(The Lion) — An Illinois circuit court judge is suing the state Supreme Court for circumventing its designated authority and unconstitutionally dismissing him without warning.

When Judge James R. Brown received orders for a temporary reappointment to an Illinois district bench, he was overjoyed to return to “his passion” and “serve the people of Cook County.”

“It was the greatest job in the world, the greatest honor to apply the law and the facts of the cases and deliver justice to people,” Brown told The Lion in an interview, referring to the role of a judge as a “noble calling.”

But within six weeks, he was abruptly dismissed in a one-sentence phone call without further explanation. Eventually, Brown discovered the court vacated his seat for expressing a political opinion in an article published before he even applied for the temporary position, according to private statements from the Illinois Supreme Court.

Previously, Brown had served 18 years on the bench before retiring after a cancer diagnosis in 2020. His last day was scheduled for June 2020, but the statewide closures during the COVID-19 pandemic abruptly ended his service March 13, 2020.

An unexpected recall to the bench

On Sept. 5, 2025, Brown published an op-ed critiquing the use of lawfare to punish political enemies. On Sept. 22, the Illinois Supreme Court issued a recall of judges for a yearlong temporary appointment to reduce a backlog of cases in the Cook County Circuit Court. Brown applied and received orders on Dec. 11 to return to the seat for a one-year term without a single interview or any correspondence with the state Supreme Court. He rejoined the court Dec. 15.

“It was like a gift from heaven for me to do one more year and close it out and go out the right way,” he said.

Within six weeks, Brown heard more than 1,000 cases. But on Jan. 26, 2026, Cook County Circuit Court Chief Judge Charles Beach called Brown and said the state Supreme Court had “vacated his recall.”

“I was absolutely devastated. I was humiliated,” Brown said.

Legal policies for judges according to the Illinois Constitution

The Illinois Constitution offers two avenues for the removal of justices: impeachment through the Legislature or official review by the Judicial Inquiry Board for the Illinois Courts Commission, said Brendan Philbin, senior counsel at Liberty Justice Center, which is representing Brown. Illinois Supreme Court justices have no role in judicial discipline and the Supreme Court clearly disregarded this constitutional system in this case, Philbin said.

“The Supreme Court justices, by doing this, acted without authority,” he said. “Judge Brown got no hearing. He didn’t even get a written removal. He got a phone call that said, ‘Hey, don’t come to work on Monday,’ which is disgraceful.”

The Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct restricts sitting judges from issuing political statements to avoid undermining judicial impartiality, Philbin explained. But Brown’s article was published before the Illinois Supreme Court even requested a return of retired judges, meaning the policy was not applicable to Brown at that time, Philbin said.

“Judge Brown was a private citizen when he wrote those statements, so applying that Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct to him really has no authority,” he said. “The code applies to sitting judges and judicial candidates. Judge Brown is neither of those. He was just a private citizen.”

Brown’s judicial career

Brown said he always remained impartial as a judge and never brought his personal opinions into the courtroom.

“My philosophy has been this and always will be this: I am only guided by my oath, the law and the facts,” he said. “I treated everybody as though I was standing on the other side of the bench. How would I want to be treated? And that’s how I judge every case I’ve ever heard.”

Brown heard approximately 300,000 cases during his 18 years on the bench and was never accused of being partial or skewing a ruling based on political opinion, according to Liberty Justice Center.

“I had never received a complaint about my fairness or being impartial in my entire 18 years,” Brown said. “Nobody ever complained about my conduct on the bench, ever. I never had a negative accusation made against me in my entire judicial career.”

Holding the Illinois Supreme Court accountable under the law

Liberty Justice Center is claiming the state Supreme Court violated Brown’s First Amendment free speech rights as a private citizen and his right to procedural due process under the 14th Amendment. The court’s application of the Illinois Judicial Code to retired judges also unconstitutionally restricts the speech of more than 300 retired judges in the state who may wish to return to the bench, according to the lawsuit.

“Based on this precedent that Court set with Judge Brown, those retired judges have a choice: Either they can be muzzled and hope that they may get invited to come out of retirement for a year, or they can speak their mind,” Philbin said. “The Illinois Supreme Court would probably disagree with them, in which case they forego any ability to go back onto the bench.”

Additionally, Judge Ramon Ocasio III of the 1st District Court of Appeals in Illinois writes a regular column in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Philbin noted. Ocasio has discussed critical race theory, law enforcement and various other matters of public concern while maintaining his seat on the bench and even receiving a promotion to the appellate court – a shocking double standard considering Brown’s case, Philbin said.

Oral arguments to re-establish Brown in his seat

In oral arguments Wednesday, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois was most interested in the location of the proceedings, specifically addressing the principle of federalism: whether a federal court should tell a state court what to do, Philbin said. Brown’s case belongs in the federal court system, Philbin insists. Otherwise, if filed in state court, the lawsuit would eventually reach the Illinois Supreme Court – the very body Brown is suing.

Liberty Justice Center asked the district court to reinstate Brown to his temporary seat while legal proceedings regarding the state Supreme Court’s alleged violation of Brown’s First and 14th Amendment rights and the unfair application of judicial policy to retired judges continue.

“I’m praying that I could go back on the bench and fulfill and finish my career the correct way,” said Brown, who has been cleared to work by his doctors. “I got cut short because of my illness and COVID, and I want a chance to finish it the right way. I love doing what I was doing when I was on the bench, and I feel like I’m contributing to society again, and that’s what I want to do. I want to help.”