Illinois election protection ordinance: A legal and political roadmap¶
Illinois offers an exceptionally favorable landscape for municipal election protection ordinances based on 18 U.S.C. § 592. The state's robust home rule framework under Article VII, Section 6 of the Illinois Constitution, combined with established sanctuary law precedents (TRUST Act and Way Forward Act) and a landmark July 2025 federal court victory upholding non-cooperation policies, creates a strong legal foundation. Chicago, Evanston, and Oak Park emerge as tier-one targets, each with progressive governing bodies and demonstrated willingness to pioneer civil liberties ordinances. The Just Democracy Illinois coalition—led by Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, ICIRR, and Common Cause—provides ready infrastructure for campaign support.
Section 1: The legal battlefield favors municipal action¶
Home rule authority provides broad constitutional foundation¶
Article VII, Section 6 of the Illinois Constitution grants sweeping powers to municipalities:
"A home rule unit may exercise any power and perform any function pertaining to its government and affairs including, but not limited to, the power to regulate for the protection of the public health, safety, morals and welfare."
Section 6(m) mandates that home rule powers "shall be construed liberally"—a directive Illinois courts have consistently honored. Any municipality with population exceeding 25,000 automatically qualifies as a home rule unit; Illinois currently has 224 home rule municipalities. Smaller municipalities may achieve home rule status through referendum.
The distinction from non-home-rule (Dillon's Rule) municipalities is critical: while non-home-rule units possess only powers expressly granted by the state legislature, home rule units operate under a presumption of authority. The Illinois Supreme Court confirmed in Palm v. 2800 Lake Shore Drive Condominium Association (2013) that home rule municipalities may enact ordinances differing from state statutes unless the General Assembly has expressly exercised exclusive control.
Illinois rejects implied preemption¶
Illinois employs express preemption only for home rule units. The Home Rule Note Act (25 ILCS 75/5) requires that any law denying or limiting home rule power include "specific language limiting or denying the power or function" and set forth "in what manner and to what extent it is a limitation." Illinois courts have consistently refused to find implied preemption of home rule authority.
One preemption provision directly affects polling places: 10 ILCS 5/17-29© declares that "the regulation of electioneering on polling place property on an election day...is an exclusive power and function of the State." However, this preemption addresses political speech regulation, not public safety measures, police cooperation policies, or security protocols. An ordinance addressing armed federal personnel would likely fall outside this narrow electioneering preemption.
TRUST Act and Way Forward Act establish sanctuary precedent¶
The Illinois TRUST Act (5 ILCS 805/), enacted in 2017 with bipartisan support (signed by Republican Governor Bruce Rauner), prohibits local law enforcement from:
- Participating in immigration enforcement operations
- Transferring individuals to ICE custody without judicial warrants
- Providing ICE access to detainees or facilities
- Detaining individuals solely on immigration detainers or civil warrants
The Illinois Way Forward Act (Public Act 102-0234, 2021) strengthened these protections by prohibiting detention contracts with federal immigration authorities—effectively closing all immigrant detention centers in Illinois. Both laws survived federal challenge in McHenry and Kankakee Counties v. Illinois (7th Circuit, 2022), where the court ruled Illinois has the power to limit cooperation with federal enforcement.
Most significantly, in July 2025, U.S. District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins dismissed the DOJ's lawsuit challenging Illinois sanctuary laws (United States v. Illinois, N.D. Ill.), ruling: "The Federal Government may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program...Congress may not wield States as federal tools." This ruling, based on Tenth Amendment anti-commandeering principles, provides powerful precedent for local non-cooperation ordinances.
Firearms preemption creates complexity but not prohibition¶
430 ILCS 65/13.1 preempts local regulation of "handguns and ammunition for a handgun, and the transportation of any firearm" by FOID cardholders. Municipalities cannot independently ban firearms at polling places.
However, the Firearm Concealed Carry Act (430 ILCS 66/65) already prohibits concealed carry in: - Any building under control of a unit of local government (§65(a)(5)) - Schools, libraries, and public parks (common polling locations) - Court buildings and government facilities
This means government-owned polling places are already firearms-restricted under state law. The gap exists for private polling locations (churches, community centers), which explains why HB 5178—a bill to explicitly ban firearms at all polling places—was introduced but has not passed.
An election protection ordinance should focus on police cooperation protocols and security procedures rather than firearms possession, thereby avoiding preemption while leveraging existing state restrictions.
Federal law provides Supremacy Clause defense¶
18 U.S.C. § 592 provides that whoever "orders, brings, keeps, or has under his authority or control any troops or armed men" at polling places "shall be fined...or imprisoned not more than five years." A municipality could frame its ordinance as implementing federal policy locally—arguing that any state law requiring cooperation with armed federal personnel at polls would conflict with this federal criminal prohibition.
The Supreme Court has established that local laws may coexist with federal regulatory schemes unless explicitly preempted. In Wisconsin Public Intervenor v. Mortier, the Court ruled that federal savings clauses protecting "State" laws also protect local laws, as municipalities are "convenient agencies" of states.
Litigation risk assessment¶
| Challenge Type | Risk Level | Primary Defense |
|---|---|---|
| State election code preemption | Moderate | Ordinance addresses police procedures, not "electioneering" |
| Exceeds home rule authority | Low-Moderate | Liberal construction mandate; police power well-established |
| Federal conflict challenge | Low | TRUST Act precedent; Jenkins ruling; 10th Amendment |
| Ultra vires challenge | Low | Traditional municipal authority over police resources |
Mitigation strategies: Draft narrowly to focus on police procedures rather than election administration; include findings documenting local safety concerns; reference 18 U.S.C. § 592 as federal policy the ordinance implements; add severability clause; avoid terms like "electioneering" that trigger express preemption.
Section 2: Illinois statutory localization kit¶
Voter intimidation statutes¶
10 ILCS 5/29-4 (Prevention of Voting):
"Any person who, by force, intimidation, threat, deception or forgery, knowingly prevents any other person from...registering to vote, or...lawfully voting...shall be guilty of a Class 4 felony."
10 ILCS 5/29-17 (Deprivation of Constitutional Rights): Creates civil liability for anyone who "subjects...a citizen...to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws" relating to elections.
10 ILCS 5/29-18 (Conspiracy): Establishes civil liability for conspiracies to prevent voting through force, intimidation, or threat.
10 ILCS 5/17-29(a) (Polling Place Zone): Prohibits electioneering within 100 feet of polling places; critically, states that "no person shall interrupt, hinder or oppose any voter while approaching within those areas for the purpose of voting."
Local control statutes¶
65 ILCS 5/11-1-1 (General Police Power): "The corporate authorities of each municipality may pass and enforce all necessary police ordinances."
65 ILCS 5/11-1-2 (Police Authority): Grants police officers conservator of peace authority and explicitly provides: "The corporate authorities of each municipality may prescribe any additional duties and powers of the police officers."
10 ILCS 5/17-23: Permits law enforcement "at all times to enter and remain in the polling place" during official duties, and requires "uniformed police officers assigned to polling place duty shall follow all lawful instructions of the judges of election."
Sanctuary and non-cooperation framework¶
| Statute | Citation | Key Provision |
|---|---|---|
| Illinois TRUST Act | 5 ILCS 805/ | Prohibits law enforcement from participating in federal immigration operations |
| Way Forward Act | P.A. 102-0234 | Prohibits detention contracts with federal government |
| Chicago Welcoming City | MCC 2-173 | Bars CPD from honoring ICE detainers or administrative warrants |
| Cook County Non-Cooperation | Ordinance 11-O-73 | County-level sanctuary protections |
Election administration structure¶
Illinois uses a county-based election authority system. Under 10 ILCS 5/1-3(8), "election authority" means county clerks or Boards of Election Commissioners. Seven municipalities (including Chicago and Rockford) have opted out under 10 ILCS ⅚-1 to establish their own election commissions.
Election judges possess significant authority under 10 ILCS 5/18-7: "Said judges of election shall have authority...to keep the peace, and to cause any person to be arrested for any breach of the peace or for any breach of election laws." Section 18-8 authorizes judges to station police officers at polling places.
This structure means municipalities control their police forces but county election authorities control polling place operations—an ordinance should address municipal police cooperation rather than election administration.
Section 3: Top three target cities for ordinance campaign¶
Chicago: Tier-one priority with unmatched infrastructure¶
Governing Body: Chicago City Council (50 alderpersons representing 50 wards) Home Rule Status: Automatic (population 2.7 million) Political Composition: The Progressive Reform Caucus includes 19 members (38% of council), co-chaired by Maria Hadden (49th Ward) and Andre Vasquez (40th Ward). A five-member Democratic Socialist Caucus operates within the progressive bloc.
Relevant ordinance history: - Welcoming City Ordinance (MCC 2-173): Pioneering sanctuary policy dating to Mayor Harold Washington (1985), codified 2006, strengthened 2021 to remove carve-outs - Empowering Communities for Public Safety Ordinance (2021): Created elected District Councils in 22 police districts and a civilian Community Commission for Public Safety and Accountability - Successfully defended sanctuary policies in City of Chicago v. Sessions (7th Circuit, affirmed by SCOTUS 2020) and United States v. Illinois (2025)
Key champions: Alderpersons Hadden, Vasquez, Carlos Ramirez-Rosa, Byron Sigcho-Lopez (DSA member), Rossana Rodríguez (DSA member), and Jeanette Taylor. Mayor Brandon Johnson, a former Chicago Teachers Union organizer, has maintained strong progressive positions.
Strategic assessment: Chicago offers the largest impact and strongest existing infrastructure. The 19-member Progressive Caucus provides a substantial base, and the city's track record on sanctuary and police accountability measures demonstrates political will for civil liberties ordinances.
Evanston: Pioneer municipality with unified leadership¶
Governing Body: Evanston City Council (Mayor + 9 aldermen, council-manager form) Home Rule Status: Automatic (population ~74,500) Political Composition: Overwhelmingly progressive; 90% voted Biden in 2020. Mayor Daniel Biss (re-elected 2025 with 63%) is a former state senator and champion of progressive causes.
Relevant ordinance history: - Listed on federal sanctuary jurisdiction list (2025) - First local reparations program in the United States (2019): $25,000 housing grants to Black residents - First Illinois municipality to adopt ranked-choice voting (2022) - Ambitious climate mandates including renewable energy requirements for largest buildings - Strong racial equity framework
Strategic assessment: Evanston has demonstrated willingness to be a national pioneer on progressive policy. Its compact council (9 members) simplifies coalition-building, unified progressive leadership minimizes internal opposition, and proximity to Northwestern University provides academic and civil society resources.
Oak Park: Explicitly progressive identity with recent civil liberties actions¶
Governing Body: Village Board of Trustees (Village President + 6 trustees, village-manager form) Home Rule Status: Automatic (population ~54,000) Political Composition: Trustees Cory Wesley and Brian Straw have been explicit progressive voices; Village President Vicki Scaman leads administration.
Relevant ordinance history: - Long-standing sanctuary ordinance; listed on federal sanctuary jurisdiction list (May 2025) - Cancelled Flock Safety license plate reader contract (2025) over concerns about ICE/Border Patrol data access—demonstrating willingness to take concrete action against federal enforcement cooperation - Climate Ready Oak Park (2022): Declared climate crisis with emissions reduction targets - Natural gas ban in new construction (2024) - Ranked-choice voting referendum pursued (2025)
Strategic assessment: Oak Park's recent action cancelling the Flock Safety contract specifically due to federal immigration enforcement concerns shows the Village Board will take concrete steps on civil liberties—not just pass symbolic resolutions. Its small board (6 trustees) makes majority-building straightforward, and the village has explicitly identified as a "progressive, welcoming village."
Additional prospects¶
Urbana (Good): Currently considering a police surveillance technology ordinance requiring council approval before police purchase facial recognition, license plate readers, or drones. Over 40 residents attended a January 2026 meeting showing overwhelming support. University of Illinois presence creates strong civil society infrastructure.
Champaign (Moderate): Home rule status provides authority, but less developed progressive infrastructure than Urbana. May benefit from coordination with Urbana efforts for regional approach.
Section 4: Coalition partners and organizational infrastructure¶
Lead legal capacity: Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights¶
Contact: 25 E. Washington Street, Suite 1300, Chicago, IL 60604 | 312-630-9744 | clccrul.org Key Staff: Ami Gandhi, Director of Strategic Initiatives and Midwest Voting Rights Program (agandhi@clccrul.org)
The Chicago Lawyers' Committee operates the 866-OUR-VOTE hotline for Illinois and Indiana, deployed field volunteers across Chicago and six suburban counties in 2024, and serves as lead counsel for Just Democracy Illinois. Their litigation capacity is substantial—they successfully secured automatic voter registration implementation and filed the December 2025 motion protecting Illinois voter data from DOJ overreach.
Primary advocacy organizations¶
ACLU of Illinois | aclu-il.org Legal Director: Nusrat Jahan Choudhury. Current priorities include voting rights, sanctuary protection, and police accountability through the Coalition for Police Contracts Accountability. Partners with ICIRR on the immigration hotline (1-855-HELP-MY-FAMILY). Issued joint statements with LWV Illinois condemning federal voter registration executive orders.
League of Women Voters of Illinois | lwvil.org 332 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 634, Chicago, IL 60604 | President: Becky Simon Extensive local chapter network including LWV of Chicago, Cook County, Champaign County, Greater Rockford, and Glen Ellyn/Wheaton. Joint Election Protection Program with Common Cause Illinois. Conducted "Hands Off!" voting rights events and "NO KINGS" protests in 2025.
Common Cause Illinois | commoncause.org/illinois Executive Director: Elizabeth Grossman. Operates one of Illinois' most extensive voter protection field programs with poll watcher training and deployment. Just Democracy Illinois steering committee member. Current campaigns include the RACE Act (restoring voting rights for incarcerated persons) and foreign money ban advocacy.
Immigrant rights and civic engagement¶
Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR) | icirr.org Hotline: 1-855-HELP-MY-FAMILY | CEO: Lawrence Benito Coalition of 130+ partner organizations. Filed January 2025 lawsuit against Trump administration immigration enforcement order. Just Democracy Illinois steering committee member. Democracy Project has registered over 250,000 immigrant voters since 2004.
Asian Americans Advancing Justice | Chicago | advancingjustice-chicago.org Executive Director: Andy Kang. Poll watching program monitored 223 polling places in 2024 primary. Pan-Asian Voter Empowerment (PAVE) Coalition leadership. Just Democracy Illinois steering committee member.
Youth and jail voting expertise¶
Chicago Votes | chicagovotes.com Co-Executive Directors: Stevie Valles, Jen Dean, Rudy Garrett Pioneered Cook County Jail as first jail polling place in the country (2020). Registered 5,000+ voters in Cook County Jail since 2017. Just Democracy Illinois steering committee member. Expertise in reaching marginalized voters.
Just Democracy Illinois: The coordinating coalition¶
The Just Democracy Illinois coalition (justdemocracyillinois.org) provides ready-made infrastructure for coordinated advocacy. Steering committee includes:
- Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Chicago
- CHANGE Illinois (redistricting reform)
- Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights
- Chicago Votes Education Fund
- Common Cause Education Fund
- Illinois PIRG Education Fund
- Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights
Additional members include ACLU of Illinois, Action Now Institute, SEIU Healthcare, and Vote At Home. Major accomplishments include passing automatic voter registration (2017) and securing implementation through litigation.
Legal clinics with relevant expertise¶
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law – Bluhm Legal Clinic | 312.503.8576 Community Justice and Civil Rights Clinic (Director: Sheila A. Bedi) focuses on policing issues. MacArthur Justice Center/Civil Rights Litigation Clinic (Director: Alexa Van Brunt) handles CPD consent decree enforcement and voting rights litigation.
University of Chicago Law School – Civil Rights and Police Accountability Project Directors: Craig Futterman, Randolph Stone. Led effort resulting in 2019 federal consent decree against CPD.
Police accountability coalition¶
The Coalition for Police Contracts Accountability (cpcachicago.org) includes ACLU of Illinois, Chicago Lawyers' Committee, Chicago Appleseed, Chicago Urban League, JCUA, MALDEF, BYP100, and Community Renewal Society—providing a network experienced in municipal advocacy on law enforcement policy.
Section 5: Election Security Infrastructure¶
Illinois's election security infrastructure is nationally recognized, forged by the 2016 Russian breach of the Illinois Voter Registration System -- the incident that catalyzed nationwide election cybersecurity reform. The state's Cyber Navigator Program (CNP), a three-agency partnership that won the 2020 EAC Clearinghouse Award for Outstanding Innovation in Election Cybersecurity, provides nine dedicated cybersecurity specialists serving all 108 election authorities. Illinois is the only state in the Midwest batch that joined the 19-state lawsuit against EO 14248, and AG Kwame Raoul secured a preliminary injunction blocking challenged provisions. Despite strong overall firearms regulation, no explicit statutory ban on firearms at polling places exists -- a gap that HB 5178 (2024) attempted but failed to close. The Democratic supermajority in both chambers (Senate 40-19, House 78-40) makes hostile preemptive legislation virtually impossible.
State Election Authority & Legal Framework¶
Illinois is the only state in the Midwest batch using a Board of Elections model rather than a Secretary of State. The Illinois State Board of Elections (SBE), established under the 1970 Illinois Constitution, comprises eight members appointed by the Governor -- four from Cook County, four from outside -- with bipartisan balance requirements. The SBE oversees 108 local election authorities (county clerks and boards of election commissioners).
The Illinois Election Code (10 ILCS 5/) governs all election procedures. Virtually all counties use hand-marked paper ballots with optical scan tabulators; DRE systems are no longer in use. Cook County's upgraded touchscreen ballot marking devices still produce paper records. A 5% random post-election retabulation is required under 10 ILCS 5/24B-15.
Illinois's exceptionally strong home rule framework under Article VII, Section 6 of the 1970 Constitution is the most favorable in the Midwest for municipal ordinance strategies. 224 home rule municipalities automatically qualify (population over 25,000) and may "exercise any power and perform any function pertaining to its government and affairs," with powers construed liberally. Cook County is the only home rule county. The preemption mechanism requires affirmative legislative action: Section 6(g) requires a three-fifths vote to deny or limit home rule powers; Section 6(h) requires specific legislative declaration for exclusive state exercise. This creates a strong presumption favoring local authority.
Key case law: Kanellos v. County of Cook (1972) established that the 1970 Constitution "was designed to drastically alter the relationship which previously existed between local and state government." Kalodimos v. Village of Morton Grove (1984) upheld a complete municipal handgun ban. Scadron v. City of Des Plaines (1992) established the "specifically limited" standard for preemption.
The TRUST Act (2017) and Way Forward Act (2021) provide the exact structural precedent for election protection ordinances. The TRUST Act prohibits state and local law enforcement from participating in immigration enforcement; the Way Forward Act prohibits state/local government contracts for federal immigrant detention. The DOJ sued Illinois over these provisions in 2025; a federal judge dismissed the suit in July 2025 in a 64-page ruling citing anti-commandeering principles.
Key 2024-2025 legislation: The Protect Illinois Communities Act (HB 5471, 2023) banned assault weapons sales, though compliance rates remain extremely low. HB 5178 (2024) proposed an explicit firearms ban at polling places but does not appear to have been enacted.
Cybersecurity Infrastructure & Capabilities¶
Illinois's cybersecurity posture was forged by crisis. The 2016 Russian breach of the Illinois Voter Registration System -- in which attackers hit SBE servers five times per second for a month, viewing 76,000 voter records and fully compromising 3,500 -- became the catalyst for national election cybersecurity reform. In response, Illinois created the Cyber Navigator Program (CNP) in 2018, a nationally recognized three-agency partnership between SBE, the Department of Innovation & Technology (DoIT), and the Illinois State Police's STIC fusion center. Nine dedicated cybersecurity specialists serve all 108 election authorities. The program won the 2020 EAC Clearinghouse Award for Outstanding Innovation in Election Cybersecurity, and no state-level data breach has occurred since its launch.
HAVA funding includes $13.2 million from the 2018 allocation, with at least half dedicated to the CNP. Base $10,000 grants go to every participating county. Original HAVA funding for voting equipment replacement was $140 million, with an estimated $175 million needed for statewide replacement.
The loss of EI-ISAC -- whose funding was terminated by CISA/DHS in March 2025 -- eliminates Albert sensor monitoring and penetration testing services. Illinois's CNP provides a significant state-level buffer, but smaller rural election authorities lacking in-house IT are most vulnerable. A 2024 contractor breach exposed sensitive voter data in approximately 15 counties through unsecured databases.
Physical Security & Polling Place Protections¶
The electioneering buffer zone is 100 feet from each polling room entrance (10 ILCS 5/17-29). Regulation of electioneering at polling places is an "exclusive power and function of the State."
Despite Illinois's strong overall firearms regulation framework -- FOID card requirements, assault weapons ban, concealed carry restrictions -- no explicit statutory ban on firearms at polling places exists. The concealed carry law (430 ILCS 66/65) prohibits firearms in schools, libraries, and government buildings that commonly serve as polling places, but this coverage is incidental to their regular function rather than polling-place-specific. The Movement Advancement Project classifies Illinois as having "no clear prohibition."
Firearms preemption exists under 430 ILCS 66/90 (Firearm Concealed Carry Act), which declares regulation of handguns and ammunition "exclusive powers and functions of the State" and explicitly invokes Section 6(h) as a denial of home rule powers. However, the Protect Illinois Communities Act (2023) notably does NOT preempt home rule municipalities, allowing stricter local bans to remain -- demonstrating the state's comfort with layered local authority on public safety matters adjacent to firearms.
Voter intimidation constitutes a Class 4 felony under 10 ILCS 5/29-4. Critically, 10 ILCS 5/29-17 establishes an explicit private right of action: any citizen whose election rights are deprived "shall be liable to the party injured or any person affected, in any action or proceeding for redress." This is among the strongest citizen enforcement tools in the Midwest.
The AG assigns monitoring teams to polling places statewide on Election Day. Election judges have authority to keep the peace and cause arrests under 10 ILCS 5/18-7.
Legal Strategies & Key Contacts¶
Illinois joined the 19-state lawsuit against EO 14248 (State of California v. Trump, Case No. 1:25-cv-10810, D. Mass.), filed April 3, 2025. AG Kwame Raoul (D) secured a preliminary injunction on June 13, 2025, blocking challenged provisions including documentary proof of citizenship requirements and federal funding conditionality. The case is ongoing following the court's denial of the motion to dismiss on September 17, 2025. Illinois is involved in 35+ multistate lawsuits against the federal government as of mid-2025.
AG Raoul has expressly cited Printz anti-commandeering principles in defending the TRUST Act, establishing the doctrinal framework within Illinois jurisprudence. Governor J.B. Pritzker (D) is supportive and has specifically expressed concern about federal interference in 2026 elections.
The risk of hostile preemptive legislation is near zero. Republicans would need 36 Senate votes and 71 House votes for the three-fifths supermajority required under Article VII, section 6(g) to deny home rule powers -- numbers far beyond their current caucus.
Key contacts:
| Role | Contact |
|---|---|
| State Board of Elections | (217) 782-4141; elections.il.gov |
| AG Election Protection (North) | 1-866-536-3496 |
| AG Election Protection (Central/South) | 1-866-559-6812 |
| DoIT / Cyber Navigator | (217) 524-3648; James.L.Patterson@illinois.gov |
| IEMA | (217) 782-2700 |
| ## Conclusion: A strategic pathway forward |
Illinois presents an unusually favorable legal and political environment for election protection ordinances. The combination of constitutional home rule authority, express preemption doctrine favoring local action, established sanctuary law precedents, and fresh judicial validation creates a strong foundation. Three strategic insights emerge:
The legal argument is strongest when framed around police cooperation, not election administration. An ordinance directing municipal police not to assist armed federal personnel near polling places—rather than regulating polling place conduct—avoids the express preemption in 10 ILCS 5/17-29© while leveraging the TRUST Act framework that survived federal challenge.
Chicago's Progressive Caucus offers the most efficient pathway to a high-impact ordinance. Nineteen alderpersons already aligned on civil liberties issues means a majority coalition of 26 is achievable. The city's experience defending the Welcoming City Ordinance through federal litigation provides institutional confidence and legal expertise.
Evanston and Oak Park offer opportunities for pioneering models. Both have smaller governing bodies where majorities are easier to build, demonstrated willingness to be first-movers on progressive policy, and recent actions (Oak Park's Flock Safety cancellation) showing readiness for concrete civil liberties measures.
The Just Democracy Illinois coalition provides existing infrastructure for coordinated advocacy, with Chicago Lawyers' Committee offering litigation support and ICIRR contributing grassroots organizing capacity. An organized campaign leveraging these resources, targeting the identified municipalities, and framing the ordinance within the established sanctuary law framework has strong prospects for success.
Printable Flyer¶
Download the Illinois Election Protection Flyer
A printable 5.5" × 8.5" flyer with Illinois-specific legal analysis, target cities, and coalition partners.
Open the flyer in your browser, then use File → Print or Ctrl+P to print or save as PDF. The flyer is optimized for half-letter (5.5" × 8.5") printing.
City-Specific Flyers¶
Printable flyers for individual cities with local council details, meeting schedules, and action steps.
Chicago — ~2,720,000 Evanston — ~76,000 Oak Park — ~52,000 Urbana — ~42,000