Meroni v. Illinois State Board of Elections, is a constitutional challenge to the Illinois Election Code and its lack of any reasonable proof of citizenship for candidates, while Illinois law effectively blocks any citizen from conducting an investigation.  The argument is that the combined effect of the laws is to create a constitutional deprivation under the Illinois State Constitution, which provides an expansive view of the guaranteed “right to vote,” which includes the right to challenge candidates.

Our challenge in the Cook County Circuit Court moves to a new phase today.  The three Defendants, the ISBE (represented by the Attorney General), Dan Duffy (lawyer Matthew Welch ), and Amanda Howland (lawyer Michael Kasper) will respond to our petition.  We will update you with copies of the pleadings as soon as possible.

Steve Boulton will write a response to these pleadings, and we will be in Court on Thursday, February 12th for the hearing.

Some history:

Meroni  v. ISBE

On Tuesday January 24th, Meroni v ISBE was called for its first hearing in the Circuit Court in downtown Chicago.  Our counsel, Steve Boulton, immediately demanded and was granted reassignment to a new judge after the first Judge disclosed that she had a past client relationship with one of the defense attorneys.   The Hon. Mark Ballard was assigned as the new judge by random draw on a computer.  The lawyers then met with Judge Ballard who came to the Bench to meet the lawyers and set the schedule.

It is important to stress that this proceeding is about the process, rather than taken with sole intent to knock candidates off the ballot.   We suspect that Mr. Duffy and Ms. Howland will not have any trouble establishing citizenship if required.  But the issue is that candidates should have to come up with some credible proof when they file to be candidates, not later at an election board hearing.    Illinois law forces candidates to present loads of proof of signatures and community support, but nothing about citizenship other than a self-serving statement of the candidate.  A citizen is given as little as five days to object, and other Illinois laws effectively block review of the only real evidence such as birth certificates and government records. Ironically, even when offered a birth certificate as proof at the time a candidate files his nomination papers, under current law the ISBE cannot accept it for filing.

The constitutional issue was never addressed by the ISBE, as Illinois law does not authorize the board to consider such issues.

The responding parties, which are Illinois State Senate candidates Dan Duffy (R) and  Amanda Howland (D), as well as the ISBE (represented by the Illinois Attorney General),  will file responses to our petition on Monday, January 30 , 2012.   We will likely file a quick rebuttal before the case is before Judge Ballard on Thursday February 2, 2012 for full hearing and his final ruling.  This challenge is discussed in earlier stories.  If Judge Ballard rules against us, which is entirely possible, given that this is essentially a “test case” on a point of law never raised before in the Illinois courts, we will appeal.

The response of attorney Michael Kasper, counsel for Howland, will likely be the most interesting.  Mr. Kasper is a highly regarded election law lawyer, and the chief election attorney for the Democratic Party in Illinois.  On multiple occasions he has stated that there is a valid question as to requiring more proof from the candidates, but we know he will, as a good lawyer, argue his clients’ case to the utmost.