Kerrie Maloney Laytin

Name: Kerrie Maloney Laytin

Party: Democratic

Age (as of Election Day): 48

Current residence: Lakeview

Current position: Cook County circuit judge (appointed by Illinois Supreme Court in 2019)

Past legal experience: Senior counsel, City of Chicago Law Department, Appeals Division, 2018-19; assistant corporation counsel, 2002-18; staff attorney, Legal Aid Chicago, 2000-02; trial attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch, 1999-2000; law clerk for Carolyn Dineen King, chief judge of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 1998-99; law clerk for U.S. District Court Judge Robert P. Patterson for the Southern District of New York

Campaign funds available, July 1 to Dec. 31: $240,006.82

Campaign funds spent, July 1 to Dec. 31: $78,577.08

Law school: Columbia University School of Law, 1997

Campaign website: judgekerriemaloneylaytin.com

Family: Two children

Hobbies/interests: Travel, yoga, spend time with children, read

Have you ever run for office before?

No.

Why should voters support your candidacy?

I am currently the only candidate with judicial experience in my race. As of right now, I have one year on the bench, and I’ve presided over 100 bench trials, contested hearings and motions and counting to date. I bring experience to the position that neither of my opponents have. I also have an excellent background. I have top-notch legal credentials. As far as my education: I went to Columbia Law School. I was on the Columbia Law Review. I graduated from New York University undergrad. I was Phi Beta Kappa and graduated magna cum laude. So, I have academic credentials that form the base for my experience.

I had amazing experiences after I graduated from law school as well. I clerked for on the Southern District of New York and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and I also worked at the U.S. Department of Justice. I was in the Federal Programs Branch, which is the part of the Justice Department that travels around the country in district court cases and defends the constitutionality of statutes and defends federal agencies.

I had some great experiences before moving to Chicago. And then when I moved to Chicago — I’ve been in Chicago since 2000 — I worked at the Legal Assistance Foundation, now Legal Aid Chicago. I represented people living in poverty, and that also is a very important part of my story.

My positions have always been in government or public service, and I see my role on the bench as a continuation of that. I never worked at a law firm — not that there’s anything wrong with that. But it just shows my commitment to serving the people of Cook County and that’s also evident in my work off the bench.

I do firmly believe that who you are on the bench is informed by what you do off the bench, and though I am very proud of my credentials and my experience, it’s about more than where you came from. It’s also about how you act when you are on the bench, how you treat people.

What makes me different from I think from either of my opponents is my commitment to public service or community service in a broader sense. I don’t just volunteer at my kids’ schools or for the soccer team, but I’ve been devoted to making our greater Chicago community a better place.

I’ve done that in a number of ways, most recently, I was on the board of directors of High Jump. It is devoted for giving seventh- and eighth-grade middle schoolers from low-income backgrounds an educational boost. It’s an intensive academic program, and the goal is to get them into good high schools and colleges.

I’ve also volunteered with my son at StandUp For Kids, which is an organization focused on youth homelessness. I’m trying to find a project with my younger son so he can volunteer.

I’ve also been active for my law school, serving as their regional advisor for people that are interested in serving public through government or public interest careers.

The legal assistance experience and my community service experience gives me a perspective on the bench that is unique. And that I understand where people come from and people that have had less fortunate circumstances. And I’m devoted to making sure my courtroom is a place where people are treated with dignity and respect and heard and they understand the process.

Then, I went on to the corporation counsel’s office, where I was in the Appeals Division for 16 1/2 years, and that also gives me a unique perspective. I argued five cases in the Illinois Supreme Court. I handled some of the highest-profile matters the city has on appeal, and I argued 40 appeals in state and federal court. Overall, I had 100 appeals I handled.

Why do you want to continue to be a judge?

I want to continue to be a judge because I really see being a judge as serving the public and continuing what I’ve always done in my career, which is public service. I feel I can bring to the courtroom a real understanding of people’s circumstances that gives me compassion on the bench. I do think it’s important to treat people with dignity and respect and to make sure that they feel heard. I truly believe that if people feel like you’ve heard them, then no matter whether they win or lose, they’ve gotten to say what they want to say and they understand the reason for your ruling. It makes a huge difference in whether they are buying into our system of justice.

I take some extra time to do that. I see a lot of pro se litigants in my courtroom. There are a number of legal resources that litigants can take advantage of, so I do take the extra time to make sure they understand what those resources are and give them the time they need to consult with a lawyer.

It can be a frightening experience to come into court, so I do try and take the extra time to make sure that people really feel treated fairly.

What was the most interesting case you handled as a lawyer?

In 2003, there was a tragedy on the South Side of the city at the E2 Nightclub, where a lot of people were trampled on the stairs. I handled all of the appeals associated with that case on behalf of the city, including the city prosecuting those nightclub owners for having the club open — because there had been a court order entered by the building court to close the second floor, which is the nightclub. They had it open the night of the tragedy, and if they had obeyed the court order, it would have been closed.

The jury found the nightclub owners in criminal contempt of those court orders, and the nightclub owners appealed it to the 1st District [Appellate Court]. And the 1st District reversed based on the conclusion that there was not sufficient evidence to support the jury verdict.

I had to take that up on appeal from there to the Illinois Supreme Court. I was the first person to argue on live TV from the Illinois Supreme Court. That argument in January 2013 was the first argument broadcasted live. I am very proud to say the Illinois Supreme Court did agree with our position that there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict, and did reinstate that jury verdict.

The appeals tend to be the cases that are a little more high-profile. Not every case goes up on appeal.

What would you consider your greatest career accomplishment?

I’m very proud of being a judge — I was appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court after they examined my background.

Since I’ve been on the bench, I’m very proud of all the experience I’m gaining. I was an appellate lawyer for a long time, but now I’m also an accomplished and experienced trial judge. Every day I’m ruling on evidence and hearing arguments and doing the work of a judge, and I’m very proud of that.

In my career as an attorney, I’m very proud of having argued before the Illinois Supreme Court five times. I became an expert on some esoteric issues involving the Illinois Constitution during my time. I handled a wide range of substantive issues for the city.

What qualities do you plan to bring to the bench?

I do feel like my thoroughness, my attention to detail, my willingness to take the time required. I’m not trying to get through my call in record time. Some judges may go faster than I do, and that’s fine. But, I want to make sure each matter gets the attention that it deserves, because to the litigants before me, it’s the most important matter in the world and it doesn’t matter to them that there’s 50 other things on my call. It’s what’s happening to them that’s important.

All the things that I learned from my background volunteering in the community, from being a public servant throughout my career, I really think that does give me a perspective on the bench that is important to keep on the bench.