Judge Orders 3 Illinois Supreme Court Candidates Returned To Ballot

CHICAGO — A judge on Thursday reversed last month's decision by the state elections board to remove two Republicans and a Democrat from their parties' Illinois Supreme Court primary ballots.

Cook County Circuit Judge Maureen Hannon ruled the three candidates had each collected sufficient signatures for their names to appear on the ballot in the June 28 elections to represent the newly redrawn 2nd Judicial District, now composed of DeKalb, Kendall, Kane, Lake and McHenry Counties.

The decision clears the way for 2nd District Appellate Court Judge Susan Hutchinson and former Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran to appear alongside 16th District Circuit Judge John Noverini and Lake County Circuit Judge Dan Shanes on the Republican Party's ballot, and for Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering to appear on the Democratic Party's ballot with 16th District Circuit Judge Rene Cruz and Lake County Associate Judge Elizabeth Rochford.

State law calculates the minimum number of signatures required to run for office based on a formula using turnout data from the last gubernatorial election, but "in no event less than 500" — which was further reduced when state lawmakers cut signature requirements by a third.

Objectors used the turnout formula for the new five-county to calculate that 791 signatures were needed to appear on the ballot as a Democrat and 757 to appear as a Republican.

But the candidates argued, and Hannon agreed, that since the new district did not exist in 2018, the number of signatures necessary to make it on the ballot should be interpreted as 334 — just as described in the Illinois State Board of Elections 2022 candidate's guide.

The judge's ruling also aligns with the recommendations of the election board's hearing officer and general counsel, which were rejected by the board on April 19.

Hannon said the interpretation of the law described in the candidate's guide was "not unreasonable and therefore has a presumption of correctness," according to her 6-page decision.

"Both sides assert that the language of the statute is clear and yet both sides have different interpretations. A statute is ambiguous if it is capable of being understood by reasonably well informed persons in two or more different ways," Hannon said.

"There is nothing in the plain language of section 10(h) that directs the candidates to calculate the minimum number of signatures by adding the vote totals in the counties that make up the newly configured Second Judicial District. It is true as the Objectors point out that it is possible to tally the votes of each County and come up with the numbers, but the statute directs that calculation to be made based on the 'number of signatures equal to 0.4% of the number of votes cast in that district for the candidate for his or her political party for the office of Governor at the last general election,'" the judge continued. "The new Second District did not vote in the last election."

Rotering is set to take part in her third Democratic Party primary, having come up short in previous bids for Illinois attorney general in 2018 and the U.S. Congress in 2016. Her campaign issued a statement after Hannon's ruling.

“We are grateful that the Court ruled in our favor today and upheld what we always knew to be true: that our nominating petitions complied with the Election Code," Rotering said. "This effort to distract from the real issues that matter to voters was unsuccessful. Fighting for fairness is why I am in this race."

Curran won the 2020 Republican Party primary for the U.S. Senate by nearly 20 percentage points over his nearest rival in the five-candidate field, later going on to lose to Democratic U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin by a 55-39 margin.

In a social media post responding to last month's state elections board decision, Curran criticized John Fogerty, an attorney representing the objectors to his petitions.

"Mr. Fogarty is also 'allegedly' the attorney for the Illinois Republican Party??? So, half the Candidates for Illinois Supreme Court had the wrong number of signatures??? I intend to appeal," Curran said.

"I know that Judge John Noverini was not behind my challenges," he continued. "My guess is that Dan Shanes, the other candidate in the race, does not want me talking about how his Masonic friends are clearing out the competition on his behalf, or how there is no way he is pro life or pro 2nd Amendment."

After the ruling, Curran told Patch he was glad to be back on the ballot.

"I am happy that the voters will have a chance to vote for someone with a record of defending life and liberty," he said in an email.

Patch also requested comment from Hutchinson, the other candidate reinstated to the ballot, and will provide any response received here.

Related: Electoral Board Tosses Trio Of Supreme Court Hopefuls Off Ballot, Candidates Appeal