Seventh Circuit Says Illinois Ballot Access Case is Moot

On March 22, the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion in Gill v Linnabary, 22-1653. This is the challenge to the petition requirement for independent candidates for U.S. House in Illinois. The law requires a petition of 5% of the last vote cast, except that in years ending with the numeral “two”, the requirement is exactly 5,000 signatures.

The case was filed in 2016 and had a complicated history. The plaintiff-candidate David Gill won injunctive relief in U.S. District Court in 2016, and was ordered on to the ballot. But then the 7th circuit countermanded that relief with a single sentence and no explanation. Then the case went back to the original U.S. District Court Judge to settle the declaratory relief. But then another U.S. District Court Judge had all his criminal cases taken away from him, and because he needed work, many civil cases were transferred to him. He then upheld the 5% requirement, making some factual errors.

Gill appealed, and the Seventh Circuit noted the factual errors, and sent the case back to be re-done. After the previous U.S. District Court judge recused himself, the case was given to a third U.S. District Court Judge, who upheld the requirement. Gill appealed to the Seventh Circuit again. Now, the Seventh Circuit has declared the case moot on the grounds that the district he had wanted to run in back in 2016 no longer exists, due to redistricting. The Seventh Circuit said that part of Gill’s arguments involved the particular characteristics of the district, which didn’t have any real population centers in it, which made petitioning more difficult.

Never before had a constitutional ballot access case been held moot because of intervening redistricting. The Seventh Circuit vacated the U.S. District Court decision, which means the slate on the issue is wiped clean, and a new lawsuit can be filed, and it probably will be. The Seventh Circuit decision is by Judge Michael B. Brennan, and is also signed by Judges Michael Y. Scudder and Amy J. St. Eve, all Trump appointees.

The uncontradicted evidence showed that no petitioning candidate for U.S. House in Illinois had managed to complete the 5% petition successfully, if the candidate was challenged, since 1974. In Illinois, unchallenged candidates get on the ballot automatically if the number of signatures they submitted equalls at least 10% of the requirement.

Illinois and Georgia have the two most difficult petition requirements in the nation for U.S. House. They are the only two states with a 5% petition requirement for that office. Although South Carolina also has a 5% petition requirement for U.S. House, the number of signatures is capped at 10,000.


Comments

Seventh Circuit Says Illinois Ballot Access Case is Moot — 16 Comments

  1. WHEN WILL ALL MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER REGIMES COPY AL/IL ROT ???

    >>> IE — NOOOO THIRD PARTIES / INDES CANDIDATES ON BALLOTS.

  2. How do people here understand “fascist” to mean? I don’t think most of you are using it the way I meant it.

  3. SEE MUSSOLINI AND HITLER *** FASCIST *** REGIMES — WITH RESULTING WARS, MASS MURDERS AND DESTRUCTION.

    WEAPONS BIZ MADE BIG CASH.

    ANY FASCISM WIKI ???

  4. NOOO SHORTAGE OF DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS OF ALL POLITICAL STUFF —

    AIDED BY WIKIS / ENCYCS / POLISCI BOOKS / HISTORY BOOKS / WAR CRIMES TRIALS / THE LAWS / EXEC ORDERS AND JUDIC CASES IN ALL REGIMES / ETC.

  5. I’m not looking for dictionary definition of the term. After all, I defined it. I am looking for how people here understand it, because the context of their usage seems to suggest that they are using it far too broadly to refer to a lot of things which I never intended to include under its umbrella.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.