Sangamon Sun

The Illinois Supreme Court recently upheld a lower court ruling that declared a controversial election law passed by Illinois Democrats unconstitutional. Senate Bill 2412, referred to by House Republicans as the “Katie Stuart Protection Act,” aimed to end the practice of allowing local party organizations to appoint candidates for the general election in uncontested legislative races. This slating process requires candidates to collect and file signed petitions from registered voters within their district. However, Democrats sought to eliminate this practice entirely.

Rep. Katie Stuart, a Metro East Democrat, faced no opposition in the March Primary, but local Republicans slated a candidate and filed the required petition signatures with the Illinois State Board of Elections hours before SB 2412's final passage. Governor JB Pritzker signed the measure shortly after informing reporters he had not reviewed all its details.

State Representative Mike Coffey commented on Illinois democracy following the bill's passage: “Election interference is an attack on our democracy and the Illinois Supreme Court made the right decision to rule SB2412 unconstitutional. The Statehouse represents the people of Illinois and the majority party needs to be transparent and honest about their motives for our state. The last minute gut-and-replace process of a bill is not how legislation should be conducted in Illinois.”

Previously, political parties had a 75-day window post-primary election to slate candidates in races without primary contenders, ensuring full candidate representation even if primaries failed to produce nominees. The new law eliminated this practice, compelling parties to rely solely on primary candidates for general elections—a move perceived by many as an effort to secure Democratic incumbents' positions by reducing competition.

The law was promptly challenged in court, with plaintiffs arguing it unconstitutionally interfered with electoral processes by violating their right to run for office and voters’ rights to choose from a complete slate of candidates. House Republicans echoed these sentiments, criticizing the law as an attempt by Democrats to protect vulnerable incumbents.

Sangamon County Circuit Judge Gail Noll ruled in favor of plaintiffs, issuing a permanent injunction against applying the law in the 2024 election. Judge Noll criticized the timing of its implementation, stating it burdened plaintiffs' rights by altering rules mid-election cycle. She emphasized that while modifying election laws falls within General Assembly authority, doing so during an ongoing cycle was unconstitutional.

Illinois Democrats quickly appealed Judge Noll’s ruling; however, Illinois’ highest court ultimately upheld her decision.

___