Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 19 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Hooker v. Illinois State Board of Elections.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hooker v. Illinois State Board of Elections Anchor | green | “only if the provision is ambiguous will we 'consult the drafting history of the provision, including the debates of the delegates to the constitutional convention.” | 4 |
| 2 | East St. Louis Federation of Teachers, Local 1220 v. East St. Louis School District No. 189 Financial Oversight Panel | green | “a court should avoid declaring legislation unconstitutional if the case does not require it , and the power to determine the constitutionality of a statute should only be exercised if such finding is essential to the disposition of a case.” | 3 |
| 3 | East St. Louis Federation of Teachers, Local 1220 v. East St. Louis School District No. 189 Financial Oversight Panel | green | “the legislature could certainly provide that, upon the expiration of the terms of office of the currently elected trustees, successor trustees will be appointed rather than elected.” | 3 |
| 4 | Hooker v. Illinois State Board of Elections | green | “if the language of the provision is unambiguous, we must give it effect without resorting to aids of statutory construction.” | 3 |
| 5 | Hooker v. Illinois State Board of Elections | green | “one contending that language should not be given its natural meaning understandably has the burden of showing why it should not.” | 3 |
| 6 | Jones v. City of Calumet City, an Ill. Mun. Corp. | green | “in the absence of a supreme court pronouncement on the issue, we turn to the plain language of the illinois constitution, which is the best guide to the document's interpretation.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.