Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot has asked a Cook County judge to toss a lawsuit accusing her of unconstitutionally wielding COVID-19 restrictions against anti-lockdown protesters, but not this summer's massively larger Black Lives Matter protests, as the mayor says the anti-racism protests were simply too large to disperse.
On June 29 in Cook County Circuit Court, four Chicago residents, including William J. Kelly, host of the Citizen Kelly radio show, sued Lightfoot and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker. Plaintiffs claimed the mayor and governor overstepped their authority through their actions to combat the pandemic, causing economic harm to plaintiffs and violating their rights. The plaintiffs, who also include David Sheldon, Omar Garza and Kathleen Hanus, want COVID-19 orders from Lightfoot and Pritzker declared void.
Plaintiffs specifically charge Pritzker and Lightfoot breached the state constitution by prohibiting large gatherings. They noted Lightfoot threatened police action against those in Chicago who assemble in large groups. Kelly said he was part of a 150-person anti-lockdown rally, which police broke up on Lightfoot's orders, citing concerns over the possible spread of COVID-19.
However, when tens of thousands of people took to the streets this summer in support of the Black Lives Matter movement, not only did Lightfoot not express concerns about the spread of the virus from the protests, she encouraged them, according to the suit.
Kelly maintained Lightfoot dispersed the anti-lockdown protest because she did not like event's message, but agrees with BLM, and so left them alone.
"It is more feasible to disperse a stationary group of 150 than tens of thousands marching through the streets. Officials may reasonably conclude that dispersing such an immense crowd could lead to disorder, and that police resources are better used in managing the marches, closing streets, and protecting participants and the public," Lightfoot contended.
Lightfoot further asserted, "Kelly offers no facts indicating that his rally was dispersed because of its message."
As far as Pritzker, plaintiffs claimed the Illinois Emergency Management Agency Act only gives the governor 30 days of emergency power per "disaster," a period that expired April 8.
In a September filing, Pritzker countered the Act does provide 30 days of power, but if the disaster — determined by the governor — lasts longer, the Act also grants the state's chief executive another 30 days, and so on, until the emergency no longer exists, at the governor's determination. Pritzker noted that in the past few months state and federal judges have confirmed this reading of the Act. Pritzker has extended his emergency powers several times since March.
Pritzker pointed out Clay County Circuit Judge Michael McHaney, who ruled July 2 Pritzker exceeded his 30-day authority, is the only judge to rule that way. McHaney's ruling lacked meaningful analysis and should be "ignored," Pritzker said.
McHaney's ruling has since been vacated by a Sangamon County judge, after the case was reassigned to her by the Illinois Supreme Court. The Clay County case and similar ones were consolidated in Sangamon County.
Pritzker has been the target of a number of other suits, alleging his shutdown orders amounted to illegal seizures of property without compensation. The owners of a restaurant in west suburban Geneva have formally petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court to rule on the legal question concerning the extent of Pritzker's emergency powers under Illinois law.
Kelly and the other plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Lightfoot and Pritzker have been represented by Chicago lawyer Laura Grochocki.
Lightfoot has been represented by lawyers Andrew Worseck, Oscar Pina and Peter Cavanaugh from the city's Department of Law.
Pritzker has been represented by Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul and lawyers R. Douglas Rees, Thomas J. Verticchio, Isaac F. Jones and Darren Kinkead, of Raoul's office.
Cook County Associate Judge Allen P. Walker is presiding over the case.