City of Chi. v. Alexander
2017 Ill. LEXIS 644
| Ill. | 2017Background
- Occupy Chicago protests in downtown Chicago; City allowed sidewalk protest but restricted storage, tents, and blocking traffic.
- CPD advised protesters of park closing rules; 11:00 p.m.–6:00 a.m. park closure enforced under Chicago Park District Code § B(2).
- Protests moved to Grant Park; arrests of 173 protesters for remaining in park after closure and 130 at a later rally.
- Defendants argued the park-closure ordinance violated rights to assembly under both US and Illinois constitutions and was unenforceable selectively.
- Circuit court held the ordinance unconstitutional as applied and facially; appellate court reversed; this court granted review to examine Illinois Constitution art. I, §5 applicability.
- Record showed minimal specific evidence tying the nightly closure to a narrowly tailored government interest; majority remanded to address as-applied challenges on Illinois Constitution grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether art. I, §5 provides broader protection than the First Amendment. | Alexander (City) argues lockstep with federal precedent. | Defendants contend Illinois protects broader assembly rights. | Illinois Constitution interpreted in lockstep with federal precedent. |
| Applicability of time/place/manner analysis to art. I, §5. | City views as content-neutral regulation under lockstep analysis. | Defendants seek more robust scrutiny under state constitution. | Apply intermediate scrutiny; no strict scrutiny. |
| Whether the as-applied challenge was forfeited or merits review. | City argues appellate forfeited challenge; majority agrees. | Dissent argues substantive as-applied review remains viable. | Majority: defenses forfeited; dissent disagrees and would remand for evidentiary hearing. |
| Whether record supports narrowly tailored, ample alternatives under intermediate scrutiny. | City asserts park-closure serves safety, maintenance, and sanitation. | Record lacking specific, relevant evidence addressing as-applied claim. | Record insufficient; appellate court judgment stands subject to Illinois law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Caballes, 221 Ill. 2d 282 (2006) (limited lockstep approach; state constitution similar to federal provision; unique language may be interpreted independently)
- De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 (1937) (incorporation of assembly right against states via due process)
- Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949) (early protection for assembly; limits of government regulation of expressive conduct)
- Rizzo, 2016 IL 118599 (Ill. 2016) (as-applied challenges require factual record; cannot decide without evidentiary hearing)
- Lyons, 39 Ill. 2d 584 (1968) (time, place, or manner framework for park restrictions)
- Ring v. Board of Education of District 24, 245 Ill. 334 (1910) (early Illinois treatment of First Amendment issues in state courts)