Illinois Supreme Court, Springfield, Ill.
CHICAGO - The Democrat-dominated Illinois Supreme Court has abruptly reversed its decision to recall to service a former judge to help alleviate a backlog of cases in the massive court system, seemingly bowing to the wishes of left-wing activists and some Chicago legal organizations expressing outrage at a column the former judge published as a citizen when he was no longer on the bench expressing support for President Donald Trump.
In an order issued Jan. 26, the state high court vacated its decision to recall retired Cook County Judge James R. Brown back to active service.
The court had issued the initial recall order in December 2025, saying Brown's services were needed to address a backlog of cases in the beleaguered massive Cook County courts.
Brown had been assigned to traffic court.
However, after the state high court announced his recall, at least two legal organizations, including the Cook County Bar Association, which represents the interests of black lawyers and judges in Chicago, and the Chicago Council of Lawyers issued statements and sent letters to the Illinois Supreme Court demanding the court rescind its appointment of Brown.
In those communications, the organizations claimed Brown had demonstrated himself to be unfit to hear cases in Cook County due to bias. As proof, they pointed to a column Brown published in September in an online publication operated by former Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass.
In that column, titled "His Judgment Cometh, and That Right Soon," Brown assailed what he called "lawfare" waged by Democratic activists and politicians in Illinois and elsewhere in the U.S. against President Donald Trump and his supporters.
He further singled out for criticism the controversial criminal prosecutorial and policy decisions of former Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx and other prosecutors, who Brown agreed had been propped up by billionaire left-wing activist George Soros and his political organizations to advance left-wing criminal justice reforms in Chicago and nationwide.
The complaining legal organizations asserted the column - which Brown authored and published when he was no longer a judge and before his recall - amounted to violations of the judicial ethics codes, which require judges to "promote public confidence" in the courts.
"The statements in question are wildly inappropriate for a member of the judiciary to be making. In our view they run afoul of the Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct," wrote the Chicago Council of Lawyers in their letter to the high court, posted on Jan. 5.
"Just as significantly, they demonstrate that Judge Brown lacks the temperament, judgment, independence, competence, impartiality and respect for the rule of law necessary for those who serve in the judiciary."
The controversy was first reported by online legal publication Injustice Watch shortly before the state Supreme Court acted.
In a radio interview with conservative talk show host Dan Proft on AM560 The Answer, Brown said: “Conservatives I don’t think are welcome on the Cook County judiciary."
“... For the Illinois Supreme Court to cave to the mob is unconscionable. It’s unconscionable.”
According to the Illinois Supreme Court's Jan. 26 order, the court rescinded Brown's appointment with all members of the court present.
This included the court's only two Republican justices, David K. Overstreet and Lisa Holder White.
Among the Democratic justices present were Elizabeth M. Rochford and Mary K. O'Brien.
Both Rochford and O'Brien ran highly partisan campaigns when they were elected to the court in 2022, accepting millions of dollars in campaign donations from Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker and endorsements from a variety of left-wing activist organizations, even as the state high court prepared to hear volatile cases challenging controversial state laws, including the state's ban on so-called "assault weapons" and Pritzker's signature criminal justice reforms abolishing cash bail in the state.
Both Rochford and O'Brien refused requests from challengers to the gun ban law to recuse themselves.
In September 2023, Rochford also spoke at a political fundraiser in Lake County, appearing in her capacity as a new justice of the Illinois Supreme Court. The event supported the Lake County Women’s Political Action Committee, a group which explicitly declares it exists to elect female Democratic candidates to office in Lake County and elsewhere.
Rochford came under a hail of criticism for speaking at the event, with critics and other observers familiar with the rules of judicial conduct both asserting Rochford's appearance at the fundraiser likely violated those rules of judicial ethics.
Specifically, they said it violated rules requiring judges to maintain at least the appearance of neutrality.
Rules in that Code of Judicial Conduct appear to explicitly prohibit such speeches by Illinois state judges, no matter their judicial office, saying:
“Except as may be specifically authorized in the context of judicial election campaigns, Rule 4.1 prohibits judges and judicial candidates from 'publicly' endorsing or making 'speeches' on behalf of political candidates or organizations.
“Paragraphs (A)(2) and (A)(3) prohibit judges and judicial candidates from making speeches on behalf of political organizations to prevent them from misusing the prestige of judicial office to advance the interests of others.”
Rochford did not apologize for the event, but rather defended herself, asserting she did nothing wrong.
"The content of my speech was not political in any way and so should not be construed to have been provided on behalf of any political candidate or organization," Rochford said in a statement at the time in response to the criticism.
No public action has been taken by judicial regulators against Rochford stemming from her appearance at the political fundraiser.
Neither the Chicago Council of Lawyers nor the Cook County Bar Association issued public statements questioning Rochford's appearance at the political fundraiser, or the decisions by Rochford and O'Brien to accept explicitly partisan support from prominent Democrats and left-wing activist groups as they campaigned to serve on the state's highest court, or their refusal to recuse themselves despite those campaign donations.
