The Illinois Tollway board on Thursday approved agreements with two major railroads, which will make possible long-anticipated western highway access into O’Hare International Airport.The agreement with the Soo Line Railroad Co., doing business as Canadian Pacific, and Union Pacific Railroad provides the Tollway with the property rights it needs to build a planned beltway around O’Hare.When it is finished, Illinois Route 390 east toward the airport will connect with a new north-south tollway to be called Interstate 490, which would stretch along the airport’s western border. The new tollway would connect with Interstate 90 to the north and the Tri-State Tollway to the south.The toll authority has argued that western highway access is crucial to an expanded O’Hare. The Tollway has been trying to get the right to do the construction for years, and sued Canadian Pacific over access in 2016.Work on the I-490 Tollway must cross the Union Pacific Railroad and the Canadian Pacific at several places, including in the Canadian Pacific’s Bensenville Yard. The project will require relocating Canadian Pacific tracks.The agreements also provide the Tollway with property rights that will help in the construction of Cook County’s planned improvements to Touhy Avenue, which include replacing the at-grade crossing at the Union Pacific Railroad with a new bridge that will ease congestion and improve access to the north side of the airport.The agreements call for the Tollway to spend roughly $250 million on land, construction access rights, air rights, business impacts and future structural maintenance costs associated with the I-490 project, spokesman Dan Rozek said.While the Tollway can now begin portions of I-490 construction as early as this fall, there are a handful of final steps, including the completion of an environmental study for review by the Federal Aviation Administration and agreements with the Chicago Department of Aviation.Sens. Tammy Duckworth and Dick Durbin, and Reps. Mike Quigley and Raja Krishnamoorthi, all Illinois Democrats, issued statements praising the agreement.“The Elgin O’Hare Western Access Project is vital to the future of northeastern Illinois’s transportation network, and today’s vote is a critical milestone toward construction of this project,” Duckworth said.The new I-490 Tollway is scheduled to be complete by the end of 2025 and will carry north-south traffic around the western border of O’Hare and provide access to the airport, according to the Tollway. The Illinois Route 390 Tollway, which currently carries east-west traffic between Lake Street (Illinois Route 20) and Illinois Route 83, will include an interchange connection to I-490.The planned O’Hare expansion, the biggest and most expensive in the airport’s 75-year history, is supposed to be finished by the end of 2028. The plans include the addition of a new Global Terminal and three new concourses, and is mostly funded by passenger fees, landing fees and other income.Chicago’s Aviation Department has said the coronavirus pandemic won’t interfere with the expansion plan, despite major financial losses for airlines as air travel has plummeted.
Pritzker not giving up. Yesterday, Kwame Raoul issued an AG opinion that reimagines the meaning of Section 7 of the Emergency Management Agency Act to give the Governor authority to exercise emergency powers for successive 30 day periods to address infectious diseases, contrary to an AG opinion issued in 2001.
Gov Pritzker withdrew his rule to penalize IL businesses who defy his Exec Order, as he did not have the votes in JCAR to uphold his rule. IDPH repeals the Gov’s Emergency Rule.
IMPORTANT: The Illinois Department of Public Health’s Guidance Enforcement of Governor Pritzker’s Exec. Orders 2020-10 & 18 states that if you do not adhere, the DPH has authority pursuant to the Department of Public Health Act (20 ILCS 2035/I.1 et seq.) to order that a place be closed and made off limits to the public “to prevent the probable spread of a dangerously contagious or infectious disease … until such time as the condition can be corrected or the danger to the public health eliminated or reduced in such a manner that no substantial danger to the public’s health any longer exists.”
BUT …. the Public Health Act also provides:
The Department’s decision to quarantine or isolate (including close) may only be done “on an immediate basis without prior consent or court order if, in the reasonable judgment of the Department, immediate action is required to protect the public from a dangerously contagious or infectious disease.” Sec. 2(c).
In the event of an immediate order issued without prior consent or court order, the Department shall, as soon as practical, within 48 hours after issuing the order, obtain the consent of the person or owner or file a petition requesting a court order authorizing the isolation or quarantine or closure.” Sec. 2(c).
“To obtain a court order, the Department, by clear and convincing evidence (A HIGH EVIDENTIARY STANDARD), must prove that the public’s health and welfare are significantly endangered by a person or group of persons that has, that is suspected of having, that has been exposed to, or that is reasonably believed to have been exposed to a dangerously contagious or infectious disease including non-compliant tuberculosis patients or by a place where there is a significant amount of activity likely to spread a dangerously contagious or infectious disease. The Department must also prove that all other reasonable means of correcting the problem have been exhausted and no less restrictive alternative exists.” Sec. 2(c).
“in determining whether no less restrictive alternative exists, the court shall consider evidence showing that, under the circumstances presented by the case in which an order is sought, quarantine or isolation is the measure provided for in a rule of the Department or in guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the World Health Organization.” Sec 2(c).
“Persons who are ordered to be isolated or quarantined or who are owners of places that are ordered to be closed and made off limits to the public, shall be given a written notice of such order. The written notice shall additionally include the following: (1) notice of the right to counsel; (2) notice that if the person or owner is indigent, the court will appoint counsel for that person or owner; (3) notice of the reason for the order for isolation, quarantine, or closure; (4) notice of whether the order is an immediate order, and if so, the time frame for the Department to seek consent or to file a petition requesting a court order as set out in this subsection; and (5) notice of the anticipated duration of the isolation, quarantine, or closure.” Sec 2(c).
An April 21 memo from the Illinois Appellate Prosecutor’s Office to the Governor concludes that the Governor’s shut down order and its extension have indeed infringed on citizens’ rights, although that infringement may be justified. The civil rights in question include, but are not limited to due process, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly. Memo concludes that there may be potential civil liability for Illinois, that Article V did not give Pritzker the power to suspend Illinois residents’ constitutional rights, that he does not have the power to organize the militia to suppress insurrection or enforce laws. This explains why Pritzker has left enforcement of the stay-at-home order to the local law enforcement.
The mayor made it illegal to go to church!
THANKS WILLIE…
Chicago police fine 3 churches for violating stay-at-home order; businessman Willie Wilson says he’ll pay
📷
Businessman Willie Wilson puts on his face mask after speaking at a news conference at the Thompson Center in Chicago demanding Gov. J.B. Pritzker to amend his executive order mandate regarding face masks on May 12, 2020. Following through with Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s promise to take action against churches that violate social distancing rules, the Chicago Police Department issued $500 fines to three separate houses of worship that held services over the weekend, city officials said.Police cited Elim Romanian Pentecostal Church, Philadelphia Romanian Church of God and Metro Praise International for their services.Police also acknowledged temporarily banning parking near churches “as a precaution to prevent planned large gatherings from taking place.”“The Chicago Police Department has been working to ensure full compliance with the (stay-at-home) order,” the department said. “As part of this effort, we continue to ask everyone to help slow the spread of the virus by staying home and practicing social distancing so that once we have begun to recover and reopen, residents can return to their religious services in a safe manner.”Gospel singer and businessman Willie Wilson, meanwhile, released a statement saying he would pay the fines. Wilson ran for mayor in 2019 and won several African American wards in the election’s first round, then endorsed Lightfoot against Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle.Their relationship frayed last year, however, and he’s been an outspoken critic of Lightfoot and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s handling of the stay-at-home order for churches.“The governor and mayor continue to trample on our constitutional rights while hiding behind a stay-at-home order that treats the church as non-essential,” he said in a statement.On Monday, Lightfoot said the city would be fining churches that had more people than allowed under the statewide stay-at-home order during the weekend.Lightfoot spent last week asking churches to abide by social distancing rules and warning that she would take action against churches that refused.But on Sunday, hundreds of people defied Pritzker’s stay-at-home order to attend church anyway, and the mayor’s office warned that violators may be cited after review.📷Breaking News Newsletter The dispute kicked off a week ago after Metro Praise International Church on the Northwest Side opened its doors for in-person services in an act that church officials described as “passive resistance” to Pritzker’s ongoing stay-at-home order.That defiance led Lightfoot to tweet, “It doesn’t matter who you are or what you’re doing. When you gather like this, you are putting yourself and your loved ones in serious danger.”Wilson spoke at Philadelphia Romanian Church of God over the weekend.“I tell everybody this year, wherever I go, practice your social distancing, do what the signs say, do what the laws say, but don’t ever put the law before God,” Wilson said during the services.
I have good news to share:
The experts have indicated we can build on our plan to bring back more activities faster, as long as Illinoisans continue to do as we have, adhering to precautions & safety measures to keep each other safe.
The epidemiologists now believe that restaurants can open for outdoor seating when Phase 3 begins, likely for everyone just 9 days from now.
With the right restrictions – tables six feet apart and away from sidewalks, masks and distancing measures for staff, and other precautions – the experts believe these services can open at a risk comparable to other outdoor activities and give businesses a much-needed boost.
Phase 3 also permits all gatherings – not just essential ones – of 10 people or fewer. That means if you want to go enjoy a picnic in the park or a walk with 9 other people, you can – just remember to wear a mask or a face covering when social distance can’t be maintained.
Newly allowed in Phase 3:
Boating or camping with up to ten people is welcome.
Golf courses can allow foursomes out on the same tee times.
All state parks can reopen with staffing and safety measures.
As we’ve already laid out: Personal care services, one-on-one personal training in indoor facilities and outdoor fitness classes of up to ten people can take place with safety precautions.
All retail stores – basically any store that wasn’t already open as an essential business – can choose to open their doors to in-person shopping with IDPH safety precautions and capacity limits in place.
In the coming days, we’ll be releasing formal industry-specific guidance developed in consultation with business owners and employees, particularly around workplaces and child care.
I want to offer just a note of concern that I hope everyone will take to heart:
The virus has not gone away.
We have followed the science and we’re succeeding, but we can’t let up now.
We’ve come too far and made so much progress because we’ve kept social distance, worn face coverings in public, washed our hands frequently, and taken care of our most vulnerable to the best of our ability.
JB Pritzker has a new talking point this week, that (as of Monday) people should stop complaining about his reopening plan because “we’re only 11 days away” from moving to the next phase.
He used this again yesterday, at 10 days, and I’m sure he’ll use it again today, at 9 days. What he doesn’t seem to understand is that we small business owners who are desperately trying to stay afloat, doing everything we can (including foregoing our own pay) to continue to pay our employees, are dying on the vine. “Just 11 days” to my business is approximately $30,107.51 in costs. So where is that money supposed to come from with limited (at best) revenue opportunities since the economy is shut down? You’ve not heard me complain about this before, because when the choice is between keeping people alive and keep my business’ doors open, I’m willing to make that sacrifice (as many are). But that’s not the choice now, every single region has met the governor’s benchmarks and all the coronavirus-related numbers in Illinois are declining, especially hospitalizations which are at the lowest point since the pandemic started. There is no reason to wait until an arbitrary date (especially since that date was set at the end of a phase that is twice as long as federal guidelines)…move to Phase 3 today.
Lisa Madigan issued her opinion on the applicability of executive orders to the Illinois State Police Merit Board in 2013. This appears to be yet another legal opinion either overlooked or ignored by Pritzker and his legal team. The value in this opinion lies not only from the fact it is signed by Lisa Madigan, but it is backed by an Illinois Supreme Court case.
Applicability of Executive Orders – “The Constitution provides that “[t]he Governor, by Executive Order, may reassign functions among or reorganize executive agencies which are directly responsible to him.” Ill. Const. 1970, art. V, § 11. This is the only reference to executive orders in the Constitution and, as a result, the only circumstance in which an executive order clearly carries the force and effect of law.”
“In general, article V, section 8, of the Illinois Constitution provides that “[t]he Governor shall have the supreme executive power, and shall be responsible for the faithful execution of the laws.” Citing this authority, the Illinois courts have suggested that an executive order may be a permissible method by which the Governor can execute an existing law, but that an executive order is not a vehicle for establishing a new legal requirement. Buettell v. Walker 59 Ill. 2d 146, 153-54 (1974). . Accordingly, the Governor does not have power to legislate by executive order, and, therefore, unless authorized by law, an executive order relating to matters other than executive reorganization can be no more than a policy directive to agencies under the Governor’s control. To conclude otherwise would cede to the Governor legislative powers which he is prohibited from exercising by the separation of powers doctrine. See Ill. Const. 1970, art. II, § 1; see generally Ill. Const. 1970, art. IV, § 1.”
Additional language in the opinion also points to the most basic legal analysis on statutory construction, a point we have written about dozens if not hundreds of times. Applying Madigan’s analysis to the language in the Emergency Management Agency Act and the 30-day limitation to an emergency declaration, Pritzker is put in check by a member of his own party and from the very office empowered to legally represent him.
“The primary purpose of statutory construction is to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the General Assembly. Board of Education of Auburn Community Unit School District No. 10 v. Department of Revenue, 242 Ill. 2d 272, 279 (2011 ). Legislative intent is best evidenced by the language used in the statute. People v. Marshall, 242 Ill. 2d 285, 292 (2011). Where statutory language is clear and unambiguous, it must be given effect as written. First American Bank Corp. v. Henry, 239 Ill. 2d 511, 516 (2011 ).”
It is clear, Attorney General Lisa Madigan not only wrote an opinion that clearly puts Pritzker in check, but she also cited the Illinois Supreme Court as the authority in the Buettell V Walker case.
Pritzker’s nightmare continues with the fact the Illinois Supreme Court clearly outlines that Executive Orders only apply to those in State Government.
“The Governor shall have the supreme executive power, and shall be responsible for the faithful execution of the laws.” The purpose of the order appears to be to formulate a new legal requirement rather than to execute an existing one. And while the order properly emphasizes the desirability of regulating the conduct of those who seek to do business with the State, the desirability of a regulation must be distinguished from the power to promulgate it.”
“..as a proper exercise of the power that section 2 of article XIII of the Constitution grants to the Governor as head of the executive branch, “to establish and enforce ethical standards for that branch.” The power granted by that provision does not, in our opinion, include the power to establish and enforce ethical standards for persons doing business with the executive branch. The present order does not regulate the conduct of officers and employees of the executive branch. Instead, its impact, including its sanctions, is upon third persons who are not a part of State government. It does not, therefore, fall within the authority granted by section 2 of article XIII.”
The Illinois Supreme Court relied on the plain language of the Constitution.
“Article V – SECTION 11. GOVERNOR – AGENCY REORGANIZATION The Governor, by Executive Order, may reassign functions among or reorganize executive agencies which are directly responsible to him. Ifsuch a reassignment or reorganization would contravene a statute, the Executive Order shall be delivered to the General Assembly. If the General Assembly is in annual session and if the Executive Order is delivered on or before April 1, the General Assembly shall consider the Executive Order at that annual session. If the General Assembly is not in annual session or if the Executive Order is delivered after April 1, the General Assembly shall consider the Executive Order at its next annual session, in which case the Executive Order shall be deemed to have been delivered on the first day of that annual session. Such an Executive Order shall not become effective if, within 60 calendar days after its delivery to the General Assembly, either house disapproves the Executive Order by the record vote of a majority of the members elected. An Executive Order not so disapproved shall become effective by its terms but not less than 60 calendar days after its delivery to the General Assembly.(Source: Illinois Constitution.)”
Nowhere in the Constitution does it provide the Governor with Executive Order power beyond “reassign functions among or reorganize executive agencies which are directly responsible to him.”
Considering the Governor is attempting to do an end-run around the legislature with new rules being adopted through an emergency rules provision (article here), it appears their legal team may be realizing they can’t use Executive Orders in the fashion they have been doing for the last 9 weeks. As the court stated, “The present order does not regulate the conduct of officers and employees of the executive branch. Instead, its impact, including its sanctions, is upon third persons who are not a part of State government.It does not, therefore, fall within the authority granted by section 2 of article XIII.”
With the Executive Order power being put in check, it appears the “emergency” rule path will hit its roadblock with Restraining Orders to be filed shortly.
The opinion and case law can be downloaded hereand here, or viewed below.View in Full Screen
A lot of parents are asking how will schools be able to open and students return to schools in September?
The reality is that schools will not be returning in the way that is familiar to us and our children. The World Health Organisation has just released a guidance document for governments in relation to planning for school openings. It will give you an idea of all of the things that must be considered at a national level and also for each individual school and your own children.
Our own US Department of Education has already set up a group tasked with providing national guidelines for schools. When these are published, they will help guide your local school management in planning with staff, parents and students. However, any plans that have specific dates for openings will be subject to public health advice nearer the time and this means that uncertainty will remain a feature in the near future, while living with Covid-19. https://www.who.int/publications-detail/considerations-for-school-related-public-health-measures-in-the-context-of-covid-19
The Illinois Supreme Court has denied Governor Pritzker’s motion for an emergency motion for a supervisor order in the Darren Bailey lawsuit.
The Declaration of Independence declares we have “unalienable rights.” These are rights that come from our “Creator”, not the government. As the Declaration states, the government derives its just powers “from the consent of the governed.”
DIRTY TACTICS in Chicago! Mayor Lightfoot’s heavy hand is on full display. She has ordered a parking ban on all streets for NINE blocks surrounding the Churches. (Ban Notice in first picture). She then had the Aldermen send letters to all residents, to tell them that the reason they can’t park their cars on the streets outside their homes, and must move them immediately or get towed, is because of the Churches. (Letter in second picture).
The Mayor KNOWS that the Churches have their own private parking arrangements, and that the members do NOT park on the streets. So this parking ban has NOTHING to do with keeping people away from Church. Instead, it is a transparent attempt to incite HATE and VIOLENCE against the Churches and their members, by blaming them for an unnecessary and malicious parking ban.
Mayor Heavy Hand lacks the courage to arrest Pastors and parishioners for going to Church, because she knows the public relations disaster that this would cause. So, instead, she is content to incite hatred against people for exercising their fundamental right to worship, even as she claims that she wants to “save lives.”
The Churches will NOT be intimidated! They are used to this sort of tactics employed by the Communists in their motherland. Check out the huge banners (photo and video) that one church worked through the night to place on its building, to remind people of what is at stake here.
Services are taking place this morning, and a press conference addressing this issue immediately afterwards. PRAY!
What a travesty on so many levels.
As reported by CBS Chicago, Mayor Lori Lightfoot ordered a parking ban from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. Sunday in the neighborhood of Philadelphia Romanian Church in response to its intention to hold services.
On Sunday morning the tow trucks descended – not just on churchgoers, but on residents and everybody else, and on a private lot used by parishioners. Read this from Second City Cop:
City tow trucks arrived and yanked the vehicles of every single resident, including numerous elderly people and a more than a few nurses coming in from the night shifts and impounded them for violation of the signs that got posted Saturday with under twenty-four hours’ notice. The city also closed the private lot that the church used for parishioners in some half-assed attempt to force church-goers to park on the streets, streets listed as temporary tow zones to snatch their cars, too.
So all the residents WHO HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CHURCH are on the hook for tickets and towing and damages to their cars – because we all know exactly how gently City tow drivers are with someone else’s property.
Perhaps Lightfoot doesn’t share the view that civil liberties come not from her hand or the hand of Governor JB Pritzker. The church’s pastor said this: “The mayor is inciting hate against the church which is very sad. A lot of our members risked their lives to escape Communism, only to find it germinating in 2020 under Mayor Lightfoot in Chicago.”
Philadelphia Romanian Church in Chicago
He continued: “We prayed for the mayor and the governor almost every evening since March 19. We will continue to pray for them. Yet, we are also aware of our constitutional rights. Their effort to intimidate us will make us stronger.”
And let’s hope Lightfoot will explain her sense of justice in punishing everybody in the neighborhood by having their cars banged up and towed to the city’s infamous pound.
Find the rebels’ neighborhood and bulldoze it, that’s sort of the thinking. Nobody should be surprised because Prtizker is doing the same. He threatened to withhold federal money from any municipality that defies his emergency order. Tough luck even for residents in those communities who support Pritzker’s order. Some justice.
And some Chicagoans — no doubt including some who had their cars towed — indeed are on Pritzker’s side. They even had their own protest, as reported by the Chicago Sun-Times, against churchgoers at Philadelphia Romanian and some other churches. This “is really indicative of a clear, right-wing cult mentality that they have,” one of the protesters said. “They would rather keep themselves in business, keep themselves earning money, instead of caring about the residents of this neighborhood, which many of them, including the pastor, are not a part of.”
A fascinating aspect of the shutdown is who have been among those most frequently standing up for civil liberties: cops!
Around the state, many police chiefs and other enforcement officials have said they won’t enforce Pritzker’s emergency order. The Illinois Sheriffs” Association, in response to Pritzker’s threats to those who won’t enforce his order, said, “It is outrageous that the Governor is threatening retaliation against these leaders and the men and women of their offices. He is insulting heroic police officers, corrections officers and local voters.”
So, whatever you call what’s become of Illinois, don’t call it a “police state” because so many of our police want no part of any such thing.
And Second City Cop is a blog run by current and former Chicago police officers. They wrote the segment above, plus harsher language too salty to quote here. About Lightfoot’s towing they concluded:
It should also be a clarion call to the churches across the city as to how far the left will go to crush the faithful of all denominations. You are only useful to them as far as you obey orders and do what you’re told. If you don’t speak up now, expect the same to happen to you in short order.
Bravo.
Tyranny – Cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control; rule by one who has absolute power without legal right.
Friends, I’m sad to say that this is the current situation with our Governor. On Friday, he had IDPH file an emergency rule that makes it a Class A Misdemeanor for businesses to open against his wishes, punishable by up to 364 days in jail. He’s also threatening to withhold funds from counties if they defy him, even though Illinois law gives counties SUPREME AUTHORITY in these matters.
Let’s look at the facts: ✅ Since the start of the pandemic, our Governor has released 4,000 prisoners and 64 of those were convicted of murder ✅ He claims he has the ability to write the law to make it a criminal offense to disobey his unilateral actions. Small business owners would face JAIL TIME for doing so ✅ These penalties only apply to non-essential businesses. He has solely determined who is essential and who is non-essential. ✅ This isn’t about following a set of health guidelines – some of the most crowded places we go to are supermarkets and large retail stores which are deemed essential ✅ We have a State Pandemic Response Plan and State Laws that govern how we handle situations like this. The Governor is not following this plan. The individual county health departments have SUPREME AUTHORITY when it comes to quarantining, and all businesses who are forced to close have the right to DUE PROCESS which includes written notice and a legal hearing. ✅ All of our businesses CAN re-open SAFELY – as they are doing in Missouri, Indiana, Tennessee, etc. ✅ I believe our governor’s actions are in violation of the Illinois and US Constitutions – our most precious documents that give us INALIENABLE RIGHTS from our Creator and not government. ✅ The General Assembly is the branch of government that is tasked with writing laws. Our system does not permit the Governor to issue orders and then write laws to enforce them. One man cannot determine which businesses are essential and non-essential for an indefinite amount of time. He must be stopped immediately.
I promise you this. I will fight to oppose the fear-mongering, tyrannical policies of our Governor. This is not a Republican or Democrat issue. This is not about politics. I spent 22 years serving our country in the US Army, and I swore an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution. We must stand up for the rule of law. Please join me in this fight.
On Wednesday, these emergency rules will be voted on by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. Please email the Committee at jcar@ilga.gov and let your voice be heard!
ADMIN- please make this shareable.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️CALL TO ACTION! ⭐️ ⭐️⭐️⭐️ Send an email to the committee members who will be voting on Wednesday to give Pritzger the power keep our state locked down for another 150 days. (IL constitution allowed him 30 days.) He will also criminalize business owners who open before he allows.
Encourage the senators and state reps to vote NO to this unconstitutional lock-down!
Bill Cunningham – Democrat bill@billcunningham.com
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker has threatened to use state resources to punish rogue businesses, communities, or just step back and let them be sued by politically allied trial lawyers, should any continue to resist his emergency orders.
As resistance to the orders of Gov. JB Pritzker mounts statewide, Illinois could be about to enter uncharted legal and political waters, and businesses could be caught in the middle, left to decide whether to follow their local governmental leaders or the governor through the COVID-19 pandemic, with many lives and livelihoods hanging in the balance.
“This is not a yes or no question,” said attorney Michael Ciesla, of suburban Northbrook. “We’re getting into areas we’ve never gotten into before.”
This week, Madison County, located in the St. Louis metro area in southwestern Illinois, became the first county to officially break with Pritzker. The board on Tuesday voted overwhelmingly to defy Pritzker’s business shutdown orders and approve a plan to allow its businesses to reopen sooner than Pritzker would allow.
Illinois Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Todd Maisch |
They were followed on May 13 by the Effingham County Board in southeastern Illinois.
It remains to be seen how many businesses in those counties will reopen, and even whether enough customers will return to make it worth the businesses’ bother. But business owners who do reopen could face a number of challenges amid the tricky economic and legal waters churned by the COVID-19 pandemic – including Pritzker’s response to the resistance.
On one hand, businesses who choose to remain closed may face economic oblivion. Many who are now closed will likely never reopen again, no matter what the state or their local governments do.
However, Pritzker has publicly warned businesses who reopen without his approval that the state’s Department of Professional Regulation would take action against businesses, to strip them of the licenses they are legally required to hold to conduct a range of businesses. The state licenses dozens of professions, including barbers, hair braiders and cosmetologists, acupuncturists, athletic trainers, engineers, architects, firearm trainers, interior designers, locksmiths, nail technicians, pawn brokers, financial counselors, loan originators, security contractors, and a host of medical and dental professions, among many others. That list doesn’t include state regulations on restaurants and alcohol sellers.
Pritzker said the actions will be needed to hold accountable those business owners who violate public health orders. In statements delivered May 13, Pritzker appealed again to “science,” saying that alone will inform his decision making on when to lift business and activity restrictions in Illinois. Without those restrictions, he said, COVID-19 will kill thousands more Illinoisans.
In addition to yanking business licenses of renegade shop owners, Pritzker has hinted he also would do nothing to stop trial lawyers – many of whom have politically backed him and donated voluminously to Pritzker’s fellow Illinois Democrats – from launching lawsuits against businesses who defy him.
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker has illegally destroyed and taken personal property, violating the constitutional rights of business owners, by ordering businesses throughout the state to remain closed as part of his efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, a new federal lawsuit asserts.
New federal lawsuit asserts Gov. JB Pritzker violated the U.S. and Illinois constitutions by requiring business owners to close, destroying their property without compensation
On Thursday, May 14, a group of plaintiffs from Chicago’s southwest suburbs, including a Will County board member and two business owners, filed suit in Chicago federal court against Pritzker.
“Despite issuing the COVID-19 Closure Orders for a readily-apparent public purpose, the Governor did not provide compensation for those who suffered substantial – and perhaps total – diminution of value in their property interest as a result,” the complaint said.
The complaint asks the court to order the state to pay “just compensation” to the plaintiffs and potential unspecified classes of business owners and workers throughout the state who have become unemployed as a result of Pritzker’s COVID-19 orders.
The lawsuit is the latest to challenge the governor’s authority to use emergency powers to shut down much of the commerce across the state through his stay at home orders.
Pritzker has repeatedly said the orders are needed to prevent tens of thousands of deaths from the highly contagious novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19.
The governor has also stated publicly and argued in court he is not prevented by any constitutional amendment or provision, or any state law, from restricting a wide range of constitutional rights as part of the pandemic response. Those restrictions include limits on the rights to travel, operate a business and worship in religious assemblies churches and other houses of worship.
The governor has been challenged in a mounting number of legal actions over those actions. Three churches, for instance, have appealed to the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago after two federal district judges ruled the governor has the authority under the Constitution to close churches indefinitely during a pandemic.
Other lawsuits assert the governor exceeded his authority under the Illinois Emergency Management Act. Plaintiffs in those state court cases say the law only gives the governor 30 days to exercise emergency powers after declaring an emergency. After that, they said, the governor needs approval from the Illinois General Assembly.
Another Illinois Attorney General legal opinion from 2001, has surfaced indicating the Illinois Attorney General’s office position has changed on the question of whether Gov. JB Pritzker has overstepped his authority in extending his emergency powers to govern by executive order beyond 30 days, without first securing approval of Illinois state lawmakers.
On May 13, the Edgar County Watchdogs, a downstate investigative blog, published a 2001 memorandum from a former senior staff member at the Illinois Attorney General’s Office.
The Illinois Emergency Management Act “clearly authorizes the Governor to exercise emergency powers for up to 30 days,” Luke wrote in the memo.
However, to allow an Illinois governor to simply continue to extend those emergency provisions, at whim, “would render the limitation clause meaningless,” Luke wrote.
“A more reasonable construction, taking into consideration the other provisions of the (IEMA law), is that the Governor would be required to seek legislative approval for the exercise of extraordinary measures extending beyond 30 days.”
The memo was addressed to former Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Director Michael Chamness. At the time, it was to address the legal path forward, should the governor – Republican George Ryan, at the time – need to declare an emergency in response to an outbreak of hoof and mouth disease among livestock in the state.
Emergency Powers of the IL Governor (See also “Powers of the Governor”)
Section 7 of the IEMA Act (20 ILCS 3305/7(a) (West 2001 Supp.)) provides that in the event of a disaster, the Governor may, by proclamation, declare that a disaster exists.
Upon such proclamation, the Governor shall have and may exercise for a period of time not to exceed 30 days the emergency powers set out in that section. In informal Attorney General opinion No. I-01-028, issued July 2, 2001, it was determined that the emergency powers of the Governor cannot be extended beyond the 30 day period permitted in subsection 7(a)(1) of the IEMA Act without legislative approval.
Republican Jim Ryan served as attorney general at that time. He was succeeded by Democrat Lisa Madigan. She was, in turn, succeeded by Democrat Kwame Raoul, who currently serves in the office.
The Illinois Emergency Management Act “clearly authorizes the Governor to exercise emergency powers for up to 30 days,” Luke wrote in the memo. However, to allow an Illinois governor to simply continue to extend those emergency provisions, at whim, “would render the limitation clause meaningless.”
In recent court filings, however, Raoul has taken a completely opposite stance while defending Pritzker against legal challenges to his authority to continue to use emergency powers in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Republican State Representative John Cabello is upping the ante in his fight against the governor’s stay-at-home order.
The lawmaker filed a restraining order May 12, Tuesday night, asking a Winnebago County judge to rule Governor JB Pritzker’s stay-at-home order invalid for everyone in Illinois.
Attorney General Kwame Raoul immediately filed a motion in response, asking for this legal battle to be moved into federal court.
Cabello had already filed a lawsuit against the governor for his extended stay-at-home order. He was the second lawmaker to do so.
Illinois health officials Tuesday announced 144 more COVID-19 deaths, raising the toll in the state to 3,601. The state also saw a record-high 4,014 new cases of the virus.
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker faces still more lawsuits accusing him of overstepping the bounds of his authority in shutting down businesses as one of the primary pieces of his action to combat the spread of COVID-19.
Since late last week, three lawsuits were filed in southern Illinois and in the northwest corner of the state challenging Pritzker’s use of emergency powers under state law.
The latest lawsuits directly challenge Pritzker’s use of executive orders to force businesses to close, potentially forever, without any opportunity for appeal or due process.
The arguments underpinning the lawsuits are essentially the same as those already laid out in prior actions brought by two Republican state lawmakers against Pritzker, a Democrat.
The lawsuits – all brought by clients represented by attorney Tom DeVore, of Greenville – assert Pritzker did not have the authority under the Illinois Emergency Management Act to extend his stay at home order beyond 30 days, without an action by the Illinois General Assembly specifically granting him continued emergency powers.
They also argue the governor ignored state law laying out a process by which the Illinois Department of Public Health is empowered to order the closures – and business owners are granted the opportunity to challenge that closure in court.
Under his stay at home order, Pritzker divided businesses and activities in the state into two categories – essential and “non-essential.” The order directed all “non-essential” businesses to close, and all “non-essential” activities to cease.
The governor has repeatedly said the order was needed to stop the spread of the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 and “save lives.”
However, since Pritzker announced his intent to extend the order until the end of May, and then did so, criticism, resistance and legal challenges to his actions have steadily mounted since.
Roy F. McCampbell's Blog 