The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Stevo v Keith, 08-1187, at its May 14 conference. Stevo v Keith challenges Illinois law, which says that in some election years independent candidates for U.S. House need 5,000 signatures, but in other years they need 5% of the last vote cast, which is usually 10,000 or more. Since no independent candidates for U.S. House ever qualified in any of the years in which only 5,000 were required, Stevo asks why the state should ever require more than 5,000.
I do not to get anyone’s hopes up here. Even if they take the case they do not seem have a problem with something as high as 5%…
Yes, but in 1979 they struck down the 5% as applied to Mayor of Chicago (which was then a partisan office), in Illinois State Elections Board v Socialist Workers Party. That decision was unanimous. In the recent Stevo case, the 7th circuit didn’t even mention that precedent, even though it is the closest US Supreme Court precedent for the Stevo issues.
Also in 1992 the US Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that Illinois could not require the Harold Washington Party to get 50,000 signatures in order to have any of its candidates for Cook County Commissioner on the ballot. That case was Norman v Reed. In the recent Stevo case, the 7th circuit didn’t mention Norman v Reed either.
In 1979, Illinois required more signatures to qualify a party in Chicago than it did for the entire state of Illinois. They specifically rejected application of an earlier case Jackson v. Ogilvie that had upheld a 5% signature requirement.
What happens if Stivo wins? It will simply lock in 5000 as being valid for congressional races.