On May 1, U.S. District Court Judge Sue Myerscough declined to grant ballot access relief to proponents of some local Illinois initiatives, because the petition deadline for local initiatives is August 3, and the Governor’s order for social distancing expired May 29. The ruling said the proponents would be free to get their signatures after the Governor’s order expired on May 29.

But on May 29, the Governor extended the social distancing order until June 28. So, on May 29, the proponents asked Judge Myerscough to re-open the case and grant relief. Bambenck v Althoff, c.d., 3:20cv-3107. Here is the request for reconsideration.

On Friday night, May 29, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order in South Bay United Pentecostal Church, 19A1044. Read it here. By 5-4, it upholds California’s limits on church services for the time being. Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the court’s four liberal members. The California rules limit attendance at churches to 100 persons, or 25% of the building capacity, whichever is less.

On Saturday, May 30, Ohio initiative proponents filed a brief in Thompson v DeWine, 20-3526, discussing the U.S. Supreme Court action. Thompson v DeWine is the case over whether Ohio should give ballot access relief to initiatives. The U.S. District Court had ruled favorably to the initiative proponents, but the Sixth Circuit had reversed the U.S. District Court. The Ohio initiative proponents the same day filed a petition for rehearing en banc. The Saturday brief is intended to bolster the case on behalf of ballot access relief.

An experienced professional petitioner recently attempted to petition for a minor party in Alaska. He reports that petitioning is much more difficult than in normal times. Wearing the mask creates problems. No one can see the petitioner’s smile. The petitioner’s voice is somewhat muffled, and in hot weather, wearing a mask is uncomfortable.

He was only able to obtain signatures at 40% of his normal rate in that location, which is in front of a grocery store.