores the need for merit selection–“That would certainly be one way to weed these candidates out,” Mollica said–they also said the public and the press need to pay closer attention to these important races.
Mollica said the specifics of Murphy’s legal background were available to any interested citizen.
“It’s doubly unfortunate that it comes out after the election,” he said.
