Illinois bill looks to minimize private donors' influence on judicial elections

Yahoo

13-02-2025

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WCIA) —Illinois judicial campaigns have become very expensive, with interest groups and wealthy donors throwing around lots of cash to get their favorite judge on the bench. This has raised questions about the fairness of the election and money's influence on the campaign.
Sen. Rachel Ventura (D-Joliet) filed a bill looking to reduce the influence of private donors in Supreme Court and Appellate Court races. This will allow candidates to use public funds instead of interest group funds. She filed the bill in response to the record-breaking amount of money spent in the 2022 Illinois Supreme Court Elections.
New Illinois law allows doctors to strengthen chronic pain treatments
She said this legislation would keep judicial elections balanced and the candidates wouldn't feel like they are indebted to a single person or organization.
'The goal is to allow all judges to have the same opportunity, ' Ventura said. 'And to get rid of that kind of off-putting feeling that someone is donating to a judge who may then later be making decisions that harm or hurt them or help them.'
The 2022 Illinois Supreme Court race spending surpassed $23 million across both sides. PACs, outside interest groups, and even Governor JB Pritzker poured money in campaigns leading up to the election.
The bill proposes a public financing program for Supreme Court and Appellate Court candidates through the Judicial Election Democracy Trust Fund.
The idea comes with a pretty big price tag. Under Ventura's proposal, the fund will contain an initial $40 million from the state's General Revenue Fund for candidate use if they choose to opt-in to the public fund for their campaign spending.
DOJ sues Illinois, Chicago over 'sanctuary city' laws
Kent Redfield, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Illinois Springfield, sees this bill as a well-meaning idea, but wouldn't be effective due to the voluntary option of it.
'The problem with public financing is that it only works if candidates actually use it.' Redfield said 'But if your opponent is getting millions from independent groups, you can't afford to just rely on public funds.'
With Illinois's current law on expenditure campaigns, the 2010 Citizen United vs. FEC ruling allows unlimited independent expenditures for corporations or unions with an emphasis on free speech.
Redfield, who has done extensive research on money in politics and campaign finance, said the ruling has changed how the judicial race is run.
'Ever since Citizens United, judicial elections have turned into high-stakes political battles, the idea that judges are above politics is just not reality anymore,' Redfield said. 'Now, outside groups can spend unlimited amounts, and that money isn't just coming from local donors—it's national, ideological, and often hidden.'
Ethics advocate groups said public financing is one step in avoiding corruption in the court systems.
Alisa Kaplan, executive director of Reform for Illinois, said this bill allows judges to be impartial compared to how the current law is written.
Illinois lawmakers react to Madigan convictions in corruption trial
'The way judicial campaigns are currently funded it really allows for special interest groups to have potentially a lot of influence on who our judges are and how they make decisions, and that's just not how anybody wants courts to run,' Kaplan said. 'You want the decisions that they make to be based on the arguments that they see before the court. You don't want them thinking about who's funding their campaign.'
Several states across the nation publicly finance political campaigns such as Arizona and Maine, and a few are considering it for judicial races. With fewer candidates on the ballot for Supreme Court and Appellate Court elections, many see public finance as the most suitable option.
With $40 million coming from the General Revenue Fund, the proposal raised eyebrows given the state's budget problem.
'The public response to that generally is 'I don't want my tax dollars going to politicians to run campaigns,'' Redfield said 'The fact that we have a budget deficit, we're looking at a very tough fiscal year. The idea of taking $40 million out and not giving it to schools or universities or early childhood education, it's not a very attractive time.'
But Kaplan said the amount is smaller compared to the state's overall budget.
'It's 0.08% of the budget, the way the bill is written right now. ' Kaplan said. ' So an extremely, extremely small part of the overall Illinois budget for something that could really have a huge impact on how cases are decided and how justice is distributed in the state of Illinois.'
Ventura believed this bill will start a conversation on fairness in the Illinois judicial system.
'I think Illinois is well on its way to exploring this, but we need to hear from our residents. What would they prefer? Because, as I said, candidate campaigns are very expensive,' Ventura said. 'But we want to make sure that none of our candidates are bought and paid for.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.