Judging who will bring running dogs to heel
A local lawyer used to have a billboard asking which lawyer you’d rather have on your side. He showed two cute but dopey-looking basset hounds wearing glasses — the other guys — and an alert German shepherd — him.
Hard to say whether three local Democratic judges are exactly the German shepherds of the pack, but it’s likely they aren’t basset hounds, either. Say what you will about Chief Judge John Baricevic, Circuit Judge Robert Haida and Circuit Judge Robert LeChien, but we doubt they’d risk their $185,511-a-year jobs if they weren’t pretty darned sure their little election two-step were legal.
Belleville City Clerk Dallas Cook filed election objections to the trio’s moves that have them resigning their judgeships at the end of their terms and running for election instead of running for retention. Cook’s objection claims the moves are unconstitutional, claiming the state constitution requires all circuit judges to seek retention and not re-election, and to file six months before the November election.
The simple reason for the judges to want election instead of retention is that they only need a simple majority to win an election. To be retained as a judge you need 60 percent of the vote.
“You have judges that are not following the law, and these are the people who represent the law. It’s incredible,” Cook said.
We agree with Cook. It is disheartening to see men who live by the law essentially bending the law to their own needs. It also says something that they have so little self-confidence that they won’t stand for retention.
While Cook’s challenge is likely to fail today, especially in our very blue state, the best challenge is giving voters a choice in November. Only two of the judges face challengers, not Haida.
Ultimately, judgment of these judges and their election ploys will come in November when voters render their decision.
This story was originally published December 13, 2015 at 1:00 PM with the headline "Judging who will bring running dogs to heel."