Court Opinion

ID: 9703973
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 00:15:45.137212+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:53.703483
License: Public Domain

PRESIDING JUSTICE BOWMAN, specially concurring: I specially concur. While I agree with this opinion’s analysis of the law, factual determinations, and result, I am concerned about those parts of the ordinances at issue that directly conflict with the provisions of the Illinois Vehicle Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 prohibiting police from stopping a vehicle solely because of a perceived violation of the seat belt law. In deciding whether the exercise of local governmental power falls within the scope of home rule powers contemplated by section 6(a) of article VII of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, courts should decide whether the home rule unit was acting in an area pertaining to its government and affairs. Commonwealth Edison Co. v. City of Warrenville, 288 Ill. App. 3d 373, 379 (1997). “An ordinance pertains to the government and affairs of a home rule unit where it relates to problems that are local in nature rather than state or national.” Commonwealth Edison, 288 Ill. App. 3d at 379. In my view, the decision as to whether a home rule unit exceeded the scope of its powers in enacting a particular ordinance should include a determination of whether the ordinance pertained to the government and affairs of the home rule unit. Further, I question whether the portions of the ordinances allowing police to stop a vehicle solely because of a perceived seat belt violation relate to problems that are local in nature. However, the parties here have not raised the issue of whether the ordinances pertained to the villages’ government and affairs. Accordingly, I believe that issue should be left for a later case where it is raised and fully briefed.