Appellate Court Overturns Board of Elections; Leaves Three Supreme Court Judicial Candidates On Ballot –

Illinois (ECWd) –

“The candidates [Susan F. Hutchinson, Mark Curran, and Nancy Rodkin Rotering] each submitted enough signatures to appear on the ballots seeking their respective parties’ nomination for a seat on our supreme court. The circuit court’s judgment reversing the Board’s decision and ordering the candidates’ names to appear on the ballots is affirmed.”

Candidates Susan F. Hutchinson, Mark Curran, and Nancy Rodkin Rotering for the Second Judicial Seat on the Illinois Supreme Court faced objections to their candidacy claiming they did not submit the required number of signatures. The Illinois State Board of Elections held hearings and removed all three from the ballot, the ISBE decision was appealed to the Cook County circuit court who overturned the ISBE decision and ordered the candidate’s names appear on the ballot.

The circuit court decision was appealed to the Dirst Appellate Court, who upheld the circuit court’s decision in overturning the ISBE and ordering those candidate’s names to appear on the ballot.

This dispute over signature requirement came after the state legislature amended the Illinois Judicial Circuits Act and the Election Code related to signature requirements.

The new Second Judicial District includes only DeKalb, Kane, Kendall, Lake, and McHenry Counties. The previous district also included Boone, Carroll, DuPage, Jo Davies, Lee, Ogle, Stephenson, and Winnebago counties.

The numbers of signatures required are calculated based on the numbers of voters in the last election, and the circuit court determined that since the new Second Judicial circuit did not exist in its current form during the last election, the calculations could not be relied upon, and both courts interpreted the “catch-all” provision of 500 signatures reduced to 334 signatures as the only provision controlling signature requirements for the Second Judicial District. All three candidates met or exceeded the 334-signature requirement.

Read the Appellate Court Opinion: