HB1288 would change Illinois law to allow a person convicted of a felony to run for and be elected to an elective public office after fully completing the sentence, including any parole or mandatory supervised release. The bill defines elective public office broadly to include offices created by the Illinois Constitution, state law, county ordinance, municipal ordinance, or referendum. It also makes conforming changes to the Election Code and the Illinois Municipal Code.
The bill preserves an important exception for people convicted of felony, bribery, perjury, or other infamous crimes committed while serving as a public official in Illinois. Those individuals would remain barred from holding local public office or constitutional office unless their conviction is reversed, they receive a pardon, or their rights are otherwise restored by law. The measure is framed as a change to the Unified Code of Corrections and related election statutes governing eligibility and restoration of rights.
Impact
HB1288 would amend the Unified Code of Corrections, the Election Code, and the Illinois Municipal Code to expand post-conviction eligibility for elected office. It would remove the general bar on candidacy and election for people with felony convictions once they have completed their sentence, while keeping existing disqualification rules for certain crimes committed by public officials in office. The bill would affect election officials, candidates with criminal records, and municipal and state offices by clarifying who may be nominated, elected, and sworn into office.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal legislative sentiment can be measured from debate or roll calls. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be a criminal-justice and voting-rights reform proposal aimed at reintegration and restoring civic participation after sentence completion. The absence of opposition or support in the available record means sentiment is best characterized as unknown from the legislative history provided.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance between second chances and public trust in elected office. Supporters would likely emphasize rehabilitation, reintegration, and the idea that people who have fully served their sentences should regain eligibility to seek office. Opponents would likely focus on the risk of allowing people with felony records to hold public office, especially given the bill’s broad definition of elective office. The bill addresses that concern by preserving a stricter rule for crimes such as bribery and perjury committed while serving as a public official, which suggests an attempt to limit the most sensitive cases.