Jacob H. Huebert
Jacob H. Huebert
Samuel Der-Yeghiayan
Samuel Der-Yeghiayan

With six weeks until citizens go to the polls, a federal judge has blocked the state law that allows many of Illinois’ voters to register and cast ballots on Election Day.

U.S. Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan ruled this morning that Illinois’ same-day registration law “significantly curtailed” the rights of rural, downstate voters in a way that likely violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

He noted in the 13-page opinion that the law, which only required counties with more than 100,000 citizens or who have the proper equipment to offer Election Day registration at every polling place, was approved on a party-line basis, with Democrats voting in favor and Republicans voting against.

And he added that granting a preliminary injunction against the measure is a better course of action than trying to fix any damages after the vote on Nov. 8.

“The impairment of that right to vote in the upcoming election and loss of the ability to effectively participate in choosing elected officials cannot be later rectified in this action,” Der-Yeghiayan wrote. “It would not be practical for this court to order all elections in Illinois to be redone at the conclusion of this case if [p]laintiffs succeed in the instant action.”

The plaintiffs are Republicans — Patrick Harlan, a congressional candidate challenging Democratic U.S. Rep. Cheri Bustos in the 17th Congressional District, and the Crawford County Republican Central Committee.

With just under 20,000 residents recorded in the 2010 census, the county is located on the Illinois-Indiana line about 25 miles southwest of Terre Haute, Ind. and is one of the lower-population areas that is only required to offer same-day registration at one location under the law, rather than every precinct.

They’re represented by attorneys at the Liberty Justice Center, the legal arm of the conservative Illinois Policy Institute, who have previously called the law “a scheme designed to boost Democratic voter turnout” by ginning up its base of support in Chicago and higher-population areas.

Jacob H. Huebert, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, said the ruling today is “exactly what we asked the judge to do” and that election authorities across the state will be directed not to provide same-day registration at individual polling places while the case continues.

“The judge’s opinion recognized it’s not fair to grant a right like that to citizens in one part of the state but not citizens in another part of the state,” Huebert said.

The defendant, the Illinois State Board of Elections, is represented by Thomas A. Ioppolo of the state attorney general’s office.

A spokeswoman for the office said it’s still reviewing the order.

But a spokesman for the Illinois American Civil Liberties Union, which argued against eliminating same-day registration so close to the election, said the group is concerned about the impact of Der-Yeghiayan’s ruling.

“We must continue to use every available method to ensure that every eligible voter in our state can access the ballot — not create obstacles to the franchise,” said Ed Yohnka, the group’s spokesman, in a statement this morning.

Der-Yeghiayan first wrote that the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm that was “much more than speculative” without the injunction, and the merits of their case had a likelihood of success.

He wrote there was plenty of evidence showing same-day registration increased voter turnout in counties that are big enough and have the technology available to implement the program.

“While it may be true that the polling place registration option can assist voters in certain populous counties, that option cannot be provided at the expense of lower population counties, thereby decreasing their political representation in Illinois. The application of this legislation favors the urban citizen and dilutes the vote of the rural citizen,” Der-Yeghiayan wrote.

Among other things, the defendants argued that nothing in the law prevents smaller counties from implementing same-day registration at every polling place.

But they also acknowledged that smaller counties have limited resources, and the judge wrote that the “de facto effect” of that reality is that larger counties get added voting options that smaller counties don’t get.

He concluded by noting that the balance of harms and public interest favored the plaintiffs, writing that “Illinois is made up of more than the Chicago metropolitan area and other high population areas. Equality under the law does not end at the city limits.”

Der-Yeghiayan also dismissed the idea of ordering all counties in the state to offer same-day registration at every polling place, saying he would not legislate from the bench.

“Illinois has acted to institute the legislation for (Election Day [r]egistration) and this court’s proper role is to determine whether such legislation and/or implementation of such legislation violates the Constitution,” he wrote. “The court also notes that such a step might also impose an untenable financial burden on various counties in the [s]tate of Illinois.”

The case is Patrick Harlan, et al. v. Charles W. Scholz, et al., No. 16 C 7832.

Sen. Donald F. Harmon, a Democrat from Oak Park who sponsored the same-day voter law back in 2014 as Senate Bill 172, lamented in a statement that “a blatantly political effort to quell participation in Illinois elections was able to get a toehold in a courtroom.”

“Rather than seeking to scale back opportunities to register to vote in certain parts of Illinois, we should be working to expand access to the polls in all communities throughout the state,” he said.