The two newest Illinois Supreme Court justices Democrats Mary Kay O’Brien and Elizabeth Rochford each accepted at least $1M each from J.B. Pritzker in the last election cycle.  They also each accepted six-figures in cash from House Speaker Chris Welch’s cash prize closet.  Meanwhile, both Pritzker and Welch are named plaintiffs in Dan Caulkins’ legal challenge to the new Illinois Firearms Ban Act. 

In the coming weeks, that challenge is set to be heard in front of the Illinois Supreme Court.  Again, both Welch and Pritzker donated huge amounts of money to Mary Kay O’Brien and Elizabeth Rochford’s respective campaigns.  Each of those dollars donated represents a reason why these justices should recuse themselves…  or else.

The “or else” is to be formally disqualified from hearing the case.

Dan Caulkins filed a motion in court last week to formally request their recusal or force their hand and disqualify them if they won’t do the ethical thing.

The Cook County Record is covering the Motion for Recusal/Disqualification.

Saying the integrity of the Illinois Supreme Court itself is at stake, lawyers representing gun owners from Macon County have formally asked the court’s two newly elected justices, Democrats Elizabeth Rochford and Mary K. O’Brien, to step aside from hearing an appeal over the fate of the state’s ban on so-called assault weapons, because the justices accepted more than $2.6 million in campaign donations from Gov. JB Pritzker and other prominent Democrats, and also pledged during their campaigns last fall to support assault weapons bans.

On March 30, attorneys Jerrold H. Stocks and Brian D. Eck, of the firm of Featherstun Gaumer Stocks Flynn & Eck, of Decatur, filed a motion with the Illinois Supreme Court, requesting the two justices recuse themselves in a lawsuit which argues the new gun ban violates the Illinois state constitution.

The attorneys are representing a group of Macon County gun owners and sellers, notably led by State Rep. Dan Caulkins, R-Decatur, in one of the many pending legal challenges to the controversial Illinois ban on “assault weapons” and so-called large capacity magazines.

And why else, besides all the money from the named defendants, should they recuse?

Remember this story we posted before the last election?

G-PAC OUTING DEM CANDIDATES FOR IL SUPREME COURT? First Rule of Judicial Campaigning… ‘Shall NOT make pledges, promises or commitments… with respect to cases…likely to come before the court’

From that story, we posted a snip from the “Gun Violence Prevention PAC” (GPAC) website:

The G-PAC Board of Directors is proud to release its first round of endorsements leading up to the November 8, 2022 General Election.

To earn a gun safety endorsement, each candidate demonstrated strong support of the following policies:

  • Banning assault weapons 
  • Banning large-capacity magazines (LCMs)
  • Making ghost guns illegal, which G-PAC and Giffords helped pass into law earlier this year
  • Funding community violence intervention programs 
  • Funding a gun storage public awareness campaign

Each endorsed candidate supports our #1 legislative priority when the General Assembly is called into session: banning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. These weapons of war have been shown to contribute to both city violence and mass shootings.


Endorsed candidates with a good questionnaire.




Emphasis added.

But the problem is this little thing called the Illinois Judicial Code of Conduct, Canon 4.


So back to that featured photo at the top of the page.

That’s Elizabeth Rochford on the right, holding a “Moms Demand Action” cookie, posing alongside a bunch of Moms Demand Action activists.

Well now, Lil’ Lizzie surely seems to be playing fast and loose with judicial ethics.

As such, this makes two huge reasons why Lizzie needs to recuse.  

Or else.

And now the Chief Justice offered this…

7 thoughts on “TAINTED JUSTICE: A million+ reasons for two IL Supreme Court justices to recuse themselves – or else… Chief Justice ducks comment”
  1. The smugness with which the chief justice answered the question question. Spoke volumes. Jurisprudence is not in the lexicon of many Illinois jurists.

  2. I submit that Rochford in particular is no soubt royally pissed that she will have to recuse herself NOT ONLY on this case, but likely every other case where Prickster is a named party. OBrien too. Pritzker’s purchase of a pair of seats on the ISC just got spoiled.

  3. The democRAT-IKKK “party” ISN’T (“democratic”) totalitarian Marxist all!

  4. So what’s the remedy if a judge such as that simply says “No, I won’t recuse myself?”
    Other than just taking it further to SCOTUS, there’s really nothing one can do, right?

  5. That picture itself demands that this robed politician recuse from any gun case brought before ISC. It won’t happen, of course. Morality is whole absent from all Democraps. They are defective. Hypocrisy is their super power.

  6. I looked at those links to their campaigns. I see 2.5 million reasons those ladies ahould recuse.

Comments are closed.