I voted. Now Illinois says I can't run.
In March 2026 I voted in the Illinois primary. My precinct had no other local or regional contested Democratic races, so I cast a Republican ballot where a friend was in a contested race. It was the one race where my vote could make a difference. A month later I discovered that a single line of Illinois law (10 ILCS 5/7-43) uses that vote to disqualify me from running as an independent candidate for State Representative this November.
I will be filing suit at the end of April to challenge it. I have to act fast if my name is make it onto the November ballot because the filing deadline is May 26, 2026.
I am starting this process by representing myself because no attorney has yet agreed to take the case, so I am raising funds to cover filing fees, service of process, court reporter costs, and — since I hope to secure counsel — legal representation. Additionally, all of the filing has to be done in Springfield — more than fours hours away — making travel costs alone a significant expense.
A district that hasn't had a real race in six years
Illinois House District 89 covers seven rural counties along the Wisconsin and Iowa borders. The current incumbent has run unopposed three elections in a row. In November 2024, 10,342 voters — 17.5% of everyone who showed up — reached the line for State Representative, saw one name, and refused to ratify it. In some precincts (right where I live) the undervote exceeded 32%.
That is not apathy. That is a measured, precinct-level demand for choice that has been denied for six years running.
How every other door closed before this one
I tried every pathway the law provides. The Democratic Party infrastructure in my district has collapsed — 94 of 120 precincts have no committeeperson at all. The slating pathway that parties historically used to fill empty ballot lines was closed for the 2026 cycle by Public Act 103-0586. The independent petition route requires 2,957 signatures gathered across 95 miles of a district deliberately drawn to be ungatherable. And now Section 7-43 — a law nobody explained, no sign warned me about, no ballot language disclosed — has turned my vote into a forfeiture of my right to run.
This is a truly obscure law. No sign at the polling place. No instruction from the poll worker. No language on the ballot. No guidance from the State Board of Elections. I exercised my right to vote and I unknowingly forfeited my right to seek office as an independent. The only safe way a person could have qualified for office as an independent would be to exist outside of both established parties for the entire year preceding a general election.
What I'm asking the court to do
My complaint makes three arguments. First, that Section 7-43 violates the First Amendment by imposing a severe burden on the right to seek office, triggered by the act of voting. Second, that it violates due process by imposing that forfeiture without any notice. Third — and this is the argument that reaches beyond my own candidacy — that the statute's harshest consequences fall on voters in rural packed districts where competitive democracy has already been eliminated at every other level.
Gerrymandering is also known as "packing" and "cracking." The cracked city still has a functioning democracy. It still has a mayor, a city council, contested elections, active party organizations. The four rural regions around it have none of that left — by design. The mapmaker who cracked the city created five victims, not one. Section 7-43 is the final lock on a door that has already been welded shut.
Why this fight reaches beyond me
The Sangamon County Circuit Court has done something like this before. In Collazo v. Illinois State Board of Elections (2024), the same courthouse enjoined enforcement of a similar ballot access statute for one cycle so that candidates could appear on the ballot while the constitutional question was litigated. I'm asking for that same narrow remedy — one election, one district, one name on the ballot.
A precedent established by this case will not just help House District #89. It would serve to protect every independent or minor-party challenger in every gerrymandered rural district in Illinois, and potentially nationwide, regardless of which party drew the map.
What your donation covers
- Court filing fees in Sangamon County (several hundred dollars)
- Service of process on the Illinois State Board of Elections and the Attorney General's office
- Court reporter costs for the TRO and preliminary injunction hearing
- Travel to and from Springfield during the litigation
- If funds permit, legal counsel to take over the case or second-chair oral argument
Any funds raised beyond the immediate legal costs go toward signature-gathering operations if the injunction is granted and I'm restored to the filing calendar. Nothing raised here becomes salary. I am not running to make a living. I'm running to contest a seat that has been uncontested for too long.
Who I am
I live in Galena, Illinois. I've spent years working with the United Methodist Church and continue my association with numerous community organizations here in Galena. My academic background is in public administration. I have an MPA and worked several years as an adjunct professor. My research as a grad student going for a Ph.D. focused on how institutions sustain governing narratives — including religious ones — and on the structural barriers that make rural democracy disappear. I've published eight books through Driftless Rivers Coalition, the research corporation I incorporated in 2025.
This is the fight my research prepared me for. I didn't expect to be the plaintiff in it. For the year prior to the March 2026 primary, I asked more than a hundred potential candidates if they would run for this position if I were to help them. To a one, they called it a fool's errand — a waste of time and money.
The ask
If you've read this far, you already know what this is really about. A district with 10,342 people who showed up and refused to ratify the choice they were handed. A law that punishes voting with disenfranchisement. A courthouse that has, once before, done the right thing.
I don't need to win every count. I need enough to file, enough to argue, enough to get a hearing. Every dollar closes the gap between a good-faith pro se plaintiff and a fair shot at the bench.
Thank you for reading. Thank you for sharing. Thank you for any amount you can give. $5 goes a long way if a hundred people each give $5.
