1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

ELIM ROMANIAN PENTECOSTAL 

CHURCH and LOGOS BAPTIST 

MINISTRIES,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JB PRITZKER, in his official capacity as 

Governor of Illinois,

Defendant.

No. 20-C-02782

Judge Robert W. Gettleman

MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendant Governor JB Pritzker, in his official capacity as Governor of Illinois, by his 

attorney, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, respectfully moves this Court to dismiss 

plaintiffs’ complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). In support 

of this motion, the Governor states the following:

1. The Governor seeks dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1) because the claims for injunctive 

relief that prompted plaintiffs to file this lawsuit are now moot. Plaintiffs sued the Governor on 

May 7, 2020, to enjoin a ten-person limitation on gatherings imposed in the first weeks of the 

Covid-19 pandemic in Illinois. Plaintiffs, two Pentecostal Christian churches, challenged the order 

as an unconstitutional infringement on their religious liberty because they wished to conduct inperson worship services with more than ten congregants. 

2. The executive order imposing the challenged limitation expired on May 29, 2020. 

The order that superseded it, along with the numerous orders that followed, have all included a 

categorical exemption for free exercise of religion. The Governor has also repeatedly affirmed that 

Case: 1:20-cv-02782 Document #: 67 Filed: 05/14/21 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:655
2

he will not reimpose a numerical limitation on houses of worship for the remainder of the Covid19 pandemic. Indeed, plaintiffs resumed conducting in-person worship services with more than 

ten congregants nearly a year ago. Plaintiffs have no need for an injunction and any injunction at 

this point would be an advisory opinion inconsistent with Article III’s case or controversy 

requirement. 

3. Plaintiffs’ remaining claimsfor relief, which seek nominal damages and injunctions 

based on state law, are barred by both sovereign immunity and qualified immunity and should be 

dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6). The Eleventh Amendment bars federal courts from awarding 

damages against the State absent its consent or the Amendment’s abrogation by federal statute, but 

there is no allegation here that the State has consented or that its immunity has been abrogated. 

See McDonough Assocs., Inc. v. Grunloh, 722 F.3d 1043, 1050 (7th Cir. 2013). The Governor is 

also entitled to qualified immunity against those claims, given that the challenged executive order 

was, at the very least, consistent with governing law at the time it was issued (and so cannot be 

said to have violated any “clearly established” rights). See Kemp v. Liebel, 877 F.3d 346, 350 (7th 

Cir. 2017).

4. For these reasons, and those detailed in the accompanying memorandum, which is 

incorporated here by reference, plaintiffs’ claims should be dismissed with prejudice.

WHEREFORE, the Governor respectfully requests that the Court enter an order dismissing 

this case with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).

Case: 1:20-cv-02782 Document #: 67 Filed: 05/14/21 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:656
3

Dated: May 14, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

KWAME RAOUL

Illinois Attorney General

R. Douglas Rees

Christopher G. Wells

Office of the Illinois Attorney General

100 W. Randolph Street

Chicago, Illinois 60601

By: /s/ Alex Hemmer

Alex Hemmer

Deputy Solicitor General

Office of the Illinois Attorney General

100 W. Randolph Street, 12th Floor

Chicago, Illinois 60601

(312) 725-3834

alex.hemmer@illinois.gov

Case: 1:20-cv-02782 Document #: 67 Filed: 05/14/21 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:657