CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 10/27/2023 1

Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Illinois 

During a Pandemic 

Libertarian Party of Illinois v. Pritzker (1:20-cv-2112) 

and Morgan v. White (1:20-cv-2189) (Rebecca R. Pallmeyer 

and Charles R. Norgle, Sr., N.D. Ill.) and Bambenek v. White

(Sue E. Myerscough, C.D. Ill. 3:20-cv-3107)

Lawsuits filed in two of Illinois’s districts sought modifications to 

ballot-petition signature requirements in light of social distancing 

made necessary by the global Covid-19 infectious pandemic. An 

agreed order modified the requirements for candidates. The district 

judge gave election officials part of the adjustments from the agreed 

order that they requested, and the court of appeals declined to stay 

the district judge’s decision. District judges in both districts denied 

relief from the signature requirements for ballot measures. 

Subject: Getting on the ballot. Topics: Getting on the ballot; 

ballot measure; Covid-19; case assignment; interlocutory appeal; 

laches; intervention. 

Election officials in Illinois agreed to an injunction modifying the ballotpetition signature requirements for candidates in the November 3, 2020, 

general election in light of social distancing made necessary by the global 

Covid-19 infectious pandemic. District judges in two of Illinois’s districts 

declined to modify the requirements for ballot measures. 

Ballot-Petition Signatures for Candidates 

Minor parties, prospective independent candidates, and others affiliated with 

them filed a federal complaint in the Northern District of Illinois on April 2, 

2020, against the governor and state election officials seeking modifications 

to in-person and witnessing ballot-petition signature requirements for the 

November 3 general election in light of social distancing made necessary by 

Covid-19.1

 On the next day, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction.2

The court assigned the case to Charles R. Norgle, Sr., but on April 10, 

Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., acted as emergency judge and set the case for a 

telephonic hearing at 9:30 a.m. on April 17.3

1. Complaint, Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Pritzker, No. 1:20-cv-2112 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 2, 

2020), D.E. 1; Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Pritzker, 455 F. Supp. 3d 738, 740 (N.D. Ill. 2020); 

see Amended Complaint, Libertarian Party of Ill., No. 1:20-cv-2112 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 16, 2020), 

D.E. 17. 

2. Motion, Libertarian Party of Ill., No. 1:20-cv-2112 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 3, 2020), D.E. 2. 

3. Minutes, id. (Apr. 10, 2020), D.E. 5. 

Judge Dow became Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.’s counselor in October 2022. Federal Judicial Center Biographical Directory of Article III Federal Judges, www.fjc.gov/history/ 

judges; Press Release, Oct. 3, 2022, www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/ 

pr_10-03-22. 
Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Illinois During a Pandemic 

2 Federal Judicial Center 10/27/2023 

The court had accommodated the pandemic by assigning a few judges 

rotating duty days for emergency proceedings.4

 The emergency judge assigned to the case was Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer, and Judge Dow was on 

duty for the motion.5

Ballot-Petition Signatures for Ballot Measures 

An organization and six persons supporting an amendment to Illinois’s constitution filed a federal complaint in the Northern District on April 7 against 

state and local election officials, seeking modifications to the ballot-petition 

signature requirements for initiatives.6 Two days later, the plaintiffs filed a 

motion for a preliminary or permanent injunction.7

This case also was assigned to Judge Norgle; Judge Pallmeyer acted as 

emergency judge on April 9 and set the case for a telephonic hearing at 9:30 

a.m. on April 17.8

Emergency Proceedings 

A prospective independent candidate for President sought to join the first 

action on April 13.9

 Judge Pallmeyer set the intervention motion for a telephonic hearing at 9:30 a.m. on April 17, noting that the parties should contact the court for the call-in number.10 Members of the public were permitted 

to attend the hearing by telephone as well.11

On April 17, Judge Pallmeyer presided over the motions in the candidate 

case from 9:32 to 10:11 a.m.12 She granted the intervention motion, and she 

invited the parties to continue discussing a settlement proposal and to reconvene on April 21.13

4. Interview with Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer, Oct. 7, 2020. 

Tim Reagan interviewed Judge Pallmeyer for this report by telephone. 

5. Id.

6. Complaint, Morgan v. White, No. 1:20-cv-2189 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 7, 2020), D.E. 1; see

Amended Complaint, id. (Apr. 27, 2020), D.E. 26. 

7. Injunction Motion, id. (Apr. 9, 2020), D.E. 4. 

8. Minutes, id. (Apr. 9, 2020), D.E. 8. 

9. Intervention Motion, Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Pritzker, No. 1:20-cv-2112 (N.D. Ill. 

Apr. 13, 2020), D.E. 7; see Intervention Injunction Motion, id. (Apr. 13, 2020), D.E. 10; Intervention Complaint, id. (Apr. 13, 2020), D.E. 8. 

10. Minutes, id. (Apr. 14, 2020), D.E. 11. 

11. Interview with Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer, Oct. 7, 2020 (noting that proceedings 

early in the pandemic were especially likely to be conducted by telephone rather than by 

videoconference, and noting that an advantage of that was that the technological success of 

the proceeding did not depend on individual participants’ home bandwidth resources). 

12. Transcript, Libertarian Party of Ill., No. 1:20-cv-2112 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 17, 2020, filed 

Apr. 20, 2020), D.E. 22. 

13. Id. at 27–28; Minutes, id. (Apr. 17, 2020), D.E. 21; Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Pritzker, 

455 F. Supp. 3d 738, 740 (N.D. Ill. 2020); see Transcript, Libertarian Party of Ill., No. 1:20-cv2112 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 21, 2020, filed Apr. 21, 2020), D.E. 25; Minutes, id. (Apr. 21, 2020), 

D.E. 24. 
Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Illinois During a Pandemic 

Federal Judicial Center 10/27/2023 3

Especially for injunction cases, Judge Pallmeyer looked for resolutions 

that the parties could agree to.14 Generally, injunctions agreed to are more 

likely to be obeyed than injunctions imposed.15

Judge Pallmeyer presided over the ballot-measure case from 10:11 to 

10:39 a.m.16 She did not find support for an injunction before Judge Norgle 

could preside over the case.17 The plaintiffs had not shown diligent signaturecollection efforts.18

The court of appeals affirmed the injunction denial on July 8.19 “One important question, when a plaintiff seeks emergency relief, is whether the 

plaintiff has brought the emergency on himself. . . . Plaintiffs had plenty of 

time to gather signatures before the pandemic began.”20 The court observed 

also that because there is no constitutional requirement for states to provide 

for ballot measures in the first place, Illinois could legally suspend ballot 

measures altogether during the pandemic.21 The plaintiffs dismissed their 

action voluntarily in August.22

An Agreed Injunction 

Meanwhile, in the candidate case, Judge Pallmeyer entered an agreed order 

on April 23 reducing the signature requirement, extending the deadline, allowing for electronic signatures, and qualifying parties and independent 

candidates for the November 2020 ballot if they had qualified either in 2016 

or in 2018.23

On May 8, however, Illinois’s state board of elections asked Judge 

Pallmeyer to reconsider the injunction it had agreed to, objecting to an August 7 filing deadline and a 90% reduction in the number of signatures required.24 At a May 15 telephonic hearing, Judge Pallmeyer agreed to move up 

the deadline to July 20 but leave the number of signatures required as previously agreed.25

14. Interview with Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer, Oct. 7, 2020. 

15. Id.

16. Transcript, Morgan v. White, No. 1:20-cv-2189 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 17, 2020, filed Apr. 24, 

2020), D.E. 25 [hereinafter Apr. 17, 2020, Morgan Transcript]; Minutes, id. (Apr. 17, 2020), 

D.E. 24. 

17. Apr. 17, 2020, Morgan Transcript, supra note 16, at 19. 

18. Opinion, Morgan, No. 1:20-cv-2189 (N.D. Ill. May 18, 2020), D.E. 50, 2020 WL 

2526484 (denying reconsideration); see Minutes, id. (May 7, 2020), D.E. 38 (same); see also

Transcript, id. (May 7, 2020, filed May 9, 2020), D.E. 39. 

19. Morgan v. White, 964 F.3d 649 (7th Cir. 2020). 

20. Id. at 651–52. 

21. Id. at 652. 

22. Minutes, Morgan, No. 1:20-cv-2189 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 13, 2020), D.E. 67; Stipulation, id.

(Aug. 11, 2020), D.E. 61. 

23. Order, Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Pritzker, No. 1:20-cv-2112 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 23, 2020), 

D.E. 27; Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Pritzker, 455 F. Supp. 3d 738 (N.D. Ill. 2020); see Rick 

Pearson, Judge Oks Skipping of Signatures for Election, Chi. Trib., Apr. 25, 2020, at C3. 

24. Reconsideration Motion, Libertarian Party of Ill., No. 1:20-cv-2112 (N.D. Ill. May 8, 

2020), D.E. 31. 

25. Transcript at 20, id. (May 15, 2020, filed May 15, 2020), D.E. 35; Minutes, id. (May 
Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Illinois During a Pandemic 

4 Federal Judicial Center 10/27/2023 

Three weeks and a day later, the board filed a notice of appeal.26 The 

court of appeals denied a stay on Sunday, June 21, noting how long it took 

the board to seek one and noting that the board did not first seek a stay in the 

district court.27 On August 20, the court of appeals affirmed the injunction.28

Central District 

Four days after Judge Pallmeyer entered the original agreed order, a federal 

complaint filed in the Central District against state and local election officials 

sought modifications to the ballot-petition signature requirements for initiatives.29 With their complaint, filed on Monday, April 27, the plaintiffs filed a 

motion for a preliminary injunction.30 On Tuesday, the plaintiffs filed a motion for an expedited hearing.31 Judge Sue E. Myerscough set the case for 

hearing by videoconference on Friday, posting contact information in the 

public record.32

On May 1, Judge Myerscough denied the plaintiffs immediate relief.33

Following Judge Pallmeyer’s lead, Judge Myerscough determined that ballot 

measures do not present the same constitutional concerns as candidates do 

with respect to ballot-petition signature requirements.34 “Lastly, the Court 

notes that Plaintiffs simply delayed their suit too long to allow the Court to 

meaningfully tailor injunctive relief without throwing Illinois’ electoral system into disarray during an already tumultuous time.”35

The case was dismissed voluntarily as moot on November 9.36

Judge Norgle 

On September 10, Judge Norgle denied intervention to a prospective candidate with very case-specific difficulties qualifying for the ballot.37

15, 2020), D.E. 36. 

26. Notice of Appeal, id. (June 6, 2020), D.E. 38. 

27. Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Cadigan, 820 F. App’x 446 (7th Cir. 2020); see Rick Pearson, U.S. Appeals Court Rejects Effort to Delay Candidate Filing Rules, Chi. Trib., June 23, 

2020, at C4. 

28. Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Cadigan, 824 F. App’x 415 (7th Cir. 2020). 

29. Complaint, Bambenek v. White, No. 3:20-cv-3107 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 27, 2020), D.E. 1; 

Bambenek v. White, 613 F. Supp. 3d 1112, 1114 (C.D. Ill. 2020); see Amended Complaint, 

Bambenek, No. 3:20-cv-3107 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 30, 2020), D.E. 20. 

30. Preliminary-Injunction Motion, Bambenek, No. 3:20-cv-3107 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 27, 

2020), D.E. 2; Bambenek, 613 F. Supp. 3d at 1114. 

31. Expedited Hearing Motion, Bambenek, No. 3:20-cv-3107 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 28, 2020), 

D.E. 4. 

32. Order, id. (Apr. 28, 2020), D.E. 5; see Bambenek, 613 F. Supp. 3d at 1114;see Transcript at 5, Bambenek, No. 3:20-cv-3107 (C.D. Ill. May 1, 2020, filed May 15, 2020), D.E. 26 

(“THE COURT: . . . We will have several observers present for today’s hearing.”). 

33. Bambenek, 613 F. Supp. 3d 1112; see Opinion, Bambenek, No. 3:20-cv-3107 (C.D. Ill. 

July 2, 2020), D.E. 35, 2020 WL 6556004 (denying reconsideration). 

34. Bambenek, 613 F. Supp. 3d at 1115. 

35. Id. at 1116. 

36. Docket Sheet, Bambenek, No. 3:20-cv-3107 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 27, 2020). 

37. Opinion, Libertarian Party of Ill. v. Pritzker, No. 1:20-cv-2112 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 10, 

2020), D.E. 76, 2020 WL 6600960. 
Ballot-Petition Signature Requirements in Illinois During a Pandemic 

Federal Judicial Center 10/27/2023 5

A stipulation to dismiss the case as settled was filed on March 2, 2021.38

The prospective presidential candidate allowed to intervene at the beginning 

of the case challenged the stipulated dismissal to preserve an opportunity to 

seek attorney fees,39 but Judge Norgle denied the challenge and dismissed the 

case on July 8 because the dismissal did not affect the candidate’s ability to 

seek fees.40

Speed and Correctness 

Judge Pallmeyer strove to rule both quickly and correctly.41 Among other 

things, that combination improves public confidence in the courts.42 Her law 

clerks were very helpful.43 They dialed in to the proceedings, and she found it 

beneficial for more than one clerk to assist her with the emergency matters.44

38. Stipulated Dismissal, id. (Mar. 2, 2021), D.E. 84; Status Report, id. (Feb. 5, 2021), D.E. 

82 (noting settlement negotiations). 

39. Motion, id. (Mar. 2, 2021), D.E. 85. 

40. Order, id. (July 8, 2021), D.E. 90; Reply, id. (Apr. 12, 2021), D.E. 89. 

41. Interview with Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer, Oct. 7, 2020. 

42. Id.

43. Id.

44. Id. (noting that law clerks really shine when they work together).