Following up on this post, noting this Illinois appellate opinion holding an initiative unenforceable due to a faulty Chinese translation of the ballot materials, this Illinois appellate court opinion reaches the opposite conclusion. According to the latter court: “If every inconsistency or irregularity in ballot translation were challengeable and deemed sufficient to void an election, every election in which the Board attempted to aid those individuals not versed in English by translating the ballot into another language would be voided and the courts overwhelmed with election cases. Clearly, this is not the intent, nor goal, in providing bilingual translations. Moreover, only substantial, not perfect, compliance is required. To allow any and every inconsistency or irregularity in translation to void an election would run counter to the well-settled principle.” Thanks to Mathias Delort for keeping me up to date on this issue.