EAST ST. LOUIS – Governor JB Pritzker removed state Rep. Darren Bailey’s suit for liberty from Clay County to U.S. district court on May 21, and Bailey moved to remand it to Clay County the same day.
Bailey’s lawyer Steven Wallace of Glen Carbon claimed Pritzker removed it to avoid a summary judgment hearing before Circuit Judge Michael McHaney on May 22.
Wallace wrote that removal reeked of bad faith.
He moved to expedite a hearing, and Magistrate Judge Gilbert Sison set it May 26.
In Pritzker’s removal notice, attorney Thomas Verticchio of Chicago argued that Bailey alleged deprivation of at least four rights secured by the U.S. Constitution.
Wallace responded that Bailey did not predicate relief in any respect on alleged violation of rights under the Constitution or federal statutes.
Pritzker declared an emergency on March 9, and issued an order under state emergency management law on March 20.
Bailey sued him on April 23, claiming the law limited his order to 30 days from the date of declaration.
His lawyer Thomas DeVore of Greenville wrote that Pritzker issued redundant proclamations for the sole purpose of rendering the limit meaningless.
“The emergency powers granted to the office of governor ensured a quick response to a disaster event until such time as the legislature had ample time to convene and address whether any laws need to be codified to further protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state of Illinois,” DeVore wrote.
He wrote that if protection of the people required additional legal safeguards, “it is far past time for the legislative branch to act.”
McHaney granted a temporary restraining order on April 27, ruling that Pritzker couldn’t quarantine Bailey in his home.
He left it to Pritzker and Bailey to set a date on a preliminary injunction.
Pritzker petitioned the Fifth District appellate court to vacate McHaney’s order, and Bailey chose not to fight.
He and Pritzker agreed that Bailey would consent to vacation, return to McHaney’s court, and amend his complaint.
Fifth District judges Randy Moore, John Barberis, and Milton Wharton vacated McHaney’s order on May 1, and remanded the suit for further proceedings.
DeVore amended Bailey’s complaint on May 13, to challenge Pritzker’s assertion that he acted under public health law.
DeVore wrote that the Department of Public Health has supreme authority in matters of quarantine and isolation.
He wrote that no person may be quarantined and no place closed without prior consent or court order.
He also wrote that to obtain an order, the department must prove significant danger from a person or group it reasonably believes to have been exposed, and that the department must prove that other reasonable means of correction were exhausted and no less restrictive alternative existed.
DeVore moved for summary judgment and obtained a hearing, but lost it by removal.
Verticchio’s removal notice stated that Bailey alleged he suffered harm to rights that are protected under the U.S. Constitution.
He wrote that Bailey sought redress under color of Illinois law for alleged deprivation of rights secured by the U.S. Constitution.
He wrote that Bailey asserted a due process claim under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Wallace responded that the complaint contained no suggestion that Pritzker’s proclamations and orders violated Bailey’s federal civil rights.
“Plaintiff states only that defendant’s proclamations and executive orders exceed authority conferred by the Illinois legislature,” he wrote.
He wrote that the question of Pritzker’s authority to take certain actions under Illinois statutes goes to the heart of the interests of the state.
Sison will preside unless a party declines consent to magistrate jurisdiction.
Pritzker previously removed constitutional challenges that DeVore filed for a bar owner in Clinton County and a hair stylist in Clay County.
In those cases, the court notified DeVore that district court hasn’t admitted him.