dodging a billion-dollar verdict

7/27/2019 Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict

1/20

1 Center or American Progress | Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict

Dodging a Billion-Dollar Verdict

By Billy Corriher and Brent DeBeaumont August 2013

A siting Illinois Supreme Cour jusice could soon ace quesions under oah abou

allegaions ha he voed o overurn a $1 billion verdic agains a powerul corporaion

ha secrely spen millions o dollars o help him ge eleced.

A lawsui now being ried in an Illinois courroom alleges ha insurance gian SaeFarm essenially unded and operaed a mulimillion-dollar campaign in 2004 o elec

Jusice Lloyd A. Karmeier o he sae supreme cour. On Augus 5, 2013, he plainis

in Hale v. Sae Farm old he judge hearing he case ha heir saed inenion is o ask

Jusice Karmeier o address he allegaions in a deposiion.1 Te plainis conend ha

Sae Farm violaed he Rackeeer Inuenced and Corrup Organizaions Ac, or RICO,

by using he U.S. Chamber o Commerce, he Illinois Republican Pary, and oher

eniies as conduis o conceal is role in unding and operaing he jusices campaign.2

RICO allows plainis o sue persons or eniies involved in a conspiracy o engage in

improper aciviies such as bribery, raud, or violen crimes.3 In May o his year, a ed-

eral judge denied Sae Farms moion o dismiss he lawsui and ruled ha he plainiscan coninue wih discovery.4 Te rial could unearh more deails abou he exen o

Sae Farms involvemen in Jusice Karmeiers 2004 campaign.

Te lessons already learned rom he sill-unolding scandal are apparen. Campaign-

nance reorm advocaes have called on sae legislaors o address he shorcomings o

sae campaign-nance laws and judicial-ehics rules in order o preven a caaclysmic

breach o jusice rom recurring. Such reorms are crucial o quashing he widespread

belie5 ha our judicial sysem is up or sale o he highes bidder.


2/20


The bi ll ion- dollar verdict

Te evens ha orm he basis oHale v. Sae Farm arose in 1997, when more han 4

million aggrieved policyholders led a class-acion lawsui in an Illinois sae cour

agains Sae Farm.6 Te 1997 lawsuiAvery v. Sae Farmconcerned a clause in Sae

Farms auomobile insurance conrac ha sipulaed ha he company would pay or

replacemen pars o like kind and qualiy o resore a vehicle o is pre-loss condiionaer an acciden.7 Sae Farm was accused o breaching his promise by insalling ine-

rior replacemen pars.8 A jury in Williamson Couny, Illinois, agreed wih he plainis

inAvery v. Sae Farm and awarded hem $1.18 billion.9 Alhough he medias coverage o

he rial played up he size o he verdic,10 i acually amouned o only around $300 or

each o he 4 million plainis.

Te Fih Disric Appellae Cour o Illinois

afrmed mos o he judgmen in 2001. Te appel-

lae cours decision, auhored by Judge Gordon

E. Maag, lowered he oal award o slighly morehan $1 billion.11 Sae Farm appealed he judg-

men o he Illinois Supreme Cour.

Te Illinois Supreme Cour heard oral argumens

in he case in 2003, bu i le he verdic pending

or more han wo years.12 In he meanime, a sea

on he high cour opened up in he cours souh-

ern disric.13 (Unlike he vas majoriy o saes,

Illinois elecs is supreme cour jusices by dis-

rics.14

) Te wo candidaes or he souhern dis-ric sea were hen-Judge Karmeier, a Republican

circui judge or Washingon Couny, and Judge

Maag.15 By he ime he nal voes were allied, he

2004 Illinois Supreme Cour race would become

he mos expensive campaign or a single judicial

ofce in he hisory o he Unied Saes.16 More

han $9 million would evenually be spen by he

wo candidaes, wih Judge Karmeiers campaign

accumulaing more han $4.8 million in campaign

conribuions and Judge Maag amassing close o

$4.6 million.17 A 2008 Chicago ribune aricle look-

ing back on he race noed ha Jusice Karmeier

won wih he heavy nancial assisance o business

and insurance ineress hoping o obain a reversal

o he $1 billion-plus verdic agains Sae Farm.18

For more reasons why he 2004 Illinois Supreme

Cour race may have atraced so much nancial

atenion, see he souhern disric sidebar.

The American Tort Reorm Association, or ATRA, is a corporate-unded

organization that champions caps on damages in tort cases, restrictions

on class-action lawsuits, and other limits on corporate legal liability.19 The

group publishes an annual list o what it terms judicial hellholesloca

that it claims have the worst courts in the United States.20 The only appa

ent criterion or making this list is a perception by ATRA that a court avo

injured plaintis over corporate deendants. Madison County, Illinois,

ranked as the number-one judicial hellhole rom 2002 to 2004.21 Accord

ing to ATRA, Madison County was the class action capital o the United

States in 2004, with 106 class-action lings.22

When a party loses a case in Madison County, the Fith District Appellat

Court hears the appeal.23 The Fith District is part o the Southern Distri

o the Illinois Supreme Court, and the justice who represents this distric

has some power over appointing its lower court judges.24

Corporate critics o the Madison County courts may have seen an op-

portunity to inuence those courts through the 2004 Illinois Supreme

Court election. The U.S. Chamber o Commerces Institute or Legal Reorm

started a newspaper covering legal aairs in Madison County,25 and when

Justice Karmeier won the 2004 Illinois Supreme Court election, the paper

proclaimed that the justices victory bellow[ed] a resounding message.

The article quotes one observer commenting that the dominance o

Madison County in the judiciary was a subplot o the election.27 Ater

Justice Karmeier took his seat on the bench, Madison County ell to the

ourth spot and then to the sixth spot on the judicial hellholes list in 2005

and 2006, respectively,28 and then it dropped rom the list altogether unt

once again making the list in 2012.29

Illinois Southern Districtas the class action capital?


3/20


To recuse or not to recuse?

On Elecion Day 2004, Jusice Karmeier deeaed Judge Maag by a wide margin and

ascended o he Illinois Supreme Cour.30 On he heels o Jusice Karmeiers vicory, he

plainis in heAvery casepeiioned he cour o bar his paricipaion in he cases nal

decision,31 ciing Sae Farms nancial conribuions o Jusice Karmeiers campaign.

Te plainis were aware ha Sae Farm and is employees had made direc conribu-ions amouning o $350,00032 o Jusice Karmeiers campaign and ha more han $1

million had come rom groups ha included Sae Farm as a member or o which he

insurance gian was a nancial conribuor.33 Te Illinois Supreme Cour issued an order

saing ha Jusice Karmeiers recusal decision was one or him alone o make.34 Te

saes code o judicial conduc insrucs Illinois judges o recuse hemselves rom any

proceeding in which he judges imparialiy migh reasonably be quesioned, bu he

rule does no menion campaign conribuions as a source o quesions abou a judges

imparialiy.35 Jusice Karmeier reused o recuse himsel rom he decision inAvery v.

Sae Farm, and jus shy o nine monhs aer aking ofce, he subsequenly voed o

reverse he judgmen agains he insurer.36

Under he Illinois Consiuion, i akes our voes or he high cour o overurn a

lower cours ruling.37 Te ally in heAvery v. Sae Farm nal decision was our jusices

avoring reversal and wo jusices parially dissening.38 Absen Jusice Karmeiers

paricipaion, only he porions o he cours opinion joined by he parially dissening

jusices would have had he necessary voes o overurn he lower cours judgmen.39

Te nal voe would have been 3-2 in avor o reversing he approximaely $456 mil-

lion in conrac damages and 5-0 in avor o reversing he $600 million in puniive

damages.40 Wihou Jusice Karmeiers voe, Sae Farm would have sill been on he

hook or around $456 million.41

Te plainis inAvery peiioned he U.S. SupremeCour o weigh in on Jusice Karmeiers ailure o recuse in 2006, bu he Cour

declined o hear he case.42

A constitutional right to recusal

Jus hree years laer, in 2009, he U.S. Supreme Cour reviewed a legal challenge con-

cerning a similar recusal issue. Jusice Bren D. Benjamin o he Wes Virginia Supreme

Cour had ailed o recuse himsel rom a decision overurning damages agains A..

Massey Coal Co., Inc., a major nancial backer o his successul 2004 campaign.43 While

Massey Coals appeal was pending, he companys CEO gave approximaely $3 million

o a nonpro corporaion, which ran ads supporing Jusice Benjamin and atacking his

elecoral opponen during he 2004 elecion.44


4/20


In Caperon v. A.. Massey Coal Co., Inc., a 5-4 majoriy o he U.S. Supreme Cour held

ha he due-process clause requires a judge o recuse himsel or hersel rom any cases

in which here is a high probabiliy o acual bias.45 Wriing or he majoriy, Jusice

Anhony Kennedy reasoned ha he Massey execuives exraordinary conribu-

ions were made a a ime when he had a vesed sake in he oucome. Jus as no man

is allowed o be a judge in his own cause, similar ears o bias can arise when a man

chooses he judge in his own cause.46 In he wake o his decision, he plainis counselinAvery v. Sae Farm launched an invesigaion o deermine wheher Sae Farms nan-

cial involvemen in Jusice Karmeiers 2004 campaign had been ully disclosed.47

Te plainis claim o have uncovered addiional evidence ha proves ha Jusice

Karmeiers conic o ineres was jus as signican as he conic o ineres in

Caperon. As wih he donaions rom Massey Coal, Sae Farm had a sake in a paricu-

lar case ha was pending or imminen a he ime ha i rais[ed] unds or direc[ed]

he judges elecion campaign.48 Te U.S. Supreme Cour in Caperon noed ha he

Massey Coal execuives spending amouned o hree imes he spending by he judges

own campaign.49

When he secre conribuions alleged by heAvery plainis are addedo he $4.8 million in repored campaign donaions, he Karmeier campaigns oal

conribuions reach $5.5 million. O his, $4.2 millionmore han 75 percen o he

oal conribuionscan be atribued o Sae Farm, is employees, groups o which

he insurer had conribued, or groups ha Sae

Farm execuives conrolled.50 Sae Farms suppor

or Jusice Karmeiers 2004 campaign is similar o

he disproporionae nancial inuence o Massey

Coal in elecing Jusice Benjamin o he Wes

Virginia Supreme Cour.

Following the money trail:

Recent findings

Trough he invesigaive work o reired FBI

Special Agen Daniel Reece, he plainis con-

end ha as much as $4 million given o Jusice

Karmeiers campaign came rom Sae Farm or

eniies srongly inuenced by Sae Farm execu-

ives.51 Tis newly unearhed evidence suggess

ha Sae Farm deliberaely concealed he exen

o is nancial suppor or Jusice Karmeiers 2004

campaign by unneling money hrough a rade

associaion, a poliical acion commitee, and a

poliical paryall wih he goal o reversing he $1

billion verdic agains he company.52

FIGURE 1

Spending to support Justice Benjamin in Caperton versus

alleged contributions to Karmeiers campaign

70%State Farm-influenced contributions

$3,852,132

6%State Farm direct contribution

$350,000

24%All other contributions

$1,318,947

Alleged contributions to Karmeiers2004 campaign $5,521,079 total

Spending to support West Virginia JusticeBenjamin in 2004: $4,986,711 total

60%Massey CEOs direct independent expenditures

$2,978,207

23%Massey CEO-influenced independent expenditures

$1,163,000

17%Justice Benjamins campaign

$845,504

Sources: Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., 556 U.S. 868, 873-884 (2009); Class-action complaint,

Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).


5/20


In 2004 Sae Farm gave he conservaive-leaning, pro-business lobbying organizaion,

he U.S. Chamber o Commerce, $1 million.53 Te chamber hen conribued $2.05

million o he Illinois Republican Pary.54 Jusice Karmeiers campaign and he Illinois

Republican Pary received he majoriy o he chambers judicial-campaign conribu-

ions in 2004a ull 73 percen o all conribuions given o judicial campaigns on

behal o he U.S. Chamber o Commerce ha year.55 Te Illinois Republican Pary gave

a series o conribuions oaling $1.9 million o Jusice Karmeiers campaign. O paric-ular noe, on he same day ha he chamber gave he sae Republican Pary $950,000,

he pary donaed $911,282 o Jusice Karmeiers campaign.56

While Sae Farms $1 million donaion o he U.S. Chamber o Commerce was known

in 2004, he role o Sae Farms CEO, Edward B. Rus Jr., in seering chamber unds

o Jusice Karmeiers campaign has only recenly come o ligh. Te plainis have

uncovered evidence ha Rus was par o he chambers ask orce ha seleced judicial

races o arge in 2004.57 As a resul, he plainis now conend ha he $2.05 million

given by he U.S. Chamber o Commerce o he Illinois Republican Pary was speci-

cally agged by Rus or use in he 2004 Illinois Supreme Cour race.58

Te plainis sayha under Russ guidance, nearly 95 percen o he unds given by he U.S. Chamber

o Commerce o he Illinois Republican Pary were ulimaely dedicaed o Jusice

Karmeiers elecion eors.59

Invesigaor Reece also claims o have uncovered

evidence ha prior o he 2004 elecionand

whileAveryv. Sae Farm was pending in he

Illinois Supreme Courhe Illinois Civil Jusice

League spen $718,965 o help Jusice Karmeiers

campaign.60

Te plainis say ha he Illinois CivilJusice League veted and recruied candidaes o

run or he open sea on he cour.61 A coaliion o

Illinois ciizens, businesses, and associaions, he

Illinois Civil Jusice League lobbies or limis on

jury verdics in personal-injury and class-acion

lawsuis.62 Te head o he organizaion in 2004 was

Ed Murnane.63 Reeces invesigaion concluded ha

Murnane was chosen by Sae Farm lawyer and lob-

byis William Shepherd o head he Illinois Civil

Jusice League in 1993.64

FIGURE 2

Alleged contributions to Justice Karmeiers campaign

Source: Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).

$5,520,079Total contributions

6%State Farmdirect contribution$350,000

22%JUSTPAC$1,190,453

35%Illinois Republican Partywith U.S. Chamber ofCommerce funds

$1,941,714

13%In-kind contributions

from the IllinoisCivil Justice League

$718,965

24%Other sources

$1,318,947


6/20


Te $718,965 in unrepored, in-kind conribu-

ions rom he Illinois Civil Jusice League includes

he cos o resources allegedly devoed o Jusice

Karmeiers campaign. In-kind conribuions are

dened as conribuions oher han cash ha ben-

e a campaign.65 O hese in-kind conribuions,

$177,749 included Murnanes salary, benes,and expenses.66 Te plainis claim ha, E-mails

generaed wihin Karmeiers campaign organiza-

ion unmisakably show ha Murnane direced

Karmeiers und-raising, his media relaions and his

speeches.67 wice in heir complain, he plain-

is quoe Murnane as saying o he 2004 Illinois

Supreme Cour race, Im running his campaign.68

While Sae Farm and he Illinois Civil Jusice League deny his associaion, Reece

claims o have ound numerous discarded emails reporedly linking Murnane o JusiceKarmeiers campaign.69 One o he emails suggess ha he campaigns reasurer equaed

a conribuion o he leagues poliical acion commitee wih a conribuion o he

judges campaign. Anoher purporedly shows Murnane insrucing he campaign rea-

surer no o issue press releases abou undraisers.70 Te plainis claim ha he remain-

ing unrepored unds were dedicaed o media, adverising, undraising, and oher

managerial expenses ha almos exclusively beneed Jusice Karmeier.71

Alhough his alleged spending was no repored as in-kind conribuions o Jusice

Karmeiers campaign, he Illinois Civil Jusice League is required o repor inormaion

abou is expendiures.72

Documens led wih he Inernal Revenue Service show hain 2004 he Illinois Civil Jusice League spen subsanially more on media buys han in

subsequen years. Te organizaion repored spending $223,658 on media expenses

in 2004.73 Bu i repored no such spending in 2005 and only $900 in media spending

in 2006. In 2007 he organizaion repored $49,440 in media spending.74 From 2008 o

2011 he Illinois Civil Jusice Leagues ax documens do no include much spending

or adverising and promoion, hough hey include more han $100,000 in oher

expenses or each o hose years.75 Te expendiure o nearly a quarer o a million dol-

lars on media in 2004 seems o be an oulier. Alhough here could clearly be anoher

explanaion or he seep drop in he organizaions media spending, he plainis allega-

ions raise he quesion o wheher ha money was spen o help elec Jusice Karmeier.

FIGURE 3

Campaign cash and money saved

(through a favorable ruling)

Sources: Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., 556 U.S. 868, 873-884 (2009); Class-action complaint, Hale v. State

Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).

0 100 200 300 400 500

$3 million / from Massey Coal to WV justice

$50 million / saved by WV justices vote

$4.2 million / alleged from State Farm to IL justice

saved by IL justices vote $456 million

Caperton v. Massey Coal

Avery v. State Farm


7/20


I he Illinois Civil Jusice League did secrely spend

nearly hree-quarers o a million dollars o help

elec Jusice Karmeier, should hose resources have

been considered in-kind conribuions? Te Illinois

Sae Board o Elecions saes ha, Goods or

services provided o he campaign or purchased on

behal o he campaign mus be repored as in-kindconribuions.76 Oher large conribuors o he

campaign, such as he Illinois Republican Pary and

he Illinois Sae Medical Sociey Poliical Acion

Commitee, spen heir money direcly on ads or

Jusice Karmeier, bu heir spending was repored as

in-kind conribuions.77 Why would he Illinois Civil

Jusice League ail o repor is in-kind conribu-

ions when oher big spenders repored hem? Even

JUSPAC, a poliical acion commitee creaed by

he Illinois Civil Jusice League, repored in-kindconribuions o Jusice Karmeiers campaign.78 Why

would he league no spend his money hrough is

poliical acion commitee and repor i?

I he allegaions are rue, hen he leagues secre

spending or Jusice Karmeier could no have been

considered he ype o independen spending ha is so prevalen79 in judicial elecions

oday, paricularly since i appears he Illinois Civil Jusice League acually recruied he

candidae and hen ran his campaign. Te plainis allegaions sugges ha he league

coordinaed is spending wih he candidae, which independen spenders are prohibiedrom doing,80 and as such, he spending should be considered an in-kind conribuion.

JUSPAC repored spending a saggering amoun o moneymore han $1 mil-

liono aid Jusice Karmeiers elecion eors.81 Tese unds represen more han 90

percen o he money raised by JUSPAC in 2004. 82 JUSPAC received large dona-

ions rom he American or Reorm Associaion, he U.S. Chamber o Commerce,

and several large corporaions.83

Wih heir addiional evidence o Sae Farms nancial inuence on Jusice Karmeiers

campaignadding up o more han $4 million, subsanially more han he $350,000

ha Sae Farms atorneys acknowledged84he plainis brough he curren lawsui

in ederal cour. Tis lawsui alleges ha Sae Farm, Murnane, and Shepherd violaed

RICO hrough heir secre involvemen wih Jusice Karmeiers judicial campaign.85

(For more inormaion abou RICO lawsuis, see he sidebar.) Te plainis asser ha

rom 2003 o he presen, he deendans creaed and conduced a rackeeering ener-

prise designed o enable Sae Farm o evade paymen o a $1.05 billion judgmen

afrmed in avor o approximaely 4.7 million Sae Farm policyholders by he Illinois

Fih Disric Appellae Cour.86

FIGURE 4

Following the money

Othercontributions

$599,982

Karmeiercampaign

$1,000,000

U.S. Chamberof Commerce

$2,050,000

IllinoisRepublican Party

$1,941,417

Bill Shepherd,State Farm lawyer

and lobbyist,chooses Ed Murnane

to chair ICJL

JUSTPAC

$1,190,453

Illinois CivilJustice Leaguealleged in-kindcontributions

$718,965

State Farm CEOEd Rust becomesmember of theU.S. Chambers

judicial taskforce

Direct contributions

$350,000

Source: Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. , No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).


8/20


OctOber 29, 1998

Harman Mining Company president

Hugh Caperton les a lawsuit

against Massey Coal

August 1, 2002

A jury rules or Caperton and

awards $50 million in damages.

NOvember 12, 2003

Republican Brent Benjamin announces

his candidacy or the West Virginia

Supreme Court.

JuNe 2004

The court denies Masseys post-trial

motions challenging the verdict

and the damages award.

August 20, 2004

Massey CEO launches a Political Action

Committee (PAC) and gives it $2.4 mil-

lion to run ads or Benjamin.

NOvember 2, 2004

Brent Benjamin wins a seat on the

West Virginia Supreme Court with

53 percent o the vote.

mArch 17, 2005

The Circuit Court o Boone County

denies Masseys motion or

judgment as a matter o law.

OctOber 2005

Beore Massey Coal led its appeal,

Caperton moved to disqualiy Justice

Benjamin rom hearing the appeal.

July 1997

Four million policyholders lea class-action lawsuit againstState Farm, claiming that the

auto insurer breached its contracts.

OctOber 1999

A jury in an Illinois state court rulesagainst State Farm and awards theclass-action plaintis $1.18 billiondollars in damages.

April 2001

An appellate court afrms most o thejudgment against State Farm, whichappeals to the Illinois Supreme Court.

mAy 2003

The Illinois Supreme Court hearsoral arguments in Avery v. State FarmMut. Auto. Ins. Co.

september 2003

Republican Judge Lloyd Karmeierannounces his candidacy or the IllinoisSupreme Courts Southern District seat.

september 26, 2003

The Illinois Civil Justice Leagues (ICJL)PAC makes its rst o $1.19 million indonations to Karmeiers campaign.

september 24, 2004

The U.S. Chamber o Commercedonates $350,000 to the Illinois GOP.

OctOber 20, 2004

The U.S. Chamber o Commercedonates $900,000 to the Illinois GOP.The Illinois GOP injects $700,000into Karmeiers campaign.

OctOber 22, 2004

The U.S. Chamber o Commercedonates $350,000 to the Illinois GOP.The Illinois GOP spends $350,000to help Karmeiers campaign.

NOvember 2, 2004

Karmeier wins the election.

JANuAry 26, 2005

The high court rules that Karmeiercan make the decision on whetherhe should be recused, and he reusesto recuse himsel.

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

FIGURE 5

Timeline of campaign cash and rulings: Caperton and Avery

Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. Avery v. State Farm1997

2005


9/20


April 7, 2006

Justice Benjamin denied the request

to recuse himsel, concluding that he

had no bias or or against any litigant.

OctOber 24, 2006

Massey Coal petitions the West Virginia

Supreme Court to hear its appeal.

OctOber 10, 2007

The West Virginia Supreme Court hears

oral arguments in Caperton v. A.T.

Massey Coal Co.

NOvember 21, 2007

A 3-2 majority o the West Virginia

Supreme Court votes to overturn

the lower courts $50 million verdict

against Massey Coal.

JANuAry 2008

A photo is released showing Masseys

CEO and then-Chie Justice Maynardvacationing on the French Riviera.

FebruAry 2008

In light o the Riviera photo, the

West Virginia Supreme Court grants

Capertons petition or a rehearing.

mArch 2008

The justice in the Riviera photo recuses

himsel, as does another who criticized

the Massey CEOs spending in 2004.

April 3, 2008

With two justices sitting out,Justice Benjamin acts as Chie

Justice, and again, the Court rules

3-2 in Masseys avor.

NOvember 14, 2008

The U.S. Supreme Court grants

certiorari in Caperton v.

A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc.

JuNe 8, 2009

The U.S. Supreme Court rules 5-4 that

Justice Benjamins ailure to recuse

himsel violated Due Process by

creating a high probability o bias.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Caperton v. Massey Coal,556 U.S. 868 (2009), available at http://www.scotusblog.

com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/08-22_pet.pdf; Caperton v. Massey Coal, 556 U.S. 868 (2009),

available at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-22.pdf.

August 18, 2005

The high court overturns the verdictagainst State Farm, with Karmeier

casting the decisive vote on $456million in damages.

mArch 6, 2006

The U.S. Supreme Court declinesto review the Illinois SupremeCourts decision.

December 2010

The plaintis hire an investigator tolook into State Farms involvementin Karmeiers campaign.

september 9, 2011

Spurred by the investigations ndings,the Avery plaintis petition the IllinoisSupreme Court to vacate its 2005decision.

NOvember 17, 2011

The Illinois Supreme Court deniesthe plaintis petition.

mAy 29, 2012

Plaintis le a ederal RICO lawsuit inthe U.S. District Court or the SouthernDistrict o Illinois.

mArch 28, 2013The U.S. District Court deniesState Farms request to dismissthe RICO lawsuit.

August 7, 2013

Media reports indicate that theplaintis intend to depose Karmeier.

Source: Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut.

Auto. Ins. Co.,No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill., May 29, 2012).

2006

2007

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2008


10/20


11/20


Lawyers or Sae Farm have asked he ederal judge o deny class cericaion or he

RICO lawsui, bu he plainis wan o move ahead wih discovery, in which Sae

Farm will have o provide inormaion and documenaion relaed o he alleged

RICO conspiracy.103

Recusal reforms to keep litigants from influencing judges

I he allegaions in he Hale case are rue, hen Sae Farm evaded several ani-corrupion

laws or judicial races. Tis is a perec example o he conics o ineres ha cause he

public o doub he inegriy o eleced judges. Sae legislaors should consider reorming

heir judicial-recusal rules or implemening a public nancing program or judicial races.

Illinois currenly gives judges who are no he subjec o a recusal peiion he

auhoriy o decide wheher a judge should be barred rom paricipaing in a case.104

Unorunaely, Jusice Karmeiers colleagues decided no o excuse him rom he nal

decision inAvery, insead deermining ha his recusal was an issue ha only he shoulddecide.105 Te Illinois rule on recusal insrucs judges o avoid he appearance o impro-

priey or imparialiy, bu i does no require jusices o consider campaign conribu-

ions when deciding wheher o recuse hemselves.106

I may seem obvious o mos observers ha he conribuion o hundreds o housands

o dollarsor even millions o dollarsin campaign cash rom a single liigan cre-

aes an appearance o impropriey and raises concerns abou a judges imparialiy, bu

Jusice Karmeier ailed o recuse himsel rom he Sae Farm case.107 I he plainis

allegaions are rue, hen Jusice Karmeier knew ha Sae Farm was paying he salary o

he person running his campaign, and he RICO rial could reveal he exen o which heknew ha Sae Farm ailed o inorm he res o he cour o his ac.

Te adopion o mandaory recusal rules or beter recusal procedures could help

resore he publics aih in he Illinois judiciary. wo commitees a he American

Bar Associaion, or ABA, have proposed changing he ABA Model Code o Judicial

Conduc o include mandaory recusal rules. Leaving i o saes o ll in he blanks, he

proposed rule species ha recusal is required when a pary, a parys lawyer, or he

law rm o a parys lawyer has wihin he previous __ year[s] made aggregae conri-

buions o he judges campaign in an amoun greaer han ___.108 Te rule denes

conribuions as donaions rom organizaions ha suppored or opposed he judges

elecion, and all independen expendiures made direcly by he pary, he parys law-

yer, or he lawyers law rm.109


12/20


Te proposed ABA-model rule applies o he ypes o independen expendiures ha

oen dominae judicial elecions oday. Bu would he proposed rule require recusal

or liigans, such as Sae Farm, ha unnel conribuions hrough hird paries raher

han giving money o groups or independen spending? Te rule denes conribuions,

in par, as money given o organizaions ha suppored or opposed he judges elec-

ion.110 Does supporing or opposing a judge include giving he judge a direc conribu-

ion? I so, should all o a liigans or a lawyers donaions o a direc campaign donorcoun oward recusal, or should only any porion conribued or he purpose o unding

a campaign conribuion coun? Tese are quesions or judges or legislaors o answer

when craing ehics rules. I seems, however, ha whenever a judge is aware ha a lii-

gan ran and subsanially unded his or her campaign, a mandaory recusal rule should

be inerpreed o preven such a conic o ineres.

Te proposed ABA rule provides legislaors and jusices a guideline o address ani-

quaed ehics rules ha were draed beore he age o mulimillion-dollar judicial cam-

paigns and unlimied independen spending. Provisions ha mandae judicial recusal or

large campaign donaions no only promoe he air adminisraion o jusice, bu heycan also help resore he publics avorable percepion o heir sae cours.111 Tus ar,

however, ew saes have adoped his ambiious sandard.

Some skepics claim ha mandaory recusal rules could allow liigans o game he

sysem by giving money o judges whom hey do no wan o hear heir cases.112 Bu

he proposed ABA-model rule addresses his concern by allowing liigans o waive he

mandaory recusal requiremen.113

Criics o mandaory recusal rules also argue ha such rules can ge in he way o judges

doing heir jobs. Te rule o necessiy says ha a judge should hear a case i no oherjudge is available, even i he judge has a perceived conic o ineres.114 Tis argumen

could have more orce in sae supreme cours, he cours o las resor or sae judicia-

ries, han in lower cours. Some saes, however, have deailed procedures ha allow he

chie jusice o appoin a lower cour judge o hear a case when a jusice recuses himsel

or hersel.115 Illinois could change he provision o is consiuion ha requires a our-

jusice quorum o overrule a lower cour. Bu such an amendmen would require a super-

majoriy voe in boh houses o he Illinois legislaure, as well as approval by voers.

Te Brennan Cener or Jusice, which advocaed or Jusice Karmeiers recusal inAvery

v. Sae Farm, oers he ollowing suggesions or reorming recusal rules:

Firs, saes should no rely on a challenged judge o make he nal decision on wheher

his or her imparialiy can reasonably be quesioned. I a judge denies a recusal reques,

here mus be promp, meaningul review o he denial. Second, saes should require

ransparen decision-making, including writen rulings, on recusal requess. Tird,


13/20


saes should adop rules recognizing ha judges imparialiy may reasonably be ques-

ioned, and disqualicaion made necessary, because o campaign spending by liigans

or heir atorneys. And nally, saes should require liigans (and counsel) o disclose

campaign spending relaed o any judge or judges hearing heir case.116

Sae legislaors should consider amending disqualicaion rules o ensure ha a judge

does no have he nal say in wheher he or she should be recused. In Illinois rial cours,liigans have one opporuniy o reques a dieren judge or any reason beore any

subsanial rulings in he case.117 Aer ha, he liigan can only reques anoher judge

or cause, bu he judge ha is he subjec o he reques is no permited o decide he

issue.118 Te rules or Illinois Supreme Cour jusices are less sric.

Jusice Karmeiers disqualicaion moion was pu beore he res o he high cour, bu

his colleagues graned him he nal decision on wheher or no recusal was appropriae. 119

Some saes require he enire sae supreme cour o rule on a recusal moion, insead o

allowing he cour o pun he quesion o he jusice wih he alleged conic o ineres.120

Alernaively, Illinois legislaors could consider adoping judicial rules ha subjec

recusal reviews or decisions o a special panel o reired judges or jusices.121 Te main

goal o such panels would be o preven he challenged jusice rom inuencing he nal

decision regarding he adequacy o he recusal moion. Te ABA noes ha such pro-

posals are oen rejeced because hey impose signican coss,122 bu hese coss could

be subsanially ouweighed by he bene o increased public condence in he judi-

ciary. Ineresingly, Jusice Karmeier saed in a 2011 case involving a colleagues recusal

moion ha no only should judges no be he sole and exclusive arbiers o wheher

hey should coninue o paricipae in a case, some have quesioned wheher hey

should ever be permited o si in judgmen o requess or heir own disqualicaion.123

Legislaors or jusices could consider procedural rules ha mandae he issuance o ormal

decisions responding o recusal moions and creae avenues o appeal or denied moions.

Te plainis inAvery lacked boh opions when hey requesed Jusice Karmeiers

recusal, bu had such saeguards been in place, hey may have prevened he egregious

oucome ha resuled. Having judges ariculae heir reasoning on recusal moions allows

aeced paries an opporuniy o have each allegaion addressed in a writen record. 124

Tis also allows a reviewing body o weigh he relevan acs and legal argumens concern-

ing he recusal issue.125 Adopion o sricer recusal rules could help repair he image o

our sae judiciaries and help diuse he widespread belie126 ha jusice can be bough.

Illinoiss curren recusal rules may have prevened he conic o ineres inAvery i Sae

Farms connecions o Jusice Karmeiers campaign had been disclosed. Te proposed

ABA-model rule on recusal includes a commen insrucing a judge o disclose on he

record inormaion ha he judge believes he paries or heir lawyers migh reasonably

consider relevan o a possible moion or disqualicaion, even i he judge believes

here is no basis or disqualicaion.127


14/20


Illinois ehics rules currenly require judges o le a deailed accoun o personal nan-

cial ineress ha could creae a conic o ineres, bu he rules do no require a simi-

larly deailed accoun o campaign cash or independen spending ha a judge knows

is conneced o a liigan.128 I a rule had required Jusice Karmeier o disclose wha he

knew abou Sae Farms eors o ge him eleced, he res o he high cour may have

ruled dierenly on he recusal moion.

Public financing can minimize the

influence of large campaign contributions

In addiion o shoring up recusal rules, sronger campaign-nance laws could also help

keep liigans rom using campaign cash o inuence cours. Some saes concerned

abou he inegriy o judicial elecions have implemened public nancing programs,

which keep candidaes beholden o he public, no campaign conribuors. Aer Massey

Coals brazen atemp in 2004 o deermine which jusice would hear is appeal, Wes

Virginia creaed a pilo public nancing program, and in 2013 he Wes Virginia legisla-ure made he program permanen.129

Illinois legislaors considered a bill o creae a public nancing sysem or judicial can-

didaes in 2007, bu i ailed o pass he sae House o Represenaives.130 Te legisla-

ion would have given a public subsidy in exchange or agreeing o spending caps and

heighened disclosure requiremens.131 Candidaes would have had o qualiy by raising

$30,000 in seed money hrough donaions o $25 or less.132

A ask orce recenly explored he various opions or public nancing programs or

saewide candidaes, including judges.133

Te ask orce ound ha public nancing orjudicial candidaes could generae greaer public condence in he cours and could be

easible, aordable, and poenially popular among voers.134

Some public nancing programs were recenly called ino quesion by a U.S. Supreme

Cour decision. In 2011 he U.S. Supreme Cour ruled unconsiuional an Arizona

public nancing sysem ha included maching unds, which were awarded o publicly

nanced candidaes whenever heir opponens spen more money han he amoun avail-

able hrough he public subsidy.135 Te Cour ruled ha his radiional orm o maching

unds was an unconsiuional penaly on he privaely nanced candidaes speech. 136

Te sae o New York, however, is currenly looking o pioneer a dieren ype o

maching-unds sysem ha does no raise he same consiuional concerns. Te sae

legislaure is considering a small-donor maching sysem in which each dollar o dona-

ions under $175 would be mached wih $6 in public unds.137 New York Ciy has had

such a sysem in place or municipal elecions, and Te Campaign Finance Insiue

ound ha i has resuled in more diverse represenaives whose campaigns are unded

by middle- and working-class consiuens.138


15/20


Such a sysem could have he same impac on Illinoiss high cour elecions. Te average

campaign conribuion or he winning candidae in 2012, Democraic Jusice Mary Jane

Teis, was more han $1,000,139 bu wih small-donor maching, smaller donaions would

play a more imporan role. Te ask orce noed ha public nancing could encourage

more candidaes or judicial ofce and greaer diversiy among he candidaes.140

Conclusion

Illinois has already aken one sep oward curbing he inuence o campaign cash. When

Jusice Karmeier was eleced in 2004, Illinois had no limis on campaign conribu-

ions, which allowed Sae Farm o give money o organizaions ha hen donaed huge

sums o money o Jusice Karmeiers campaign. Parly in response o he 2004 Illinois

Supreme Cour race, Illinois insiued campaign-conribuion limis in 2009141 aimed a

prevening eniies such as Sae Farm rom unneling millions o dollars o hird paries

who could hen conribue ha money o judicial candidaes.

In is 20132014 erm, he U.S. Supreme Cour will hear a lawsui challenging he

consiuionaliy o limis on he overall amoun o money ha a person or corporaion

can give o candidaes in ederal elecions.142 For each elecion cycle, ederal law limis

overall donaions o ederal candidaes and poliical acion commitees.143 Alhough his

lawsui only challenges overall limis and no he limis on conribuions o individual

candidaes, Proessor Richard L. Hasen o he Universiy o Caliornia, Irvine old Te

New York imes ha, Tis could be he sar o chipping away a conribuion limis.144

Alhough i migh seem obvious ha Congress and sae legislaures should have he

power o limi campaign conribuions o preven corrupion, his is he same U.S.

Supreme Cour ha ruled in Ciizens Unied ha unlimied independen spending inpoliical campaigns does no give rise o corrupion or he appearance o corrupion.145

Te acs surrounding heAvery v. Sae Farm case prove ha unlimied direc conribu-

ions o candidaes have he poenial o creae conics o ineres ha cause he public

o doub he inegriy o judges. Sae Farm is accused o giving millions o dollars o

hird paries who hen gave ha money o a judge hearing a case involving a $1 billion

verdic agains he insurance company.

More imporanly, Sae Farm is accused o concealing hese aciviies rom he public

and he res o he Illinois Supreme Cour, even hough Jusice Karmeier was allegedly

aware o he liigans unding and operaion o his campaign. Te curren RICO lawsui

can unearh he ruh abou Sae Farms acions.


16/20


Te RICO lawsui comes a an inconvenien ime or Jusice Karmeier, whose curren

erm ends nex year. Once Illinois jusices are eleced in a parisan, conesed elecion,

hey serve 10-year erms beore sanding in reenion elecions, in which voers decide

wheher o keep hem on he bench or no.146 While voers are considering ha decision

in regard o Jusice Karmeier in 2014, hey could learn ha Sae Farm secrely spen

millions o dollars o elec Jusice Karmeier in 2004 in an eor o avoid a $1 billion ver-

dic agains isel. Wihou a billion-dollar verdic pending beore he Illinois SupremeCour, can Jusice Karmeier coun on Sae Farm o oer similarly generous suppor or

his 2014 reenion campaign?

Illinois should ac now, beore here is anoher judicial-campaign scandal, o imple-

men sronger rules governing judicial ehics and campaign nance. Such acion could

help ensure ha he inegriy o he cour is no quesioned. A poll o Illinois voers

aken jus aer he 2004 elecion ound ha 89 percen believed ha campaign conri-

buions inuence he decisions o Illinois judges o some degree.147 Lawmakers and he

high cour jusices should enac new rules o minimize he inuence o campaign cash

on he judiciary and assure liigans ha he opposing paries are no secrely inuenc-ing he judges hearing he case.

About the authors

Billy Corriher is he Associae Direcor o Research or Legal Progress a he Cener or

American Progress, where his work ocuses on sae cours and he inuence o polii-

cal conribuions on judges. Corriher joined CAP aer serving as a weekly blogger or

Noice and Commen, he Harvard Law & Policy Review blog, where he ocused on

ederal appellae cour cases and oher legal and policy maters. He has also writenop-eds and blog poss or he American Consiuion Sociey and he Bill o Righs

Deense Commitee. Corriher received his bachelors degree in poliical science rom

he Universiy o Norh Carolina a Chapel Hill. He received a law degree and a masers

degree in business rom Georgia Sae Universiy, graduaing wih honors in 2009. He is

a member o he Sae Bar o Georgia.

Brent DeBeaumont is a summer inern or Legal Progress a he Cener or American

Progress. Prior o inerning wih CAP, DeBeaumon served as a policy advocae inern

wih he American Civil Liberies Union o Washingon sae and as a legal clerk wih

a Seatle law rm. He grew up on a arm in easern Washingon and received his bach-

elors degree in hisory and poliical science rom Washingon Sae Universiy in 2010.

DeBeaumon is currenly a hird-year law suden a Seatle Universiy School o Law

and plans o ake he Washingon Sae Bar Exam nex summer. He has dedicaed his

career o providing access o jusice or all individuals and advancing he legal proec-

ions or our naions mos vulnerable ciizens.


17/20


Endnotes

1 Steve Korris, State Farm Lawyers Seeking to Void Avery

Want Karmeier Deposition,Madison-St. Clair Record,August 7, 2013, available at http://madisonrecord.com/issues/332-class-action/257988-state-arm-lawyers-seeking-to-void-avery-want-karmeier-deposition.

2 Order denying motion to dismiss, Hale v. State Farm Mut.

Auto. Ins. Co., No. 12-0660-DRH (S.D. Ill. Mar. 28, 2013).

3 18 U.S.C. 1961-1968.

4 Order denying motion to dismiss, Hale v. State Farm Mut.Auto. Ins. Co.

5 A 2010 poll rom Justice at Stake ound that 71 percent orespondents said they believe campaign expenditureshave a signicant impact on co urtroom decisions. Justice atStake, Solid Bipartisan Majorities Believe Judges Inuencedby Campaign Contributions, Press release, September 8,2010, available at http://www.justiceatstake.org/newsroom/press_releases.cm/9810_solid_bipartisan_majorities_be-lieve_judges_inuenced_by_campaign_contributions?show=news&newsID=8722.

6 Deborah Lohse, Policyholders at State Farm Win LawsuitOver Auto Parts, The Wall Street Journal, October 5, 1999,available at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/r/press/state-

arm2.htm.

7 Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 746 N.E.2d 1242, 1246(Ill. Ct. App. 2001).

8 Ibid.

9 Ibid. at 1242.

10 A Virginia newspaper ran an Associated Press account othe trial. Associated Press, Verdict against State Farm up to$1 billio n, The Free Lance-Star, October 9, 1999, available athttp://news.google.com/newspapers?id=pi4zAAAAIBAJ&sjid=gggGAAAAIBAJ&pg=2312,2115995&dq=state-arm+billion&hl=en.

11 Avery, 746 N.E.2d at 1242.

12 Brennan Center or Justice, Avery v. State Farm AutomobileIns. Co., February 3, 2006, available at http://www.bren-nancenter.org/legal-work/avery-v-state-arm-automobile-

ins-co.

13 Ibid.

14 Ill. Const. art. IV, 2.

15 Adam Skaggs, Judging or Dollars (New York: BrennanCenter or Justice, 2010), available at http://www.brennan-center.org/blog/judging-dollars.

16 Ibid.

17 National Institute on Money in State Politics, CandidateSummary: Karmeier, Lloyd A, available at http://www.ollowthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate.phtml?c=63204 (last accessed July 2013); National Instituteon Money in State Politics, Candidate Summary: Maag,Gordon E, available at http://www.ollowthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate.phtml?c=63221 (last ac-cessed July 2013).

18 Tim Jones, Special-interest lobbies pour cast into judicialraces, Chicago Tribune, July 28, 2008, available at http://arti-cles.chicagotribune.com/2008-07-28/news/0807280154_1_campaign-cash-wisconsin-supreme-court-judges.

19 American Tort Reorm Association, About ATRA, availableat http://www.atra.org/about (last accessed July 2013).

20 American Tort Reorm Association, New Report Cites SixJudicial Hellholes, Press release, December 13, 2005, avail-able at http://www.atra.org/newsroom/new-report-cites-six-judicial-hellholes%C2%AE.

21 Peter Lattman, Madison County, Illinois: A Judicial HellholeNo More, The Wall Street Journal, December 21, 2007,available at http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/12/21/madison-county-illinois-a-judicial-hellhole-no-more/.

22 American Tort Reorm Foundation, Madison and St. ClairCounties, Illinois, available at http://w ww.judicialhellholes.

org/2011-12/madison-and-st-clair-counties/ (last accessedJuly 2013).

23 Bethany Krajelis, Fith District arms Madison Countyruling in breach o contract c ase, The Madison-St. ClairRecord, February 4, 2013, available at http://madisonrecord.com/issues/892-breach-o-contract/252301-th-district-arms-madison-county-ruling-in-breach-o-contract-case.

24 Illinois Const., art. VI, 5.

25 David Lyle, Chamber-Owned News Service Reports On Su-preme Court Case Without Disclosing Parents Role, MediaMatters or America blog, June 19, 2012, available at http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/06/19/chamber-owned-news-service-reports-on-supreme-c/184135.

26 Ann Kne, Karmeier win bellows resoundi ng message,The Madison-St. Clair Record, November 5, 2004, availableat http://madisonrecord.com/issues/306-campaigns-

elections/130374-karmeier-win-bellows-resounding-message.

27 Ibid.

28 Lattman, Madison County, Illinois: A Judicial Hellhole NoMore.

29 American Tort Reorm Foundation, 2012/13 Judicial Hell-holes Report (2012), available at http://www.judicialhell-holes.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/ATRA_JH12_04.pd.

30 Matt Adrian, In the wake o a nasty campaign, Karmeiertakes his spot on the Illinois Supreme Court, Herald Review,December 7, 2004, available at http://herald-review.com/news/state-and-regional/in-the-wake-o-a-nasty-campaign-karmeier-takes-his/article_6d72ae43-421d-5975-b6e-7cbd34892a10.html.

31 Plaintifs Motion or Non-Participation,Avery v. State FarmMut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 91494 (Ill. Jan. 26, 2005).

32 Brennan Center or Justice, Avery v. State Farm AutomobileIns. Co.

33 Ibid.

34 Petition to Recall Mandate and Vacate August 18, 2005Judgment,Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 91494(Ill. Sept. 8, 2011), available at http://barrettlawgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Petition.pd.

35 Ill. Code o Judicial Conduct, Canon 3(C).

36 Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 835 N.E.2d 801 (Ill.2005).

37 Ill. Const. art. VI, 3.

38 Avery, 835 N.E.2d 801.

39 Brennan Center or Justice, Avery v. State Farm AutomobileIns. Co.

40 Common Cause, Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board Request orInvestigation o Justice Lloyd A. Karmeier, p. 13, available athttp://www.commoncause.org/at/c/%7BFB3C17E2-CDD1-4DF6-92BE-BD4429893665%7D/JIB_COMPLAINT_AND_HAZARD_AFFIDAVIT.PDF.

41 Ibid.

42 Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 547 U.S. 1003 (2006)(denying petition or certiorari).


18/20


43 Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (2009).

44 Ibid., p. 873.

45 Ibid., pp. 886887.

46 Ibid., p. 886.

47 McClatchy-Tribune Inormation Services, Suit: State Farmcovered up donations to justice who voted in its avor,Chicago Tribune, September 15, 2011, available at http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-15/news/chi-suit-state-arm-covered-up-donations-to-justice-who-voted-in-

its-avor-20110915_1_state-arm-dick-luedke-recuse.

48 Caperton, 556 U.S. at 884.

49 Ibid., p. 873.

50 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

51 McClatchy-Tribune Inormation Services, Suit: State Farmcovered up donations to justice who voted in its avor.

52 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

53 Ibid.

54 National Institute on Money in State Politics, NoteworthyContributor Summary: U.S. Chamber o Commerce, 2004,available at http://www.ollowthemoney.org/database/topcontributor.phtml?u=2714&y=2004&incy=0&ince=0&incs=0&inc=0 (last accessed August 2013).

55 Ibid.

56 Ibid.; National Institute on Money in State Politics, Candi-date Summary: K armeier, Lloyd A.

57 Class-action complaint, Hale v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,p. 10.

58 Ibid.

59 Ibid., p. 23. The $1,941,453 spent to elect Justice Karmeieramounts to 94.7 percent o the $2.05 million donation.

60 Petition to Recall Mandate and Vacate August 18, 2005Judgment,Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., p. 24.

61 Order denying motion to dismiss, Hale v. State Farm Mut.Auto. Ins. Co., p. 2.

62 The Center or Media and Democracy, Illinois Civil Justice

League, available at http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Illinois_Civil_Justice_League (last accessed August2013); Illinois Civi l Justice League, About, available athttp://www.icjl.org/about/ (last accessed July 2013).


64 Ibid., p. 19.

65 An Illinois campaign-nance disclosure orm describes inkind contributions as Contributions other than cash valuedin excess o $150. Illinois State Board o Elec tions, Instruc-tions or Completion o This D-2 Form (2011), available athttp://www.elections.il.gov/Downloads/CampaignDisclo-sure/PDF/2011_D-2.pd (last accessed July 2013).


67 Ibid., p. 19.

68 Ibid., pp. 24, 28.

69 Ibid., p. 20.

70 Ibid.

71 Ibid.

72 As an entity organized under Section 501(c)(6) o theInternal Revenue Code, the Illinois Civil Justice League mustle reports detailing its expenditures. Department o theTreasury, Internal Revenue Service, Tax-Exempt Status orYour Organization (2011), available at http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pd/p557.pd.

73 Internal Revenue Service, Form 990: Return o OrganizationExempt rom Income Tax, Illinois Civil Justice League, 2004(2005), available at http://990s.oundationcenter.org/990_pd_archive/363/363857949/363857949_200412_990O.pd.

74 Foundation Center, 990 Finder: Illinois Civil Justice

League, available at http://990nder.oundationcenter.org/990results.aspx?990_type=&n=Illinois+Civil+Justice+League&st=&zp=&ei=&y=&action=Find (last accessed July2013).

75 Ibid.

76 Illinois State Board o Elections, A Guide To CampaignDisclosure, available at http://www.elections.il.gov/down-loads/campaigndisclosure/pd/campdiscguide.pd.

77 Illinois State Board o Elections, Citizens or Karmeier: D-2Semiannual Report, 7/1/2004 to 12/31/2004, February 2,2005, available at http://www.elections.il.gov/CampaignDis-closure/D2Semi.aspx?id=292046.

78 Ibid.

79 Billy Corriher, Meet Four Conservative State SupremeCourt Justices Thankul For Citizens United, ThinkProgress,

November 30, 2012, available at http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/11/30/1240641/meet-our-conservative-state-supreme-court-justices-thankul-or-citizens-united.

80 When an individual or political committee pays or acommunication that is coordinated with a candidate orparty committee, the communication is considered anin-kind contribution to that candidate or party commit-tee and is subject to the limits, prohibitions and reportingrequirements o the ederal campaign nance law. FederalElection Commission, Coordinated Communications andIndependent Expenditures (2007), available at http://www.ec.gov/pages/brochures/indexp.shtml. Illlinois law denesindependent expenditures as spending that is not made inconnection, consultation, or concert with or at the requestor suggestion o the publ ic ocial or c andidate. 10 Il.C.S.5/9-1.15.

81 Illinois State Board o Elections, Citizens or Karmeier.

82 Illinois State Board o Elections, JUSTPAC, the Political

Action Committee o the IL Civil: D-2 Semiannual Report,7/1/2004 to 12/31/2004, January 28, 2005, available athttp://www.elections.il.gov/CampaignDisclosure/D2Semi.aspx?id=289924.

83 Ibid.

84 Petition to Recall Mandate and Vacate August 18, 2005Judgment,Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., p. 22.

85 McClatchy-Tribune Inormation Services, Suit: State Farmcovered up donations to justice who voted in its avor.


87 Rebecca Cohen, Blagojevich guilty on 17 o 20 corruptioncharges, The Daily Northwestern, June 26, 2011, available athttp://dailynorthwestern.com/2011/06/26/city/blagojevich-guilty-on-17-o-20-corruption-charges/.

88 18 USC 1962 (a).

89 18 USC 1964 (c).

90 Grantham & Mann, Inc., v. American Safety Prods., Inc., 831F.2d 596, 606 (6th Cir. 1987).

91 Town of Kearny v. Hudson Meadows Urban Renewal Corp., 829F.2d 1263, 1269 (3d Cir. 1987).


19/20


20/20

131 Ibid.

132 Ibid.

133 Illinois Campaign Finance Reorm Task Force, PublicCampaign Financing and Illinois Elections (2011), availableat http://www.elections.il.gov/Downloads/CampaignDisclo-sure/PDF/Campaign%20Finance%20Reorm%20Task%20Force%20Public%20Finance%20Report.pd.

134 Ibid., pp. 6566.

135 Arizona Free Enterprise Clubs Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett,

131 S.Ct. 2806 (2011).

136 Ibid., pp. 28142815.

137 Andy Kroll, New Yorks Gov. Cuomo Unveils His Own Billto Battle Big-Money PoliticsBut Does It Matter?, Mother

Jones, June 12, 2013, available at http://w ww.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/andrew-cuomo-bill-public-nancing-corruption-new-york.

138 Michael Malbin, Peter Brusoe, and Brendan Glavin, SmallDonors, Big Democracy: New York Citys Matching Funds asa Model or the Nation and States,Election Law Journal11(1) (2012): 320.

139 National I nstitute on Money in State Politics, CandidateSummary: Theis, Mary Jane, available at http://www.ollowthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate.phtml?c=136591 (last accessed July 2013).

140 I llinois Campaign Finance Reorm Task Force, Public Cam-paign Financing and Il linois Elections, p. 66.

141 2009 Ill. Laws 832.

142 U.S. Sup reme Court, No. 12-536 McCutcheon v. FederalElection Commission, Questions Presented, available athttp://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/12-00536qp.pd.

143 2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(1).

144 Adam Liptak, Justices Take Case on Overall Limit toPolitical Donations, The New York Times, February 19, 2013,

available at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/us/politics/supreme-court-to-hear-campaign-nance-case.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.

145 Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310, 357 (2010).

146 American Judi cature Society, Methods o Judicial Selection,available at http://www.judicialselection.us/judicial_selec-tion/methods/selection_o_judges.cm?state (last accessedJuly 2013).

147 University o Illinois at Springeld, Illinois Statewide SurveyOn Judicial Selection Issues.

dodging a billion-dollar verdict

Documents