Karmeier named next chief justice

SPRINGFIELD — Lloyd A. Karmeier has arguably been the most controversial top court judge in Illinois over the years.

He authored memorable opinions in the most visible legal disputes in the state. He narrowly survived a bitter, expensive retention campaign. He’s been accused of bias in one billion-dollar case and of taking “dark money” campaign contributions in another.

Now, he will be the face of the Illinois Supreme Court as its 120th chief justice.

The court announced this morning that Karmeier, a Washington County native who was elected as a Republican and has served on the court since 2004, was unanimously elected to the position by his peers on the court. The role typically rotates based on seniority with the justice who has served the longest without holding the title standing next in line.

In a statement, Karmeier said he appreciates the confidence his colleagues have shown in him. He cited the “outstanding” work his five predecessors did in the position, which is responsible for leading and advocating for the court system and improving court policies and programs.

Former chief and current justice Thomas L. Kilbride pushed openness through a program to allow news cameras in trial courtrooms, for instance. And outgoing Chief Justice Rita B. Garman helped push electronic filing, diversity and collegiality between the court and the other branches of government.

Karmeier added in his statement that he wants to continue the court’s initiatives to improve access to the courts for lower-income citizens and electronic filing.

“We have made great strides in those areas over the past several years, and we have done so despite the state’s considerable economic difficulties,” he said.

The announcement comes just days after a federal judge in Chicago certified a class of plaintiffs in a long-running case that claims Karmeier was recruited to run for the Supreme Court in 2004 by State Farm Insurance Co.

A lower court earlier had ruled the company should pay more than $1 billion to 4.7 million auto insurance policyholders for using non-manufacturer auto parts when doing repairs.

The racketeering lawsuit claims the company and others funneled “dark money” — funds from intentionally obscure sources — into Karmeier’s campaign in order to better their odds of getting the verdict overturned.

Karmeier declined to recuse himself in the case and ended up casting a decisive vote in 2005 that helped overturn the fine.

But the company’s lawyers have denied the allegations, and Karmeier has said he was not biased because he did not know who donated to his campaign.

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear claims by plaintiff lawyers that Karmeier should have recused himself from a case against tobacco giant Philip Morris, a company which they also alleged had given funds to Karmeier.

The Illinois justices tossed a $10.1 billion verdict against the company more than a decade ago, and just this year dismissed an effort to resuscitate it. Karmeier voted to dismiss it both times.

He wrote in a filing that the notion that Philip Morris bankrolled his campaign was “based entirely on conjecture, innuendo and speculation” and that even if the company had contributed to him, “it is inevitable (and entirely appropriate) that interest groups will support judges whose judicial philosophies they believe are most closely aligned with their own views” in a system that elects judges.

Plaintiff lawyers in both of those cases combined to spend and raise millions trying to unseat Karmeier in 2014, utilizing a last-minute television advertising blitz. But Karmeier narrowly won, getting roughly 60.8 percent of the yes-or-no vote in Southern Illinois when he needed at least 60 percent.

Garman, a fellow Republican who will step down as chief and administer the oath for Karmeier in an Oct. 31 ceremony, said in her own statement that she holds Karmeier in the “highest regard,” that he has the right temperament to be chief and he will do “a marvelous job.”

“I have always appreciated his thoughtful legal analysis and his judicial temperament. Justice Karmeier is one of those rare individuals who can graciously offer and accept constructive criticism,” she said. “As a result, his comments to me have often improved my opinions; my comments to him are always given due consideration.”

That element of Karmeier’s jurisprudence has probably gained more attention over the last year or so. In 2015, he authored a highly anticipated, unanimous decision that struck down state pension reforms as unconstitutional. The decision covered more than 200 years of American history, using references to James Madison, Abraham Lincoln and the Great Depression to argue that the state couldn’t use a financial emergency to justify circumventing the state constitution.

“Crisis is not an excuse to abandon the rule of law. It is a summons to defend it. How we respond is the measure of our commitment to the principles of justice we are sworn to uphold,” he wrote, in what was arguably the 38-page decision’s most memorable passage.

More recently, in a split high court decision that tossed out a redistricting proposal as unconstitutional, Karmeier authored the most detailed opinion.

The majority only wrote about one of the 11 claims that the idea to have an independent panel draw maps instead of legislators was unconstitutional. But Karmeier argued against each of the counts in a nearly 40-page dissent, and was willing to spell out what he believed were the consequences of the majority decision in no uncertain terms.

“If we do not permit this ballot initiative to go forward in accordance with the law,” he wrote, “our authority over the redistricting process and, indeed, our status as an institution, will forever be suspect.”

Karmeier will formally start his three-year term on Oct. 26.