BEFORE THE DULY CONSTITUTED ELECTORAL BOARD FOR THE HEARING AND PASSING UPON OBJECTIONS TO THE NOMINATION PAPERS FOR CANDIDATES FOR THE OFFICE OF STATE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE 52" REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT SHARON A. MERONT, ) Objector, } vs. } Case No. 11 SOEB GP 502 KENT GAFFNEY, } Candidate, } NOW COMES Objector, SHARON A. MERONI, by and through her attomey, and for her Response to the Motion to Strike and or Dismiss filed by Candidate, states as follows: ‘The Candidate filed a Nomination Papers to be on the ballot for the Illinois General Assembly for the March 20, 2012 Primary Election and November 2012 General Election in Iinois. As part of the submission of nomination petitions, the Candidate was required by the [linois Election Code to submit a “Statement of Candidacy.” 10 ILCS $/10-5. The Statement of Candidacy requires the candidate to state under oath in writing that: 1, , being first duly sworn, say that I reside at street, in the city (or village) of. . in the county of ~ State of Illinois; and that | am a qualified voter therein: that am a candidate for election to the oflice of| to be voted upon at the election to be held on the ___ day of and that 1 am legally qualified to hold such office and that T have filed (or will file before the close of the petition filing period) a statement of economic interests as required by the Illinois Governmental Ethics Act, and I hereby request thal my name be printed upon the official ballot for election to such office. 10 ILCS 5/8-8, 10-5 (2009). Ilinois uses a practice of “apparent conformity” under which: Certificates of nomination and nomination papers, and petitions to submit public questions to a referendum, being filed as required by this Code, and being in apparent conformity with the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed to be validunless objection thereto is duly made in writing within 5 business days after the last day for filing the certificate of nomination or nomination papers or petition for a public question 10 ILCS 5/10-8 (2009), Petitioner adequately stated her grounds of complaint, that the candidate did not meet the Constitutional requirements for candidacy set by Illinoii law. ‘The central provision at issue is Section 10-8 of the Illinois Election Code, which states: The objector's petition shall give the objector's name and residence address, and shall state fully the nature of the objections to the certificate of nomination or nomination papers or petitions in question, and shall state the interest of the objector and shall state what relief is requested of the electoral board 10 I1.CS 5/10-8 (2011) ‘The requirements in Section 10-8 are directory rather than mandatory. The provisions of the Ilinois Election Code are designed to protect the integrity of the electoral process. Welch v. Johnson, 147 IIL. 2d 40, 56, 167 Il, Dec. 989, 588 N.E.2d 1119 (1992). The Hollen Court ruled that Section 10-8 is “designed to secure order, system and dispatch in proceedings.” Wollen v. Jacoby, 274 Il. App. 3d 388, 210 Ill. Dec, 841, 843, 653 N.E.2d 1303, 1305 (1* Dist 1995). The test applied by the Wallen court was that unless the defect complained of in the Objection was either “essential to the validity of the election process” or else the basis “confusion or prejudice” based upon “proven conerete, factual evidence” from the Candidate, the Objection must stand. ‘The Hollen court's, conclusion is buttressed by the principle that “substantial compliance can satisfy even mandatory provisions of the Code.” Ibid. ‘The few constitutional requirements of the Candidate are easily reviewable by reference to the Illinois Constitution of 1970. A candidate for the Illinois General Assembly must be a United States Citizen, at least 21 years old, and have lived in the district of his candidacy for at least twoyears prior to the election, Ill. Const. Art 4, §2. These requirements are of public record and are uncomplicated. They therefore are a proper basis of the Objection. ‘The State Board of Elections requires no evidence or proof of the citizenship of a candidate other than the Statement of Candidacy. The State of Illinois requires no documentation or other proof in the nomination papers that can be reviewed by a citizen seeking to verify that the candidate meets the citizenship requirement of the Ilinois Constitution other than the mere statement of a candidate, which is in essence unreviewable. ‘The right to vote is recognized as a cornerstone of American democracy. “No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined.” Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 ULS. 1, 17, 848. Ct. 526, 935, 1] L. Ed. 2d 481, 492 (1964). As stated by the United States Supreme Court, “the right of qualified voters, regardless of their political persuasion, to cast their votes effectively. . . rank[s] among our most precious freedoms.” Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23, 30, 89 8. Ct'5, 10, 21 L. Ed. 2d 24 (1968), The right to vote is created under the federal constitution and is therefore applicable to the State of Iilinois though the Fourteenth Amendment. Petitioner's attempt to protect her right to vote by objection to candidates on citizenship lative scheme affects a “stage ‘grounds is part of the right to vote under Illinois law because the le, of the election” of candidates for office. Tully v. Edgar, 171 Ill. 2d 297, 307, 215 Ill. Dec. 646, 651- 2, 664 N.E.2d 43, 48-9 (1996). It is not contested that a state government, such as that of Minois, indisputably has an interest in preserving the integrity of its election process to ensure that elections are fair and honest. Rosario v. Rockefeller, 410 U.S. 752, 761, 93 S. Ci. 1245, 36 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1973). Butis its equally well