What it takes to expel legislators in Illinois
Though historically rife with a variety of scandals, Illinois legislators have rarely used their powers of expulsion to remove offending colleagues from office.
In fact, it's happened only twice in the 205-year history of the General Assembly — first in 1905 for slandering the honor of the legislative body and then in 2012 for corruption — though there have been several unsuccessful attempts.
The ability of legislators to expel fellow members came to the fore recently when Republican Tennessee lawmakers ousted two Democratic state representatives and attempted to vote out a third for participating in an anti-gun protest on the House floor late last month following a school shooting that left six dead. The protest broke the chamber's rules of decorum, Republican leaders in Tennessee charged.
Both expelled Tennessee legislators were reinstated to their seats less than a week later, after county councils voted to have the two ousted men fill the vacancies.
“Republicans there clearly shot themselves in the foot with this,” said Dick Simpson, a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Illinois at Chicago, “Most commonly you kick someone out for corruption, but there was so little support for this and they're already back in office, the Republicans didn't gain any advantage in doing this.”
It's the fourth time since 1980 a Tennessee legislator has been expelled, according to records at Ballotpedia.org.
There have been 20 legislative expulsions since 1980, according to the report. Sexual harassment and corruption are the most common reasons.
In Illinois, Democratic Party leaders argue the legislature's disciplinary rules make it much more difficult to expel members here than in Tennessee.
“In the Illinois House, we take small steps to structure respectful debate, and like many bodies we've had to consider how an elected official's wrongdoing affects their ability to serve,” said state Rep. Robyn Gabel, chairwoman of the House Rules Committee and Democratic majority leader. “But there is simply no parallel in Illinois to the flagrant disregard for due process that the Tennessee House majority has shown in attempting to permanently remove members over a matter of decorum.”
Despite a 78-vote supermajority, Illinois House Democrats need 79 votes to expel any member or change any of the rules regarding disciplinary action against a fellow legislator, according to the House rules that are updated after every election.
Tennessee Republicans hold 75 of the 98 House seats, or 76%, and used that supermajority to rapidly push through the expulsions, critics contend.
Many political experts blame gerrymandered legislative districts for creating lopsided partisanship not just in Tennessee, but in statehouses throughout the country.
“The drawing of political districts really creates the foundation of our government, and where that foundation is rigged, everything that flows from it carries that taint,” said Madeleine Doubek, executive director of Change Illinois, a nonpartisan, nonprofit group that advocates for ethical government and elections. “Politicians' drawing their own districts and creating safe seats for themselves is a contributing factor to this situation where you have a supermajority that can follow its leaders and exert its will in any circumstance.”
The rules governing expulsion of a state representative in Illinois are seemingly written to prevent overuse or misuse.
The first step is a complaint for a special investigating committee that must be signed by three members outlining all charges against the elected official. Then, three members of each party are assigned to the investigating committee by party leaders. The committee has to investigate the charges and vote on each allegation. A majority of votes is required to authorize charging the accused legislator. A tie results in no charge.
If the committee votes to charge the legislator with wrongdoing, two members — one from each party who were not on the investigating committee and did not sign the initial complaint — are assigned as managers for a hearing of a 12-member select committee on discipline.
The disciplinary committee assignments are also evenly split between each party, and members can't be initial complainants or members of the investigative committee.
At the disciplinary hearing, the managers present their case for conviction while the accused legislator can provide rebuttal arguments.
A majority vote is required on each count by the disciplinary committee. A tie vote counts toward acquittal. According to the rules, if the disciplinary committee “finds the member at fault on any charge, the committee shall adopt a recommendation for disciplinary action. The committee may recommend a reprimand, a censure, expulsion ... or that no penalty be invoked” by a vote of the full House.
The disciplinary stage is incredibly rare. Most complaints are halted at the investigative level.
That's what happened in 2020, when former Minority Leader Jim Durkin, a Western Springs Republican, and two others called for an investigation into then-House Speaker Mike Madigan when he was implicated in the ComEd bribery scandal. Madigan later resigned.
Madigan, a Chicago Democrat, himself sought an investigation of former Democratic state Rep. Luis Arroyo Sr. of Chicago, who was indicted on federal bribery charges in October 2019. Arroyo resigned before the committee completed its investigation.
Corruption is usually the cause for such complaints in Illinois, not breaking the rules of decorum.
It was corruption that led to the most recent expulsion from the General Assembly. In 2012, Chicago Democratic state Rep. Derrick Smith was booted after being indicted on federal bribery charges. He was later convicted, but not before he ran for his seat again and won. He couldn't be kicked out again because of a provision in the state's rules regarding disciplinary actions against elected officials that says they can't be expelled for the same offense twice.
Smith's conviction in 2014 forced his automatic removal. He was sentenced to five years in prison.
Before Smith's ouster, the only other Illinois legislator to be expelled was state Sen. Frank D. Comerford, a Chicago Democrat who raised the hackles of his brethren in both chambers shortly after winning election in 1904. Comerford claimed during a speech at the Illinois College of Law that the legislature was “a great public auction, where special privileges are sold to the highest corporation bidders.”
Alleging that he had slandered “the honor and integrity” of the General Assembly, a complaint was filed against Comerford, and a special committee was assigned to investigate his claims. According to media reports at the time, the investigating committee determined his corruption claims to be unfounded. He was voted out roughly three months after taking office.