On Thursday, November 21, 2024, Injustice Watch reported that Judge Shannon O’Malley was removed from the bench by voters in the recent election, making him the third Cook County judge ousted in six years. This unprecedented trend marks a significant shift in judicial retention elections in the county, where no judges had been removed for nearly three decades prior.
Judge O’Malley, who has served a single term in the court’s child protection division, faced scrutiny regarding his compliance with state judicial residency requirements. Additionally, the bar associations raised concerns about his management of courtroom proceedings and his credibility. In the election held on November 5, O’Malley received 57.9% of the “yes” votes but fell short of the 60% threshold necessary to retain his position.
Out of the 77 Cook County judges on the ballot, O’Malley was the only one not recommended for retention by any legal organizations that assess judicial candidates. The Illinois State Bar Association noted issues with O’Malley’s courtroom management, highlighting that his approach often resulted in significant delays in case processing. The Chicago Council of Lawyers emphasized that such delays can adversely affect children caught in the child welfare system.
Following the election, Cook County Chief Judge Timothy Evans referred O’Malley and Judge E. Kenneth Wright Jr. to the state’s Judicial Inquiry Board for an investigation into the latter’s property tax exemptions claimed in another county. Wright narrowly retained his seat with 61.5% approval despite being implicated in similar controversies. Judge Ieshia Gray, also under investigation for bias and unfair treatment, barely secured her position with 60.6% of the votes.
Voter participation in Cook County judicial elections has increased significantly in recent years, with 75% of voters casting ballots in this year’s top circuit court race. This surge in turnout contrasts sharply with historical trends, where participation often hovered around two-thirds or less. Judicial election experts attribute this increased engagement to the availability of voter guides and comprehensive information about candidates, including resources provided by Injustice Watch and other organizations.
The 2024 election results indicated a more discerning electorate, with six judges receiving less than 65% of the “yes” votes—a notable increase from previous years. Injustice Watch’s analysis revealed that this was the highest number of judges falling below that threshold since at least 1998. Longtime voter Alice Cottingham, who expressed her dissatisfaction with previous lack of information, noted that the availability of resources has empowered voters to make informed decisions about judicial candidates.
The judges who faced the most “no” votes tended to perform better in suburban areas compared to urban districts. This discrepancy highlights the influence of information dissemination, particularly as traditional media has diminished its coverage of judicial endorsements in retention races. The “Girl, I Guess” guide, which targets younger voters in the city, has been instrumental in shaping opinions, particularly among urban voters.
Historically, Cook County has seen few judges removed from the bench. The last ousting occurred in 2018 when Judge Matthew Coghlan was voted out amidst rising community concerns over judicial accountability and police misconduct. The success of the grassroots campaign that targeted Coghlan indicated a growing appetite for change among voters, a sentiment echoed in this year’s election as O’Malley’s removal demonstrates a shift in public perception toward judicial accountability.
Despite O’Malley’s ouster, the overall trend in voter support for judges remains relatively stable. Judges on average received 74% “yes” votes, a figure consistent with recent elections but down from the 79% approval rates seen in the early 2000s.
As the landscape of Cook County judicial elections evolves, the recent results signal a potential new era of voter engagement and accountability in the judicial system. With voters demonstrating a willingness to act based on available information, the implications for future elections may be profound, paving the way for continued scrutiny of judicial performance and integrity.
Source: Injustice Watch
