Prairie State Wire

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois decision of granting summary judgment against Grasiela Rodriguez has been affirmed by the U.S. 7th Circuit Court.

Michael Madigan, Jason Gonzales, Grasiela Rodriguez, and Joe G. Barboza ran against each other during the 2016 Democratic primary election in which Madigan won.

The battle did not end in the primary election. Gonzales contested the results.

He accused Madigan, Rodriguez, Barboza of making concerted efforts to dilute the Hispanic votes by putting up Barboza and Rodriguez as candidates when Madigan’s campaign learned of Gonzales’ intent to run.

“The effort was hardly necessary, since if every non-Madigan vote had gone to Gonzales he still would have lost in a landslide. Nonetheless, Gonzales contends, the appearance of two candidates who served only as distractors violated the Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment and entitles him to damages (perhaps represented by the expenses of his failed run),” the court document stated and reported by Capitol Fax. “Gonzales relies on Smith v. Cherry, 489 F.2d 1098 (7th Cir. 1973).”

Gonzales filed an appeal.

The decision on the appeal reads:

“None of the other courts of appeals has ever reached a decision similar to Smith; certainly none has ever relied on Smith to vindicate one politician’s view that an opponent overstepped the bounds of propriety. See, e.g., Pignanelli v. Pueblo School District No. 60, 540 F.3d 1213, 1219 (10th Cir. 2008) (distinguishing Smith because “voters had a real choice between real candidates” in a school board election). We need not decide today whether Smith should be overruled, but we are confident that it should not be extended.”