Jones v. Calumet City

In November 2016, voters in City voted in favor of referendum providing for term limit for office of mayor, as a result of which Plaintiff became ineligible to run for mayor. Mayoral election was held without Plaintiff’s name on the ballot, office was filled, and results were certified. Plaintiff appeals court’s entry of summary judgment for Defendants on his complaint seeking declaratory judgment that referendum was unconstitutional, and TRO and injunction enjoining city from implementing results of referendum.  City had legitimate interest in providing term limit for office of mayor, to encourage persons who were not long-serving politicians in city council to run for that office.  Referendum did not run afoul of free and equal clause, and was not unconstitutionally ambiguous, as its meaning is sufficiently clear. Referendum only provided term limits for candidates in future elections, and thus had no retroactive impact and did not violate prohibition on ex post facto laws. (REYES and LAMPKIN, concurring.)