Skip to main content

View Diary: Illinois Supreme Court puts Rahm Emanuel back on ballot (371 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No, they don't. (4+ / 0-)

    The requirement may not serve a purpose, but that is not for the court to decide, it's up to the legislature.

    The court argues that the legislature, being fully aware of the technological advancements, has chosen not to update the law.

    Nothing contradictory about that.

    •  It's impractical to suggest that every law (0+ / 0-)

      must be updated to account for changes in technology. Common sense should rule the day here. If the original intent was for a candidate stay in contact with other residents then the acknowledged technological advancements should be taken into consideration.

      Not this mind and not this heart, I won't rot • Mumford & Sons

      by jayden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 11:24:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It may be impractical. But that's... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MixedContent

        ...the rule of law for you. Judges don't get to say, "We think this law is quaint. So we'll just ignore it."

        By the way, the more local the race, the more important it would be to live there.

        •  I'm not suggesting they ignore it. (0+ / 0-)

          But they can interpret it and consider whether the spirit of the law is being met.

          Not this mind and not this heart, I won't rot • Mumford & Sons

          by jayden on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 11:38:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site