* Interesting…
…Adding… This is the e-mail received by the attorneys…
OPINION: Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Relief (d/e [4]) is GRANTED. Defendants are ENJOINED from enforcing the Illinois Election Code’s signature requirement against David M. Gill, independent candidate for U.S. Representative in the 13th Congressional District in light of the fact that he has obtained 8,593 valid signatures and shown a modicum of support. Consequently, because it appears Gill otherwise qualifies to be on the ballot, this ruling requires that Gill remain on the ballot. (SEE WRITTEN OPINION) Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 8/25/2016. (GL, ilcd)
I don’t yet have the written opinion.
*** UPDATE *** The opinion is here.
[ *** End Of Update *** ]
* Bernie had a piece about the case today…
In a hearing Wednesday, Gill was seeking a preliminary injunction that would prevent the State Board of Elections from removing his name from the ballot despite an earlier State Board of Elections staff review that found Gill had 8,593 signatures considered valid. The number he needed, under state law, was 10,754, and he had turned in more than 11,300.
But Gill claims the law is unconstitutional because so many signatures are required. While Republican and Democratic candidates have to go through a primary to get on the November ballot, they also need to collect fewer than 740 petition signatures each. Gill’s case is based on the idea that the threshold for independents and third-party candidates is so high that it creates an unfair burden.
Gill has noted that independent candidates for U.S. Senate in Illinois have to gather five times the 5,000 signatures required of major-party candidates for that statewide office, but as an independent House candidate, he is required to gather nearly 15 times what a Democrat or Republican needs.
“The point of me running as an independent is because people have been poorly served by both major parties for the last 30 or 40 years, and now we’re seeing both major parties try to keep me from being on the ballot, and I think it’s entirely unconstitutional the way in which they’re doing so,” Gill said after the hearing.
