If any vestige of Republican loyalty remains in the home state of America’s first Republican president, it certainly isn’t to be found in the halls of power. Illinois may have once been the land of Lincoln, but today it’s a Democrat’s dream. Former Cook County Judge James Brown (don’t get excited – he isn’t that James Brown) recently found this out the hard way. Judge Brown was removed by the Illinois Supreme Court for expressing his support for President Donald Trump – while he wasn’t even a judge. Now he’s suing to have that reversed. Can the state fire employees over their political opinions, or is this a violation of both his official rights as a judge and his basic First Amendment rights of free speech as an American?
The Democratic State of Illinois
Before we delve too deeply into the story of what happened to Judge James Brown, let’s assess the political state of Illinois. Governor JB Pritzker is a Democrat. US Senators Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth are both Democrats. Of 17 congressional districts for the US House, just three representatives are Republican. Democrats control a majority in the state senate (currently 40-19) and have done so without interruption since 2003. They hold the state house, as well (78-40), and have done so since 1997. And finally, the Democratic Party holds a 5-2 majority in the Illinois Supreme Court.
With that background in mind, it’s no great surprise that a Republican judge would face political persecution in this bluest of blue states. Still, the extent of that persecution is indeed shocking.
Judge Brown served Cook County for 18 years prior to his retirement in 2020. In September of 2025 – after half a decade of civilian life – he authored a guest column for John Kass News, a blog operated by the former Chicago Tribune columnist of the same name. In it, Brown criticized Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, claiming that the years of their administrations were “wracked with false accusations of systemic racism” and progressive-led “lawfare” against Donald Trump.
In December, the Illinois Supreme Court announced that Judge Brown and six others were being called temporarily back into service to fill vacancies in Cook County Circuit Court, with all seven assigned to traffic court through December 7, 2026. But the local left-wing lawyer associations – both the Chicago Council of Lawyers and the Cook County Bar Association – petitioned to have his appointment rescinded over the blog post, which they said made him unfit for Cook County’s courts. The state supremes obliged, and Brown, represented by constitutional rights advocacy group the Liberty Justice Center, sued in Chicago federal court to defend his rights. Lawyers from the office of Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul (yep, you guessed it: another Democrat) filed a motion with the court to toss Brown’s lawsuit.
Free Speech for All, or Just the Left?
In a brief filed in support of the AG’s motion, the Illinois Supreme Court justices argue that all judges must remain free of even the “appearance of impropriety.” James Brown’s post, it seems, transcends mere political opinion and crosses into the territory of “impropriety,” apparently. They actually claimed that this overrides the First Amendment rights of even retired judges. Further, the supremes say that federal courts have no jurisdiction over how they handle Illinois state judges, regardless of Brown’s rights.
Those championing Brown’s removal argued the post was “wildly inappropriate for a member of the judiciary to be making” and said he lacked the “temperament, judgement, independence, competence, impartiality and respect for the rule of law necessary for those who serve the judiciary.”
Normally, a judge facing removal would have a right to a hearing first – but not so far for Brown, according to the justices, as temporary judicial recall assignments are discretionary.
The federal court has yet to weigh in on the matter – at least publicly – so that remains an open issue. The US Supreme Court has, over the years, fully incorporated the First Amendment – meaning it doesn’t simply apply to the federal government, but states and municipalities as well. But setting aside the obvious constitutional contradiction, there’s another problem: hypocrisy.
Both Elizabeth Rochford and Mary O’Brien, two of the progressive Democrats in the Illinois Supreme Court, ran extremely partisan campaigns ahead of the 2022 elections, accepted millions in donations from Democrat Governor JB Pritzker, and, in general, refused to in any way abstain from nakedly partisan politics both before and during their time on the court. They both also refused to recuse themselves when it was time to consider the constitutionality of the state’s so-called assault weapons ban, despite clear bias in its favor and political alliance with the Democrats who made it law.
In the blue state of Illinois – and especially in Cook County, home of notoriously politically corrupt Chicago – neither the Constitution nor logic seems to matter. And again, given the state of the state, who’s really surprised?
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)