Illinois Supreme Court rejects motion questioning its impartiality

The Chicago Reader reporter:

If you were given an important matter to decide and asked if you could decide it fairly, you're probably vain enough to say, of course. But suppose you were then told that your decision must not only be fair but appear fair. Would uncertainty set in? You might reply, That depends on who's looking. Or possibly, If some people think I'm biased, I can't help that. Or, Gimme a break! This is Illinois, where nothing appears fair.

A month ago such a matter was presented to the Illinois Supreme Court. A motion filed with the court asked it to hear an appeal of a malpractice suit against an exceptionally high-powered Chicago law firm. But at the same time, four of the seven justices were asked to disqualify themselves from even considering the motion for this reason: because of their personal, professional, and political connections to the law firm, their impartiality could not be assumed.

The four justices presumably thought about this. On Monday they all rejected the idea.