Caulkins v Prizker Recusal Thread

[steveTA84]

what are they thinking?!?!?!?

 

 

1. This is a true non-partisan event. This activity is allowed

 

2. I wonder if they know about all

of her scandals? Really? “Justice of the year”? Feel free to tell them if you’re a Greek American http://www.uhva.org/contact.html

[SiliconSorcerer]

It's to bad the BAr has no LL's. 

[steveTA84]

My god these people are stupid! Here’s the rabid anti-gun dem candidate for McHenry Co Board Chairman moments ago lol 

[steveTA84]

Now we’re talking!!!! Left leaning court watchdog group out of DC is on it!!!

https://x.com/fixthecourt/status/1702127332922695897?s=46&t=ZJIYNr-TwO9eZdQE_UykAg

[steveTA84]

This is why the above is huge. They’re the ones who spearheaded the campaigns against Alito and Thomas 

 

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-judges-educational-trips-resemble-paid-luxury-vacations-group-says-2023-08-21/

 

Aug 21 (Reuters) - Thirty-one U.S. federal appeals court judges have on 76 occasions since 2021 attended privately-funded seminars at luxury resorts, events that despite being billed as educational look more like paid vacations, a judicial watchdog group said Monday.

In a letter to the head of the federal judiciary's administrative arm, the non-profit Fix the Court said a review of disclosure reports detailing judges' seminar attendance revealed a need to ensure ethical protocols are being followed.
 

Fix the Court said its list of trips to resorts was undoubtedly an undercount, citing a lack of information on some accommodations and apparent trips by some judges they did not report.

The letter urged U.S. District Roslynn Mauskopf, who heads the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, to work with the Judicial Conference, the judiciary's policymaking body, to look into the seminars and require judges to provide more financial information about the trips.

 

 

They also came under fire and are also themselves a target

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/fix-the-court-supreme-court-ethics-lobbying-disclosure

 

EXCLUSIVE — A Supreme Courtadvocacy group alleging ethics violations among justices including Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alitolikely failed to disclose its own apparent lobbying in violation of federal law, according to experts. 

Fix the Court, a charity that used to be a project of the New Venture Fund, an influential nonprofit group that the left-wing dark moneybehemoth and for-profit consultancy Arabella Advisorsmanages, is helping to lead a seemingly coordinated campaigndemanding Supreme Court justices publicize more about their finances. Those mounting efforts haven't stopped Fix the Court from not reporting activities on financial disclosures that could constitute grassroots lobbying, multiple tax lawyers told the Washington Examiner.
 

Arabella Advisors… sounds familiar. Oh yeah! They fund a gun control group!

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/liberal-dark-money-network-quietly-launches-gun-group-create-narrative-guns-make-us-less-safe.amp

 

A left-wing group aiming to shift public opinion against firearms quietly launched at the largest liberal dark money network in America, Fox News Digital has found.

Project Unloaded, an anti-gun group, hopes to create a "new cultural narrative that guns make us less safe" by undertaking campaigns targeting teens and young adults, according to its website.
 

"Research shows that teens and young adults are forming opinions and making decisions about guns, Project Unloaded's website states. "Through creative and cultural campaigns, Project Unloaded establishes safe spaces for open conversations about guns and provides accurate information about gun safety to inspire the next generation to choose on their own terms not to own a gun."

Project Unloaded is not a standalone organization. Instead, it is a project of the New Venture Fund, a nonprofit incubator that acts as a fiscal sponsor to dozens of left-wing groups. Fiscal sponsorship involves a nonprofit providing its tax-exempt status to other groups, meaning they do not have to register with the Internal Revenue Service.
 

The New Venture Fund is one of four nonprofits managed by the Washington, D.C.-based Arabella Advisors consulting firm that recently expanded its operations. Arabella also manages the Sixteen Thirty, Windward and Hopewell funds, which contain progressive groups below them. The four Arabella-controlled nonprofits raised $1.6 billion in 2020, positioning themselves as the country's most extensive dark money network.

 

 

Are we seeing the web of all this now and how getting justice for Rochford’s misconduct has far reaching implications?

Edited September 15, 2023 at 02:42 PM by steveTA84

[steveTA84]

On 9/15/2023 at 8:53 AM, steveTA84 said:

Now we’re talking!!!! Left leaning court watchdog group out of DC is on it!!!

https://x.com/fixthecourt/status/1702127332922695897?s=46&t=ZJIYNr-TwO9eZdQE_UykAg

Just to be clear, this group’s statement, along with a little bio about them and their activity, would make a great way to close out a complaint to the Judicial Inquiry Board….

[steveTA84]

Guess who just made the Chicago Sun-Times and has a full article? Why Justice Rochford of course. Rich Freaking Miller did a whole article on her and wasn’t kind 

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/2023/9/15/23875800/illinois-supreme-court-justice-elizabeth-rochford-rule-speeches-rich-miller

 

Keynote speakers are usually invited because they help legitimize the organization and, as a result, drive increased attendance. And robust attendance is obviously very crucial to the success of any annual fundraiser.
So, while Rochford didn’t technically speak “on behalf” of the group, she did help the Lake County Democratic Women further prove its bona fides by agreeing to speak.
And while she did not directly raise money for the group which helped nominate her in a competitive Democratic primary and then elect her over a Lake County Republican general election opponent, it should have been abundantly clear that her very presence undoubtedly helped the group raise at least some campaign money that it might possibly not have brought in without her.
Rochford has been around politics for a very long time. She most certainly knows that this speech was far different from presenting to a law school symposium or bar organization.
I’m not saying that judges and justices should cloister themselves away like monks. But they should at least try to keep up appearances when they’re not actively campaigning, especially during an era when every decision by just about every Supreme Court in the land, including the U.S. Supreme Court, is being analyzed for political bents.

Edited September 16, 2023 at 12:44 AM by steveTA84

[steveTA84]

[steveTA84]

Miller’s article was also submitted elsewhere too

https://pantagraph.com/opinion/columnists/rich-miller-sitting-state-judges-should-know-better/article_f1ebf77c-5414-11ee-958b-3b8c51cc2fcb.html

 

https://flipboard.com/topic/illinoispolitics/-/a-kImHBkBdTy-gBCg5Mr6QGw%3Aa%3A2395104098-%2F0?format=amp

[davel501]

It's funny how the sun times article bends over backwards to be careful in the title. 

[steveTA84]

On 9/16/2023 at 12:23 PM, davel501 said:

It's funny how the sun times article bends over backwards to be careful in the title. 

But not so much in the actual article. I like this part lol. Idiot…..

 

So, you might ask, what the heck was Illinois Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Rochford thinking when she decided to accept an invitation to be the keynote speaker at the Lake County Democratic Women’s annual fundraising gala on Sept. 9? The registered political action committee is one of the most influential independent countywide campaign groups of its kind in all of Illinois, having helped recruit, train and then elect dozens of local candidates over the years (including Rochford herself).

“Illinois voters deserve a fair and impartial state Supreme Court that’s free of and from politics, which does not appear to be the case here,” said Illinois Republican Party Executive Director Shaun McCabe in a press release last week about Rochford’s speech.

 

 

Like him or not, give Rich Miller credit for being realistic and honest in this article. Now we just need this to get in the mainstream, as it’s worse IMO 

 

Edited September 16, 2023 at 05:42 PM by steveTA84

[davel501]

On 9/16/2023 at 12:38 PM, steveTA84 said:

But not so much in the actual article. I like this part lol. Idiot…..

 

So, you might ask, what the heck was Illinois Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Rochford thinking when she decided to accept an invitation to be the keynote speaker at the Lake County Democratic Women’s annual fundraising gala on Sept. 9? The registered political action committee is one of the most influential independent countywide campaign groups of its kind in all of Illinois, having helped recruit, train and then elect dozens of local candidates over the years (including Rochford herself).

“Illinois voters deserve a fair and impartial state Supreme Court that’s free of and from politics, which does not appear to be the case here,” said Illinois Republican Party Executive Director Shaun McCabe in a press release last week about Rochford’s speech.

 

 

Like him or not, give Rich Miller credit for being realistic and honest in this article. Now we just need this to get in the mainstream, as it’s worse IMO 

 

 

Yeah, I think the editors at the sun times softened the headline but weren't brave enough to mess with the story. 

[steveTA84]

On 9/16/2023 at 12:45 PM, davel501 said:

 

Yeah, I think the editors at the sun times softened the headline but weren't brave enough to mess with the story. 

Agreed

[steveTA84]

Dems are bringing up Justice Holder-White and her speaking at events. She’s up for retention next year. It’s campaign season. It’s not the same as what Rochford did https://electjusticeholderwhite.com

[steveTA84]

Wow did the Sun-Times bad their title. Here’s an uncensored one from Rich Miller 

 

https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/keynote-speaker-elizabeth-rochford-betrays-spirit-if-not-letter-code

[steveTA84]

Gonna be an interesting comment section lol 

 

https://capitolfax.com/2023/09/18/please-stop-doing-stuff-like-this/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[South Side 27]

The commies at Crap Fax think this is fine since the SCOTUS has conservative justices like Thomas who they say are unethical. 

[steveTA84]

On 9/18/2023 at 10:31 AM, South Side 27 said:

The commies at Crap Fax think this is fine since the SCOTUS has conservative justices like Thomas who they say are unethical. 

Comments so far are heavily against Rochford 

[steveTA84]

Sun Times finally tweeted Rich’s article out 

 

[Jeffrey]

I wonder if they'd clean up a news article on Trump like that?

[steveTA84]

Springfield outlet published Rich’s article. https://www.illinoistimes.com/news-opinion/judge-takes-heat-for-speech-17413618

 

 

Ok, and let’s be clear. This is very simple, Justice Rochford. Here’s the rules:

https://www.ija.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=329:2021-2--a-judge-s-participation-in-a-political-party-s-fundraising-event-as-a-guest-of-honor&catid=23:opinions&Itemid=139
 

While Rule 65 B permits a judge to be the “guest of honor at an organization’s fundraising events” a political party’s fundraising event do not fall within the Rule.

Given the broad range of political activity allowed judges running for election and judicial candidates, judges running for election and judicial candidates would be allowed under Rule 67 to appear as a guest of honor and speak at a political party’s fundraising event. The political activity of being a guest of honor is considered part of the political process of campaigning for judge.

But, judges not campaigning for office are forbidden from being guests of honor at a political party’s fundraising event.

IJEC Opinion 96-19 addresses whether a non-candidate judge may be a speaker at a Lincoln Day dinner sponsored by a political organization. The opinion determined that the judge could speak so long as the event was not a fundraiser but instead a community event and assuming the speech did not otherwise bring the judge’s impartiality into question.

 

The 2006 Amendment to Rule 65 B allows a judge to serve as a guest of honor at a fundraising event for an organization.

The amendment states:

“However, a judge may be a speaker or the guest of honor at an organization’s fundraising events and may allow event-related promotional materials, invitations, and other communications to mention such participation by the judge.”

See JEC Opinion 2010-10. (Judge may serve as a guest of honor speaker at a fundraising event sponsored by an educational, religious, fraternal, or civic organization not conducted for economic or political advantage of its members).

This provision, however, does not deal with a judge appearing as a guest of honor at a political party’s political fundraising event.

 

 

Again, let’s go back and see how the PAC advertised the event on their website. Rochford is the star/keynote speaker. That’s a no no and it’s clear that Rochford was used as a means to get people to donate to the PAC to get their tickets (and you can see the link right there).

 

 

 

click it and you go here, where you see at the top where it goes when you donate, along with the notification at the bottom

 

 

The PAC is still active 

 

 

Rochford’s statement is proven false, and people should really start (and I guess they are) the lack of integrity going on here with her digging her heels in and not admitting she made a mistake.

 

 

Edited September 18, 2023 at 10:33 PM by steveTA84

[steveTA84]

Looks like the IL GOP and county GOP’s where she is their justice are pushing it today 

 

[steveTA84]

Cool County Record is doing paid promotions of their article😳

[steveTA84]

Hmmmmm, so Rochford took part in Cunningham’s retention campaign. Hmmmmmm. Time to dive into this and see if Justice Cunningham and Rochford, since Cunningham is using her picture for a campaign promotion, violates rules and canons. Pretty sure it does because Rochford isn’t up for retention 

[steveTA84]

Cunningham is using Rochford and O’Brien in campaign materials to solicit funds!!!!!!! https://joyforjustice.com/about-justice-joy-cunningham/

 

 

 

[steveTA84]

Did Rochford approve her pictures being used on the campaign page? If so…..

[steveTA84]

Cunningham’s campaign website 

https://joyforjustice.com

 

Holder-White’s

https://electjusticeholderwhite.com

 

Holder White does not use anyone but herself on her website, especially justices not up for retention/election. Cunningham uses both Rochford and O’Brien, who are not candidates. Both, if they OK’d their images being used for Cunningham’s campaign page that solicits donations, that’s a no no 

Edited September 19, 2023 at 09:46 PM by steveTA84

[steveTA84]

Another outlet publishing Rich Miller’s article https://www.illinoistimes.com/news-opinion/judge-takes-heat-for-speech-17425662?media=AMP+HTML

[mab22]

Maybe the Republican judges can read children's books at Republican conventions or gatherings. The D's say it's okay so long and they are not making money from it, they set the standard.

[steveTA84]

Abusive Discretion, a national group that focuses on judges and their misdeeds, picked it up. This one is GREAT

 

https://abusivediscretion.com/ethics-concerns-surround-illinois-supreme-court-justice-rochfords-keynote-speech-at-democratic-party-fundraiser/

 

On Wednesday, September 13, 2023, the Cook County Record reported that Illinois Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Rochford, one of the newest Democratic appointees, is under scrutiny for her recent decision to serve as a keynote speaker at a Lake County Democratic Party fundraiser. This move has raised questions about her adherence to judicial ethics, as state rules prohibit judges from participating in such partisan events. Critics, including state Republican Party officials, are planning to file complaints with the Judicial Inquiry Board, the body responsible for investigating judicial misconduct cases.

On September 9, Justice Rochford addressed a Lake County Democratic Party fundraiser organized by the Lake County Women’s Political Action Committee. The group’s mission is to support female Democratic candidates in Lake County and beyond. The event was promoted using Rochford’s expected appearance to boost ticket sales. Rochford’s decision to speak at the fundraiser has ignited a debate over the adherence to judicial ethics. The Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct expressly forbids judges from publicly endorsing or making speeches on behalf of political candidates or organizations, except in specific contexts related to judicial election campaigns. The Code aims to maintain public confidence in the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.

In response to the criticism, Justice Rochford defended her speaking engagement, asserting that she receives requests from various groups and believes it’s essential for judges to engage with the public and educate them about the judicial branch. She emphasized that her speech focused on non-partisan aspects of the Illinois Supreme Court and the unique lodging arrangement during court terms, rather than advancing any political agenda.

The Illinois Republican Party has announced its intent to file complaints against Justice Rochford with the Judicial Inquiry Board. While some legal experts argue that the breach may not warrant severe sanctions like suspension or removal, a public reprimand is seen as a possible outcome.

Apart from this recent incident, Justice Rochford has been involved in other contentious cases. She has declined to recuse herself from politically charged cases, including those involving laws supported by Governor JB Pritzker, who made a substantial campaign donation. Additionally, Rochford was a key figure in upholding Illinois’ ban on so-called “assault weapons,” despite receiving significant support from gun control advocacy groups.

Justice Elizabeth Rochford’s decision to speak at a Democratic Party fundraiser has ignited a debate about judicial ethics and impartiality. Critics argue that her participation in the partisan event undermines public trust in the judiciary. As the controversy unfolds, it remains to be seen how the Judicial Inquiry Board will address the matter and what, if any, repercussions Justice Rochford may face for her actions.