Home General Illinois Green Party Asks State Supreme Court to Preserve its Qualified Status in Some Districts
formats

Illinois Green Party Asks State Supreme Court to Preserve its Qualified Status in Some Districts

Published on December 26, 2011, by in General.

On December 23, the Illinois Green Party asked the State Supreme Court to hear its appeal in Illinois Green Party v Illinois State Board of Elections. This is the case over the interpretation of the state’s definition of “political party.” The election law says that group that is not a qualified party statewide is still a qualified party within any district or local jurisdiction, if that group got 5% of the vote within that area in the last election.

The Green Party polled over 5% if the vote in November 2010 in four U.S. House districts, and six State House districts. But, the state won’t recognize that the Green Party is still ballot-qualified, because the district boundaries changed this year. On December 22, the State Appeals Court refused any relief to the Green Party, except that it did authorize an expedited appeal to the State Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Green Party member Laurel Lambert Schmidt submitted 1,315 signatures to be on the Green Party primary ballot in the 3rd U.S. House district. If the State Supreme Court rules that the Green Party is still entitled to its own primary in that district, she will appear unopposed on the Green primary ballot. But if the State Supreme Court rules against the party, there will be no primary and all those signatures will have been gathered in vain.

If the Green Party is deemed not to have ballot status in any U.S. House district, it could then submit 5,000 signatures in any district by June 2012, the same as the procedure for any other unqualified party that wants to have a nominee in November for that office.

4 Responses

  1. Why wouldn’t this apply to the Republican and Democratic parties? It’s not like they were able to qualify in these districts that did not exist in 2010. That would mean all parties would need to re-qualify for ballot access every ten years.

    You can’t say, “well, theoretically, they would have likely attained the 5% threshold.” Well, you can but you’d be a partisan hypocrite.

  2. Demo Rep

    Separate is NOT equal.

    Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954 — now a mere 57 years ago — like centuries.

    Every election is NEW.

    Way too difficult for SCOTUS morons to detect.

  3. Richard Winger

    #1, parties that got at least 5% for Governor are ballot-qualified for everything in the state.

    In 1986, there was speculation that the Democratic Party ticket would not get as much as 5%, because the November ballot for the Democratic Party carried no one for Governor, and a LaRouche supporter for Lieutenant Governor. But the combined ticket got 6.6%, saving the Democratic Party.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Protected with SiteGuarding.com Antivirus