Caulkins v Prizker Recusal Thread

[SiliconSorcerer]

On 3/13/2023 at 9:15 AM, Jeffrey said:

Anything with a pulse should understand Chicago/Illinois is full of corruption.  I can't get over JB's response when asked about this.  Why is he so quick to reply that he would never ask a judge to decide on a case from JB's orders.  Making donations to a then candidate isn't anything questionable to me.  Preemptively responding with that only raises more inquiry.

I think when it hits the "Million Dollar" range it becomes completely questionable.   This isn 't 10,1,000, or even 10,000 it's 1,000,000 

What would you do for a million bucks? Appearance is ALL a judge needs to recuse themselves, appearance is CLEARLY there when LOTS of people in and out of state are asking. 

[steveTA84]

So now we have law groups saying if the two justices don’t recuse themselves from the SAFE-T Act and Caulkins gun ban cases that it sets up the plaintiffs to petition SCOTUS for emergency review due to the fact they’re violating settled SCOTUS precedent. Wow did this snowball 😂https://cookcountyrecord.com/stories/640174637-serious-risk-of-bias-pritzker-bristles-but-legal-community-has-long-sought-new-rules-for-judge-recusal-over-campaign-cash

[steveTA84]

Just keeps getting better 😂😂😂😂. So......the ILSC justices are financially tied to lawyers acting on behalf of Everytown in IL in a federal case against the gun ban. Add that in to the mix and it just makes it worse for those two

 

https://madisonrecord.com/stories/640177332-everytown-for-gun-safety-files-amicus-brief-supporting-gun-ban-attorneys-donated-to-democrat-justices-set-to-hear-legislation-challenge

 

EAST ST. LOUIS – National group Everytown for Gun Safety moved on March 9 to file a brief as friend of U. S. district court in favor of Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s law regulating semi automatic weapons and "high capacity" magazines.

The group’s counsel Bhavani Raveendran attached the brief, in which he claims the Fourteenth Amendment amended the meaning of the Second Amendment.

Raveendran practices at the Romanucci and Blandin injury firm in Chicago.

 

The firm and its leader Antonio Romanucci have contributed $1,574,601.54 to political campaigns, more than a third of it in the last three years.

Last year he and his firm delivered $105,000 for successful Supreme Court candidates Elizabeth Rochford and Mary O’Brien.

Rochford and O’Brien will participate in resolution of constitutional challenges in state courts.

[springfield shooter]

On 3/13/2023 at 6:45 PM, steveTA84 said:

Just keeps getting better 😂😂😂😂. So......the ILSC justices are financially tied to lawyers acting on behalf of Everytown in IL in a federal case against the gun ban. Add that in to the mix and it just makes it worse for those two

 

https://madisonrecord.com/stories/640177332-everytown-for-gun-safety-files-amicus-brief-supporting-gun-ban-attorneys-donated-to-democrat-justices-set-to-hear-legislation-challenge

 

EAST ST. LOUIS – National group Everytown for Gun Safety moved on March 9 to file a brief as friend of U. S. district court in favor of Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s law regulating semi automatic weapons and "high capacity" magazines.

The group’s counsel Bhavani Raveendran attached the brief, in which he claims the Fourteenth Amendment amended the meaning of the Second Amendment.

Raveendran practices at the Romanucci and Blandin injury firm in Chicago.

 

The firm and its leader Antonio Romanucci have contributed $1,574,601.54 to political campaigns, more than a third of it in the last three years.

Last year he and his firm delivered $105,000 for successful Supreme Court candidates Elizabeth Rochford and Mary O’Brien.

Rochford and O’Brien will participate in resolution of constitutional challenges in state courts.

 

I'm sure Judge McGlynn will be swayed by that 14th/2nd Amendment  argument.

 

I'm equally sure the moon is made of green cheese.

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

So when are judges supposed to recuse from a case?   Shouldn't they have done that already?  

 

There currently isn't enough media pressure to force them off the bench. 

 

I suspect if Caulkins loses at ISC he won't appeal to the US Supreme court on these grounds.  His team doesn't appear to be talking about the two judges. 

[POAT54]

I believe they are using the "Kim Fox form of recusal". The progress way.

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

 

 Read the comments section.

 

   

 

[steveTA84]

On 3/13/2023 at 7:51 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

 Read the comments section.

 

   

 

I’m retiring from writing and research after this mess 🤣

[steveTA84]

Uncovered more ammo.  So the judges are GPAC endorsed and this is straight from Raoul’s (another defendant) website:

https://kwameraoul.com/news/press-releases/g-pac-and-giffords-pac-endorse-attorney-general-raoul-and-il-supreme-court-candidates/
 

Chicago — This afternoon, the Gun Violence Prevention PAC and Giffords PAC endorsed Attorney General Kwame Raoul and Illinois Supreme Court candidates Judge Elizabeth M. Rochford and Justice Mary O’Brien in the 2022 general election at an event at Bright Star Church on Chicago’s South Side. 

“Every law we pass to strengthen Illinois’ gun law is at risk this November if we don’t elect gun safety candidates in our justice system,” said Kathleen Sances, President and CEO of the Gun Violence Prevention PAC. “Reducing gun violence and the number of illegal firearms on our streets have been key pillars of Attorney General Raoul’s work.  Judge Elizabeth Rochford and Justice Mary Kay O’Brien have been recommended by the Illinois State Bar Association and have the full support of the organizations working to protect and strengthen our gun laws and maintain public safety. Together, these candidates working in Illinois’ justice system will make our state a safer place and ensure key positions don’t fall into inexperienced hands.”
 

In addition to the Attorney General’s race, the balance of the Illinois Supreme Court is at stake in November. Judge Elizabeth Rochford and Justice Mary Kay O’Brien are experienced and highly qualified candidates who have the support of the organizations working to protect and strengthen our gun laws and maintain public safety.

Judge Elizabeth Rochford is running for Illinois Supreme Court in the 2nd District, which includes DeKalb, Lake, Kane, Kendall and McHenry counties. She started her career as Assistant State’s Attorney and later served as President of the Illinois Judges Association. She is committed to fairness in our courts and has worked to expand racial justice, equity, and access to the justice system. She served for 23 years as Commissioner of the Illinois Court of Claims and as a judge for the past decade . 

“GPAC and Giffords PAC do such important work to prevent gun violence and create safer communities across our state, and I am honored to receive their endorsement,” said Judge Elizabeth Rochford. “There is too much at stake in this election to entrust a seat on our state’s highest court to someone who does not have the necessary qualifications and experience, and I am humbled that GPAC and Giffords PAC believe I am the right person to serve. As a Supreme Court justice, I will utilize my 35 years as an attorney and a judge to increase fairness and equity and expand access in our judicial system.”

Justice Mary Kay O’Brien is running for Illinois Supreme Court in the 3rd District, which includes Bureau, DuPage, Grundy, Kankakee, LaSalle and Will counties. She has served on the 3rd District Appellate Court for nearly 18 years. She has heard more than 4,500 cases and served on numerous committees, including the Supreme Court Rules, Legislative, and Appellate Court Access to Justice Committees, the Illinois Courts Commission, and the Lawyers Assistance Program, among others.

While the Supreme Court race is last on the ballot, they should be first on voters’ minds because fundamental rights are at stake. At every turn, their opponents of our endorsed candidates have called common sense gun safety legislation “unconstitutional” and supported the corporate gun lobby’s agenda of profit over people, putting children and families at risk. We can’t let them take control of the court. 

 

How do you get GPAC endorsement? https://gpacillinois.com/2022-generalendorsements/
 

The G-PAC Board of Directors is proud to release its first round of endorsements leading up to the November 8, 2022 General Election.

To earn a gun safety endorsement, each candidate demonstrated strong support of the following policies:

• Banning assault weapons 
• Banning large-capacity magazines (LCMs)
• Making ghost guns illegal, which G-PAC and Giffords helped pass into law earlier this year
• Funding community violence intervention programs 
• Funding a gun storage public awareness campaign

Each endorsed candidate supports our #1 legislative priority when the General Assembly is called into session: banning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. These weapons of war have been shown to contribute to both city violence and mass shootings.

RATING PROCESS

Endorsed candidates with a good questionnaire.

CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
GOVERNOR and LT. GOVERNOR
GOV. JB PRITZKER and LT. GOV. JULIANA STRATTON

ATTORNEY GENERAL
AG KWAME RAOUL

SUPREME COURT
2ND DISTRICT
JUDGE ELIZABETH ROCHFORD

3RD DISTRICT
JUDGE MARY KAY O’BRIEN

 

[Yeti]

Wow, they previously demonstrated that they support Commie Sense gun control and the policies they are being asked to review now to get endorsements.  Does not seem to make them impartial judges in this case.

[Upholder]

Bought.  And.  Paid for.

 

I'm sure that they will rule fairly based on sound constitutional principals.  /s

[steveTA84]

On 3/13/2023 at 10:27 PM, Upholder said:

Bought.  And.  Paid for.

 

I'm sure that they will rule fairly based on sound constitutional principals.  /s

There’s the proof they won’t though. And it looks like other legal groups are signaling that if they don’t recuse a can of worms will be opened (another one to this can of worms)

[mab22]

On 3/13/2023 at 11:05 PM, steveTA84 said:

There’s the proof they won’t though. And it looks like other legal groups are signaling that if they don’t recuse a can of worms will be opened (another one to this can of worms)

Criminal investigations need to be in process already.

 

Chris Farleys Fat guy in a little coat song needs a revision. 
Fat guuuy in an oraaaange jump suiiiiit.

Fat guuuy in an oraaaange jump suiiiiit.

Fat guuuy in an oraaaange jump suiiiiit.

 

The Dems threw Blago under the bus, let’s see if the rotund one gets pinched for becoming a liability. 
 

[Flynn]

On 3/13/2023 at 11:05 PM, steveTA84 said:

There’s the proof they won’t though. And it looks like other legal groups are signaling that if they don’t recuse a can of worms will be opened (another one to this can of worms)

 

It's going to get messy if they don't recuse in essentially any case that involves anything J.B. is involved with until they are gone, no one is going to believe for one second they are impartial when they are literally 1 million reasons for them to not be impartial, this opens up a can of worms that is going to climb the Federal Court ladder as we see Supreme Court precedent already in play.

[Flynn]

On 3/13/2023 at 11:20 PM, mab22 said:

The Dems threw Blago under the bus, let’s see if the rotund one gets pinched for becoming a liability. 

 

As history tells us, that is pretty much the Illinois way.

[steveTA84]

 

[SiliconSorcerer]

I'm already on there radar, probably the red dot in the middle it's time to contact the The Judicial Inquiry Board of Illinois and start filing complaints. 

 

An attorney's duty to report attorney misconduct under Rule of Professional Conduct 8.3, this extends to judges as well 

 

 

[Jeffrey]

Any real judge would not be vocal about their disdain for any part of the Constitution.  

[Tvandermyde]

The GPAC piece is interesting as there is a quote from Rochford in the piece, but there is no quote from Mary Kay

[steveTA84]

On 3/14/2023 at 9:08 AM, Tvandermyde said:

The GPAC piece is interesting as there is a quote from Rochford in the piece, but there is no quote from Mary Kay

 

 

Right there is reason enough to raise questions of COI and impartiality to their views on the case before they even hear it IMO

https://www.mom-at-arms.com/post/more-conflicts-of-interest-at-the-illinois-supreme-court-over-gun-ban

Edited March 14, 2023 at 03:08 PM by steveTA84

[Upholder]

The oral arguments before the court for the SAFE-T act this morning included all seven judges.   Bought.  And.  Paid for.

 

 

[steveTA84]

Todd, O’Brien’s past. She was pro-gun and I guess power and money made her flip to the gun grabbers’ side and do a 180 (based on the endorsement)

 

https://illinois.gop/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Mary-K.-OBrien.pdf

Edited March 14, 2023 at 03:17 PM by steveTA84

[Yeti]

On 3/14/2023 at 10:05 AM, steveTA84 said:

 

 

Right there is reason enough to raise questions of COI and impartiality to their views on the case before they even hear it IMO

https://www.mom-at-arms.com/post/more-conflicts-of-interest-at-the-illinois-supreme-court-over-gun-ban

Wonder how many FOIA requests come through to probe into the communication that “qualified” the judges for endorsement from the Anti-Rights groups, particularly  focused on Judge Rochford?

[mikew]

https://youtu.be/j0BFef-WrT0

 

Mom at Arms got a nice call out on Bishop's show.

[steveTA84]

On 3/14/2023 at 10:44 AM, mikew said:

https://youtu.be/j0BFef-WrT0

 

Mom at Arms got a nice call out on Bishop's show.

A mainstream reporter/journalist that gives due credit to smaller/guerrilla sources is a rarity these days 

[mab22]

On 3/14/2023 at 10:10 AM, Upholder said:

The oral arguments before the court for the SAFE-T act this morning included all seven judges.   Bought.  And.  Paid for.

 

 

Notice no blindfold on lady justice, they must have rubbed it off, and are those flies surrounding the outer ring?

💩

[Flynn]

Imagine sitting on the highest court in the state and not being able to realize that you destroyed all your integrity by taking money from the named defendants in multiple cases, while also being so arrogant you can't see the spotlight on you...  Welcome to Illinois...

[SiliconSorcerer]

On 3/14/2023 at 12:55 PM, Flynn said:

Imagine sitting on the highest court in the state and not being able to realize that you destroyed all your integrity by taking money from the named defendants in multiple cases, while also being so arrogant you can't see the spotlight on you...  Welcome to Illinois...

 

Well apparently the Judicial Inquiry Board of Illinois isn't any better if they won't supply you with the required form you can't file a complaint.

Is there a lawyer in the house? 

 

[mab22]

On 3/14/2023 at 1:21 PM, SiliconSorcerer said:

 

Well apparently the Judicial Inquiry Board of Illinois isn't any better if they won't supply you with the required form you can't file a complaint.

Is there a lawyer in the house? 

 

Found the form here ?
https://jib.illinois.gov/download.html

and this might be what your looking for?
https://jib.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/jib/documents/complaint-against-a-judge-2022.pdf

 

[SiliconSorcerer]

On 3/14/2023 at 1:42 PM, mab22 said:

Found the form here ?
https://jib.illinois.gov/download.html

and this might be what your looking for?
https://jib.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/jib/documents/complaint-against-a-judge-2022.pdf

 

thank you, the other links are wrong and the don't of course answer the phone. 

 

 

I'm going to file this.