Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-3097 Tobin for Governor, et al. v. Illinois State Board of Elections, et al.

By: dmc-admin//October 8, 2001//

00-3097 Tobin for Governor, et al. v. Illinois State Board of Elections, et al.

By: dmc-admin//October 8, 2001//

Listen to this article

“In this case, the method by which the petition and the objections to it were evaluated was remarkably like a trial. First, written objections to the petition were filed. A hearing on the objections was scheduled, and the parties were given notice of the hearing date. Both the objectors and the candidates were represented by attorneys at the hearing and were given the opportunity to present evidence in support of their cases. The hearing officer, who functioned much like a magistrate judge, evaluated the evidence and the arguments, considered their merits in light of the relevant law, and issued a recommendation. The Board then considered the hearing officer’s recommendation and decided whether to accept it, just as a district court would do. In light of the nature of these proceedings, we believe it is an inescapable conclusion that the board members were acting in the functional capacity of judges when they ruled on the objections to the nomination petition.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Gettleman, J., Ripple, J.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests