## Facts

- Robert Herman Church purchased a private alarm business in 1988 and operated it after the purchase.
- In 1991, Church applied for a license to operate the business under the Illinois Private Detective, Private Alarm, and Private Security Act of 1983.
- In his application, Church stated that since 1984 he had worked about 1,200 hours per year as a patrolman for a local police department and had substantial law-enforcement training and experience.
- The Act required an applicant to have prior employment with a *licensed private alarm agency* as part of the statutory experience pathway for licensure (including eligibility to take the licensing examination).
- The state department responsible for administering the Act and overseeing the Private Detective, Private Alarm, and Private Security Board denied Church’s application.
- The department also refused to allow Church to sit for the licensing examination because he had not previously worked for a licensed private alarm agency as required by the Act.
- Church filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the Act’s industry work requirement.
- The circuit court held the industry work requirement unconstitutional and ordered the department to issue Church a license.
- The department appealed from the circuit court’s judgment.

## Issues

1. Whether the Act’s requirement that an applicant for a private alarm contractor license first work for a *licensed private alarm agency* violates constitutional limits on economic regulation (including due process and equal protection) by imposing an arbitrary barrier to entry.

## Decision

- The Illinois Supreme Court held the Act’s licensed-agency work requirement constitutional under rational-basis review.
- The Court concluded the legislature could reasonably require industry experience obtained within the regulated, licensed alarm-industry setting as a condition of licensure.
- The Court ruled the department acted within its authority in denying Church’s application and refusing to let him sit for the licensing exam based on the experience pathway.
- The circuit court’s order directing issuance of a license was overturned, and the department’s denial was reinstated.

## Legal Principles

- Economic and occupational licensing statutes are presumed constitutional, and a challenger must show the classification is arbitrary and unrelated to any legitimate governmental objective.
- Under rational-basis review, a court asks only whether the legislature could have believed the licensing requirement would advance public safety and consumer protection; the court does not substitute its policy judgment for the legislature’s.
- A legislature may require specific, industry-based experience obtained within a licensed setting to help ensure familiarity with regulatory compliance, technical standards, and supervised practice.
- A licensing scheme does not create an unconstitutional exclusive privilege or improper special law when the class of eligible applicants is open to all who meet the statutory criteria and the criteria reasonably relate to the regulatory purpose.

## Conclusion

Church v. State upheld Illinois’s requirement that a private alarm contractor applicant obtain prior work experience with a licensed private alarm agency before qualifying through the experience route (including eligibility to take the licensing exam). Applying deferential rational-basis review to this form of economic regulation, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the legislature could reasonably link licensure to supervised, in-industry experience and that the department properly denied Church’s application and exam access for failure to meet the statutory prerequisite.


Church v. State, 646 N.E.2d 572 (1995)