Brown v. Neville, et al.

The Liberty Justice Center filed a lawsuit on behalf of retired Cook County Circuit Court Judge James R. Brown against the justices of the Illinois Supreme Court who circumvented the Illinois Constitution and removed him from a temporary judicial assignment. The case challenges the justices’ decision to vacate Judge Brown’s recall appointment in retaliation for a political opinion column and podcast appearance Judge Brown made as a private citizen while in retirement and before even applying to return to the bench. In doing so, the Illinois Supreme Court failed to follow Illinois’ constitutional procedures required to remove a sitting judge and violated Judge Brown’s First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

Judge Brown served as a circuit court judge in Cook County, Illinois, from 2002 through 2020. During his 18 years on the bench, he presided over thousands of cases and consistently received strong evaluations from bar associations for his legal ability, fairness, and judicial temperament. After retiring with a spotless disciplinary record, he returned to the bench in 2025 when the Illinois Supreme Court issued an urgent call for retired judges to fill vacancies in the Circuit Court of Cook County. In December 2025, the court assigned Judge Brown to a one‑year recall term and placed him in the high‑volume Traffic Court, where he resumed hearing cases without any complaints about his performance or impartiality.

Only six weeks later, however, the Cook County Bar Association and Chicago Council of Lawyers publicly objected to Judge Brown’s assignment based solely on his commentary on the John Kass News blog and podcast back in September of 2025, in which he discussed national politics and the prosecution of President Trump. In response, without notice, without a hearing, and without referring any complaint to the Illinois Courts Commission, the Illinois Supreme Court revoked Judge Brown’s recall appointment by a one-sentence order. In a subsequent unsigned public statement, the court acknowledged that his protected speech during retirement was the reason his appointment was vacated—even though that speech occurred months before he applied to return to the bench and while he was not a judicial candidate subject to the Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct.

The removal of a sitting judge in Illinois may occur only through impeachment by the legislature or after notice and a public hearing before the Illinois Courts Commission. By bypassing these safeguards and punishing Judge Brown for his viewpoint as a private citizen, the justices violated his First Amendment rights and his Fourteenth Amendment rights to procedural due process. The Liberty Justice Center’s lawsuit also challenges the state’s attempt to treat retired judges as perpetually bound by judicial conduct rules in ways that chill a broad range of core political speech.

The Liberty Justice Center’s lawsuit seeks to restore Judge Brown to his recall position for the remainder of his term, to secure declaratory relief recognizing that the justices’ actions violated the U.S. Constitution, and to obtain damages for the economic and reputational harm Judge Brown has suffered.

“By removing Judge James Brown from the bench, the justices of Illinois Supreme Court chose politics over the rule of law,” said Brendan Philbin, Senior Counsel at the Liberty Justice Center. “In a frantic rush to obey the partisan directives of the Cook County Bar Association and Chicago Council of Lawyers, the justices ignored the Illinois Constitution and trampled on the First Amendment rights of Judge Brown. Considering Judge Brown’s long career of judicial service, he deserves better.”

Judges do not forfeit their right to speak on matters of public concern once they retire, and even the highest court in a state must follow the law when it seeks to remove a sitting judge.

Brown v. Neville, et al. was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on February 18, 2026.