Skip to main content

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

Comment Preferences

  •  The dissent was clear (7+ / 0-)

    that that's an interpretation which ignores important, relevant legal precedent.

    That interpretation would have Rahm be a resident of no where at all which is not a reasonable position.

    look for my DK Greenroots diary series Thursday evening. "It's the planet, stupid."

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

    [ Parent ]

    •  Hmm, yes and no. (0+ / 0-)

      You're exactly right that the whole point of legal residency is prevent people from facing statelessness.  Everyone's gotta get to vote somewhere.

      However, nobody is saying Rahm isn't a resident of Chicago. The majority is saying that "being a resident of Chicago" and "residing in Chicago" are two different things.

      I know. It gives me a headache, too.

      I'm pretty sure the Illinois Supreme Court is going to rule for Rahm on this one, and I think the dissent had the much better reading of the statute.

      ‎"Our greatest asset as advocates is a deep cognizance of our own ignorance, plus a willingness to do something about it." -Joseph Mitchell Kaye, 1966.

      by JR on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 01:45:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (123)
  • Community (60)
  • Media (23)
  • Elections (23)
  • Environment (22)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Law (21)
  • Culture (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Science (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Ireland (16)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Hillary Clinton (15)
  • Health Care (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site