Skip to main content

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

Comment Preferences

  •  Guys: Actually READ the opinion (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tantris, slatsg

    Not to be snarky, but honestly, there are 358 comments and this could be easily 60 if people would read the opinion.

    1. How can being WHCOS not count as serving your country ???? How could the court ignore that????

    Answer: They DIDNT! The court addresses it and concludes it WAS serving your country, but it doesn't relate to CANDIDATE qualification. It relates to VOTER qualification.

    1. How could the majority ignore "decades of strong judicial precedent"?

    Answer: Umm, because they didn't and you're parroting the very sloppy and angry dissent which cited inappropriate and inapplicable case law as precedent.

    1. How could the majority conclude he didn't live there? Now congresspeople wont be able to maintain their candidacies. Now president Obama wont qualify.

    Answer: (a) Because he DIDNT live there. (b) Congressional qualifications are not set in the Municipal Code and nearly all maintain a residence in their home state or district. Rahm did not. (c) No one is living exclusively in President Obama's house. When he returns to Chicago, he can sleep there or do whatever he likes. Plus, he's President. Not an office governed by the Municipal Code.

    As Mary Mitchell in the Sun-Times correctly pointed out the surprise is not that Rahm got thrown off the ballot, it is that he ever got on in the first place.

    Whether you like the decision or think the IL law is good public policy, this was NOT at all a close call for the Appellate court. This was an easy case. Judge Hoffman is a VERY highly respected judge. His opinion is very carefully and thoroughly crafted.

    This doesn't mean for a second that the IL Supreme Court won't come down the other way, but this was not at all a tough case.

    And seriously, before we hit 600 comments, please, actually bother to read the opinion. It would have stopped more than 2/3rds of these comments.

    Cleverly enough, actually READ the case

    In re: ideological purity-- We can't govern if we don't win-Toby Ziegler

    by ChicagoCillen on Tue Jan 25, 2011 at 03:51:01 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site