Federal Courts Committee

Overview

The Federal Courts Committee works to improve the administration of justice in the federal courts. The committee’s standing agenda includes evaluating judicial nominees and assessing the procedures and resources of the federal courts to promote substantive justice for pro se and other litigants of limited resources. The committee collaborates with other organizations to identify projects for investigation, research, and publication. Illustrative projects include reports on nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and seeking to improve in forma pauperis qualification procedures.

Co-Chairs: Meghan Paulas & William Strom

Monthly Meetings: 3rd Wednesday at 12:00 PM

Current Projects

Federal Supervised Release Project

Mapping the utility of conditions of supervised release (which are set at the time of sentence, not at the time of eligibility for release); individual rehabilitation; standards of protections of rights and liberty; and rules of procedure
Research around the level of judicial discretion in supervised release and sentencing and issues related to “vaguely worded” conditions
Working to create an opportunity for students to gain court experience by providing counsel to people who otherwise would not have it; strategizing to figure out the best way to identify clients when there is no right to counsel in this situation

Seeking to Improve in forma pauperis qualification procedures in an effort to increase access to the federal courts

Positions

On Friday, August 31, 2018. the Chicago Council of Lawyers submitted a letter to Congress concerning the confirmation hearings of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, scheduled to begin on September 4, 2018:

After careful consideration, the Chicago Council of Lawyers opposes the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Judge Kavanaugh’s record suggests that he does not regard the role of a judge as that of a neutral arbiter but as a means to reaching certain outcomes. And while the Council does not ordinarily consider the substance of the candidates’ views when evaluating judges, the Supreme Court is a uniquely powerful institution, and Judge Kavanaugh’s views are uniquely extreme and troubling. If confirmed to the Supreme Court, Judge Kavanaugh will likely make justice less accessible to the disadvantaged and undermine the rule of law.

Furthermore, an unprecedented amount of records from Judge Kavanaugh’s prior service to the White House were not available for review as of Friday afternoon. Nothing short of full transparency is acceptable prior to lifetime appointment to the highest court. In the absence of a full and fair review of the judge’s record, confirmation at this time is an abdication of duty on the part of Congress.

The Chicago Council of Lawyers is a non-partisan public interest bar association that is dedicated to improving the quality of justice in the legal system by advocating for the fair and impartial administration of justice. For nearly 50 years, the Council has played an integral role in educating the public about the judicial system, including providing evaluations and recommendations to voters on the qualifications of judicial candidates in Cook County, as well as statements on the qualifications of nominees to the federal bench. The Council has also periodically vetted federal judicial candidates for Republican and Democratic Senators, and has published evaluations of sitting judges in the Chicago federal courts, including the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and the Northern District of Illinois.

The Council of Lawyers takes this responsibility seriously. Although it has not traditionally spoken out regarding Supreme Court nominees, these are extraordinary circumstance. And the Council of Lawyers could not, in conscience remain silent.

Chicago Council of Lawyers’ Evaluation of Brett Kavanaugh (Aug 31 2018)

Chicago's Public Interest Bar Association