WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2579

MARRIAGE OF WARD

104th Regular Session Introduced by Suzanne Ness

Requires guardianship status on marriage licenses; if a ward is party, court must determine best interests, else marriage void and anyone knowingly marrying a ward without procedur

Rule 19(a) / Re-referred to Rules Committee
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2579

Summary — HB 2579 (Marriage of Ward)

Status: Introduced (2025-02-06/07). Re-referred to Rules Committee; assigned to Judiciary — Civil Committee.
Primary sponsors (as listed): Selina Bliss; Todd; Onishi; Nakashima; Suzanne M. Ness.

Note: the bill text provided includes material from more than one jurisdiction. This summary focuses on the provisions that amend the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act and the Probate Act of 1975 (the “Marriage of Ward” provisions).

Purpose

To create mandatory procedural protections before an adult under court-ordered guardianship (a “ward”) may marry — by adding guardianship status to marriage license forms, conditioning issuance of a license on proof or a court determination that the marriage is in the ward’s best interests, strengthening the standards courts must apply in those determinations, and making knowingly marrying a ward without following required procedures a felony.

Key provisions

  • Amend 750 ILCS 5/202 (Marriage license application form):

    • Require the marriage-license application to include whether either party is under a court-ordered guardianship in any U.S. state.

  • Amend 750 ILCS 5/203 (License to marry):

    • County clerks shall issue a marriage license and certificate only after satisfactory proof that:
    • Neither party is under a court-ordered guardianship; or
    • If at least one party is under guardianship, there has been a judicial determination (per Probate Act §11a-17(a-10)) that the marriage is in the best interests of the ward.
    • This appears as a new subsection (1.5) governing issuance.

  • Amend 755 ILCS 5/11a-17 (Probate Act — duties of guardian):

    • When the court determines whether a proposed marriage is in a ward’s best interests, the court must “follow” (rather than merely “consider”) the specified standards listed in the statute (the bill replaces permissive language with mandatory application of those standards).
    • If a best-interests hearing is not held before a judicial officer prior to a ward entering into marriage, the marriage is declared without legal effect — void ab initio.
    • Creates criminal liability: any person who knowingly enters into a marriage with a ward without following the required procedures is guilty of a Class 4 felony.

Who is affected

  • Adults under court-ordered guardianship (wards) — increased protective oversight over marital decisions.
  • Prospective spouses of wards — required to ensure statutory procedures are followed before marrying a ward.
  • Guardians of adults — responsibility to petition or participate in best-interests proceedings when marriage is contemplated.
  • County clerks — new verification duty (must be furnished satisfactory proof before issuing license).
  • Courts — additional mandatory review obligations and increased number of best-interests hearings.
  • Potential criminal defendants — persons who knowingly circumvent the procedures.

Procedural and enforcement notes

  • The bill ties issuance of marriage licenses to documentation or a prior judicial best-interests determination (per Probate Act §11a-17).
  • A lack of a prior judicial determination renders the resulting marriage void from the start.
  • Violation carries felony exposure (Class 4).
  • Implementation will require county clerks to collect and assess guardianship documentation and will likely increase filings in probate or family court to obtain the required court determinations.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Strengthens safeguards against coercive or exploitative marriages involving wards.
  • Increases administrative and judicial workload (verification by clerks; hearings for best-interests determinations).
  • Criminalizes knowingly contracting such a marriage without statutory compliance, creating prosecutorial and sentencing implications (Class 4 felony under Illinois law).
  • Practical effect depends on rules and procedures courts adopt to meet the “follow” standard and how “satisfactory proof” is defined/verified by clerks.

If you want, I can:
- Pull and summarize the current text of 755 ILCS 5/11a-17(a-10) to show the specific “standards” the bill makes mandatory; or
- Draft suggested guidance language for county clerks on what constitutes “satisfactory proof.”

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.