Well established law in Illinois states that a petition signor needs to be registered at the address they print on the petition. Also, a candidate must file a statement of candidacy in which the candidate swears they reside at a particular address, and are "qualified" voters at that address. I stated my opinion that Mell may be in trouble with this one. However, the hearing officer interpreted that statute differently then how I read it. She stated that being qualified to be a voter is different then being actually registered to vote, and therefore, there was no requirement in the statute that a candidate for the General Assembly be a registered voter at all. She also state "I find this additionally troubling because I cannot believe that the legislature intended for this particular office … that Candidates have a lesser connection to the voting process than petition signers." Interpreting the law as she did, the hearing officer rejected the petition challenge.
Laiacona is appealing the hearing officer's decision to the circuit court. Here is the sum of his argument (from the challenge memorandum of law which I obtained on Eric Zorn's blog):
Illinois Election Code §8-8 which sets the requirements for nominating papers for General Assembly candidates does not directly require that that the candidate be a registered voter but it indirectly does when it requires that the candidate, under oath, “shall state that the candidate is a qualified primary voter of the party to which the petition relates.” ...Because (Mell) was not a registered voter at the address from which she is seeking office although she claimed to be on her statement of candidacy and because (she) was not a registered voter capable of voting at any address in the district she seeks to represent at the time she signed and filed her statement of candidacy, the objection should be granted and, for now, (Mell) denied ballot access. Now that she is a registered voter at the address at which she resides in the District, she can seek election as a write-in, under the banner of a new party, or by appointment to a vacancy in nomination of which there will likely be two.
I am a constant objector to the harsh ballot access requirements in Illinois, and the proclivity of throwing people's names off the ballot for technical purposes. However, I am an even stronger objector of only giving deference to politically connected insiders. If technicalities is what wins the day, then I am inclined to be sympathetic to the challenge in this case.
