The Chicago Bar Association recommended against three candidates vying to fill vacancies on the Nov. 3 ballot, and singled out two retention candidates as not recommended for new terms.

One of those disfavored circuit judges has already stated she isn’t actually seeking retention, and the other is facing judicial disciplinary proceedings today.

The CBA’s nonpartisan evaluations are handled by its Judicial Evaluation Committee. Its “Judge Smart Guide” provides a narrative on the findings of candidates up for election or retention to the bench. The report can be found at chicagobar.org/chicagobar/votejudges.

Under the Illinois Constitution, judges seeking retention must get a “yes” vote from at least three-fifths of voters in their jurisdiction.

The two circuit judges who were not recommended for retention this year, Mauricio Araujo and Patricia M. Martin, both declined to participate in the CBA’s evaluation process — which earns an automatic negative grade from the organization.

Martin, who has served as presiding judge of the circuit court’s Child Protection Division since 2000, indicated to the CBA she is not seeking retention, but her name is printed on the ballot.

Araujo has been assigned to administrative duties by circuit court leadership since October 2018, as the state Judicial Inquiry Board filed a complaint against him alleging he sexually harassed court employees and a Chicago police officer. Around the same time, the chief judge’s office received a complaint about inappropriate comments Araujo allegedly made toward an assistant state’s attorney in his courtroom.

Araujo’s hearing before the Illinois Courts Commission began on Tuesday morning, and the commission announced it plans to issue an immediate decision at the end of the hearing.

In the 1st District Appellate Court, also elected by Cook County voters, the CBA recommended new 10-year terms for Justices Aurelia M. Pucinski and Mary K. Rochford.

The report also includes ratings for 36 candidates seeking election to Circuit Court positions, carrying over their grades from the March primary cycle. The committee found seven candidates “Highly Qualified,” 26 “Qualified” and three “Not Recommended.” The two candidates who declined to participate in the screening, Tiesha L. Smith and Krista D. Butler, were automatically graded “Not Recommended.”

Candidate Perla Tirado was rated “Not Recommended” based on a lack of experience, but the committee was complimentary of her demeanor.

All the countywide judicial vacancies are uncontested, with winners of the March 17 Democratic primary facing a clear path to the bench.

In the north and northwest suburbs, one race in the 12th Judicial Subcircuit and another in the 13th Judicial Subcircuit have both Democratic and Republican candidates.

The CBA rated Illinois Supreme Court Justice P. Scott Neville Jr. as “Highly Qualified” for the seat he was appointed to fill in 2018. He does not face an opponent in the general election.

Neville has extensive appellate experience and is well regarded for his deep understanding and knowledge of the law. Neville is committed to improving the Illinois Courts and possesses all the requisite qualifications or service on the Illinois Supreme Court,” the report said.

The CBA also issued statements on two candidates seeking election to seats on Illinois Appellate Court: Justice Michael B. Hyman for the Neville vacancy and Circuit Judge Sharon O. Johnson for the Simon vacancy.

Hyman, who has served on the appeals court by assignment since 2013, was deemed “Highly Qualified” for his “knowledge of the law, integrity, legal experience, work ethic, and excellent writing skills.”

“Justice Hyman teaches other jurists and is dedicated to improving the justice system,” the report stated.

Johnson, who is currently assigned to the Domestic Relations Division and hears cases at the Markham courthouse, was rated as “Qualified.”

“Judge Johnson is an experienced jurist well regarded for her work ethic, diligence, calm demeanor, and legal knowledge,” the report said.

 

The CBA has evaluated judicial nominees since 1887. The report was originally called a “Bar Ticket” and has evolved multiple times over years, including in 1976 when it became the JEC.

Only one Cook County judge facing retention has been rejected by voters in the last 14 election cycles. In 2018, then-circuit judge Matthew E. Coghlan fell short of the 60% threshold after an organized effort by the Judicial Accountability Political Action Committee criticized his record of criminal sentencing and his past as a prosecutor. The CBA had rated Coghlan as “Qualified.”

In the CBA’s announcement of its ratings, one of its leaders suggested voters should be wary of more politicized efforts to evaluate judges.

“Judicial independence is the cornerstone of our democracy and judges are required to apply the law fairly and equally to all who appear before them,” wrote Timothy S. Tomasik, CBA’s second vice president and a partner at Tomasik Kotin Kasserman who previously chaired the JEC. “It is reprehensible for politicians and politically backed organizations masquerading as independent judicial watchdog groups to use innuendo and guilt by association tactics in the media to unfairly discredit the reputations of qualified men and women who are serving honorably as members of Illinois' judiciary.”