Federal Judge Blocks Illinois Law Limiting Judicial Campaign Donations

CHICAGO — A federal judge has blocked the enforcement of a pair of campaign finance laws restricting contributions to judicial candidates in Illinois. The ruling opens the door for additional campaign donations ahead of Election Day on Nov. 8.

The ban on campaign donations from residents of other states, enacted in November 2021, as well as the $500,000 limit on how much a single donor can give to an independent expenditure committee supporting or opposing a candidate for judge, enacted in May, were both challenged in August by former Illinois resident Matt Chancey, conservative political committee Restoration PAC and its affiliate Fair Courts America.

Chancey, a former Lake County assistant state's attorney who moved to Texas after living in Illinois for more than six decades, wanted to donate to the campaigns of Mark Curran, candidate for the Illinois Supreme Court, Reginald Mathews for a Lake County judgeship, Jeff Delong for the Effingham County bench and Mary Christine Heins as a judge in Jackson County, according to his complaint.

“Illinois’ new law restricting out-of-state donors seems like a solution in search of a problem,” said Chancey, in a statement announcing the suit. “As a 63-year resident of Illinois and an attorney there are many friends and colleagues I’d like to support in upcoming elections. This ban is an unnecessary and illegal limit on my right as an American to speak in politics through my support for candidates.”

U.S. District Judge John Tharp ruled in the group's favor Friday, rejecting the state's motion to dismiss the case and granting a preliminary injunction to the plaintiff. According to the federal judge, there is no reason to believe that political speech during judicial elections is any less valuable than during other elections.

"The special nature of judicial elections does not justify Illinois’ differential treatment of in and out-of-state contributors in this manner. The Court cannot ignore the gravity of the restriction with which it is faced: A state law prohibits an entire class of people from engaging in a distinct category of political expression during the electoral process," Tharp said.

While attorneys for the state contended that the ban prevents donors who reside in one state dominating the judiciary of another state, the judge questioned why it would matter if funds sufficient to corrupt the judiciary come from outside or inside Illinois.

"The State does not (and cannot) explain why money is more corrupting simply because its source is from outside the state, so the premise that the out-of-state ban on campaign contributions materially enhances the state judiciary’s appearance of integrity is entirely without foundation," Tharp said in a 28-page opinion.

"The examples of past corruption in Illinois courts the State cites in its briefing, e.g., Operation Greylord, don’t do the State any favors in this regard, there is no indication that any of those corruption scandals had much, if anything, to do with influences from outside of Illinois as opposed to internal ones," he added.

Chancey and the political committees were able to show some likelihood of success on the merits of the case, according to Tharp, an appointee of George W. Bush.

"Whatever its intent, the ban on out-of-state contributions will likely be more effective in preserving the status quo of the state’s judiciary than in enhancing its appearance of integrity," he said.

As for the restrictions on donations to independent committees, the judge said the office of Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, which defended the legislation, had failed to sufficiently explain how the half-million limit accomplished anything other than burdening First Amendment rights.

"To make the case that the IEC restrictions are closely drawn, the State must argue that the $500,000 IEC contribution limit does something—anything—to shore up public confidence in judicial integrity," Tharp ruled. "But other than making some conclusory statements, the State offers nothing."

Chancey, Fair Courts America and Restoration PAC are represented by attorneys from the Liberty Justice Center, a Chicago-based nonprofit associated with the conservative Illinois Policy Institute

Jeff Schwab, senior attorney at the firm, said that Tharp was correct in finding that the two laws likely violate constitutional free speech protections.

“Illinois claims the ban on contributions to judicial candidate by out-of-state donors is necessary to prevent corruption but has failed to show that out-of-state contributions are more corrupting than in-state contributions," Schwab said, in a statement after the ruling. "Illinois’ limit on the amount one can contribute to independent expenditure committees that support judicial candidates is completely arbitrary because the law provides many ways of circumventing that limit.”