holding that city board of election commissioners violated voters’ rights to substantive due process by changing voting rules without informing voters of new requirements for voting and then refusing to count their votes
How later courts described this case
- holding that city board of election commissioners violated voters’ rights to substantive due process by changing voting rules without informing voters of new requirements for voting and then refusing to count their votes
- noting that the right of equal protection “has long been limited to instances of purposeful or invidious discrimination rather than erroneous or even arbitrary administration of state powers. The gravamen of equal protection lies not in the fact of deprivation of a right but in the invidious classification of persons aggrieved by the state’s action.”
- concluding that Chicago Board of Election Commissioners violated plaintiffs' fourteenth amendment rights by altering interpretation of candidate qualification statute without notice
- holding that an agency may be bound by its own established custom and practice as well as by its formal regulations
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
KNOCH, Senior Circuit Judge
(dissenting in part).
I would affirm the decision of the District Judge. I agree with his reasoning as set out in his opinion Bacon v. Holzman, N.D.Ill.E.D., 1967, 264 F.Supp. 120, 129, 130 , that the flaws in procedure on which the majority bases its reversal do not rise to constitutional stature.