On December 18, U.S. District Court Judge Colin S. Bruce, an Obama appointee, upheld the Illinois petition requirement for U.S. House for independent candidates and the nominees of unqualified parties. Gill v Scholz, 3:16cv-3221. The 22-page opinion says that no trial is needed because it is obvious that the law is constitutional, because in 2017 the Seventh Circuit upheld the 5% petition for legislative candidates in Tripp v Scholz. The two candidate-plaintiffs in Tripp v Scholz needed 2,399 signatures and 2,407 signatures. David Gill, the plaintiff in the U.S. House case, needed 10,754 valid signatures.
The fallacy in this opinion is that the number of signatures needed for a legislative candidate is far less than the number needed for U.S. House, and that is reflected in the history of successful usage of the petition for each type of office. No one has successfully completed the 5% petition for U.S. House in Illinois since 1974, when a candidate succeeded in getting 8,593 valid signatures. This statement is true for all candidates who were challenged. In Illinois, a candidate whose petition is not challenged is put on the ballot automatically if his or her petition contains a number of signatures equal to 10% of the requirement.
By contrast, many independent and unqualified party nominees for Illinois legislature have succeeded in getting on the ballot during the last 50 years, even when they were challenged.
Originally, the Gill case was assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Sue Myerscough, another Obama appointee who issued an injunction putting Gill on the ballot in August 2016. The state then appealed, and the Seventh Circuit removed him just before the election, but without explaining why. The case then returned to the U.S. District Court, and a trial was expected. But then the case was re-assigned to Judge Bruce, who wrote today’s opinion and who cancelled the trial.