Raymond E. Trafelet v. James R. Thompson, Governor of Illinois
Cases that cite this one
45 later published cases cite this decision. The 23 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Malmed v. Thornburgh (3d Cir. 1980)
- Shakman v. Democratic Organization of Cook Cty. (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1979)
- Gondelman v. Commonwealth (Pa. 1989)
- William M. HATTEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jack M. RAINS, Secretary of State for the State of Texas, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees (5th Cir. 1988)
- Saetre v. State (Minn. 1986)
- Richards v. Lavelle (7th Cir. 1980)
- Richards v. Lavelle (7th Cir. 1980)
- Pittman v. Chicago Board of Education (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1994)
- Freund v. Florio (District Court, D. New Jersey 1992)
- Honorable Ellis Gregory, Jr. Honorable Anthony P. Nugent, Jr. Honorable Douglas W. Greene and Honorable Flake L. McHaney v. Honorable John D. Ashcroft (8th Cir. 1990)
- Walker v. Employees Retirement System of Texas (Tex. App. 1988)
- Dwyer v. Conflict of Interest Commission (District Court, D. Rhode Island 1986)
- Nicpon v. Nicpon (Ill. App. Ct. 1986)
- United Black Community Fund v. City of St. Louis (District Court, E.D. Missouri 1985)
- Sklar v. Byrne (7th Cir. 1984)
- State Ex Rel. Haught v. Donnahoe (W. Va. 1984)
- Smith v. Bd. of Election Com'rs for City of Chicago (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1984)
- Rittenband v. Cory (Cal. Ct. App. 1984)
- Sklar v. Byrne (7th Cir. 1984)
- Barrio v. San Manuel Division Hospital for Magma Copper Co. (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983)
- Citizens Party v. Illinois State Board of Elections (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1982)
- Georges v. Carney (District Court, N.D. Illinois 1982)
- United States v. 16.92 Acres of Land (7th Cir. 1982)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Raymond E. TRAFELET et al.
v.
James R. THOMPSON, Governor of Illinois, et al
No. 78-1917
Supreme Court of the United States
October 9, 1979
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Mr. Justice WHITE, dissenting.
This case presents the issue whether a state law that requires elected judges to retire at the age of 70, challenged on grounds that it violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments, ought to be subjected to strict scrutiny or to the less exacting rational-relationship test employed by the court below. The determination turns on whether the challenged judicial retirement law is properly regarded as a limitation on access to the ballot that impairs "the right of individuals to associate for the advancement of political beliefs, and the right of qualified voters, regardless of their political persuasion, to cast their votes effectively." Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23, 30, 89 S.Ct. 5, 21 L.Ed.2d 24 (1968). We have held as recently as last Term that a state law limiting access to the ballot "impairs the voters' ability to express their political preferences," and thus could be justified only by a compelling state interest whose presence or absence is determined when a reviewing court subjects the questioned provision to strict scrutiny. Illinois Elections Bd. v. Socialist Workers Party, 440 U.S. 173, 184, 99 S.Ct. 983, 990, 59 L.Ed.2d 230 (1979). Accord, e. g., Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724, 728-729, 94 S.Ct. 1274, 39 L.Ed.2d 714 (1974).
Because the decision of the court below as to the appropriate standard of review is possibly in conflict with these and other decisions of this Court, I would grant this petition for certiorari and dissent from the Court's unwillingness to do so.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.