Their most recent conduct is not surprising, in light of the effort made last winter to

the Illinois State Bar Association: In 2004, ISBA was talked into creating a “committee on tone and conduct” for supreme and appellate court races. It was created at the urging of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform and in fact, appointed an ICPR person to the committee. Apart from playing a major role in an anti-Karmeier movie that was produced following the 2004 election, there was no indication that the ISBA committee accomplished anything.

But the committee is back in action this year and when the McGlynn campaign complained about the attack on Justice Karmeier (and on Justice McGlynn) by the Stewart campaign, the committee took no action because the ad apparently had been removed from the Stewart web site. There was no admonition to the Stewart campaign that such attacks on a sitting Illinois Supreme Court justice were out of order.

make sure McGlynn did not get a more favorable rating than Stewart.

In 2004, ISBA members (including many plaintiffs’ attorneys) were shocked and chagrined that Lloyd Karmeier received a higher ISBA rating than Gordon Maag.

This year, in apparent nervousness that there would be a repeat of 2004, ISBA actually sent two mail solicitations to a Chicago criminal lawyer or Southern Illinois lawyers, encouraging them to participate in the candidate evaluation poll. When the first mailing did not produce the anticipated or desired result, a second mailing was sent — just in Southern Illinois — to get larger participation. 

These were sent to St. Louis car accident attorney‘s, St louis personal injury attorneys, and many other types of lawyers.

And it worked, and it resulted in a remarkably lower evaluation for McGlynn than for Stewart, even though the vast majority of lawyers participating had never encountered McGlynn in a courtroom. For that matter, most had not encountered Stewart, either, but they learned that he was the choice of ITLA and obviously was the choice of ISBA.

The result of the survey? This is what we reported in our Commentary on February 27:

We’ve written twice within the past few weeks that there were some rumblings that the plaintiffs’ lawyers were putting the word out among their ranks to make sure they participate in the poll and cast their ballots for the right candidates — their candidates.

A few weeks back, it seems there was even some concern that ballots were not being received so ISBA sent a notice to members in Southern Illinois that another mailing was going to be launched.

So it was not surprising to anyone that two judges appointed by Justice Karmeier to fill vacancies — Appellate Justice Stephen P. McGlynn and Madison County Circuit Justice Don W. Weber — received unusually low scores — suspiciously low scores.

But the low scores for McGlynn and Weber are not as suspicious when the numbers are analyzed. In the appellate poll, for example, there was an increase of 26% in the number of voters in 2006 over 2004. The actual number of lawyers receiving ballots, according to the ISBA’s own numbers, increased by only 5% so “lawyer growth” would not account for the increase.

Seems strange that there would be a higher percentage of lawyers voting in an election year with NO Supreme Court race than in one with a very high profile contest for the highest court in the state — a contest that only comes around once every ten years.

ISBA doesn’t tell candidates who submitted ballots and they’re certainly not going to tell us but it is safe to say (… ok, to assume …) that much of the increase was the result of the rumored push to get plaintiffs’ attorneys to pan McGlynn and Weber and boost their opponents.

The result of the ISBA maneuvering is that Bruce Stewart had a favorable bar association rating and Steve McGlynn did not. In judicial elections, where voters know less about candidates than they do about candidates for other offices, the bar association rating can be an important credential — but it shouldn’t be if it is issued under false or political circumstances.

The point of all of this is that the Illinois State Bar Association is too closely tied to the plaintiffs’ lawyers in Illinois, and too willing to do their bidding. We met Irene Bahr, new president of ISBA at a recent forum in Bloomington and she made it clear that she is “not a trial lawyer.” But she has a stable-full of plaintiffs’ attorneys who exercise an inordinate amount of control over what should be the state’s premier legal organization.