Thursday, January 27, 2011

Illinois Supreme Court Reverses Appellate Court Ruling Keeping Emanual Off Chicago Ballot

The Illinois Supreme Court came to the rescue of Rahm Emanuel and reversed a 2-1 state appellate court decision declaring him ineligible to run for Chicago mayor because he had not "resided in" Chicago for a period of at least one year prior to the election. The decision is unanimous. You can read it here. Emanuel will win the election in a walk and the corruption that drives the city will continue to thrive.

9 comments:

Cato said...

Here's my comment from this blog on September 28, 2010:

"Rahm will get on the ballot, because nobody will want to punish him for engaging in public service."

Here's the Court's holding:

"The Board concluded that the candidate’s absence from Chicago was solely for the purpose of permitting him to discharge what he
perceived to be a duty to serve the United States in the capacity of Chief of Staff to the President of the United States...None of these findings are
clearly erroneous."

The Supremes unanimously overturned the appellate court. Ouch. I'm surprised two appellate judges risked their careers with that ruling.

Pete Boggs said...

What else would we expect in Chi-Blago?

Indy4U2C said...

Corruption is as corruption does.

--The Democrat Machine

Michael said...

Chicago is going to be what it wants it to be. Just don't drag others into the mess and corruption.

dcrutch said...

Plus- if it had been some typical schmuck, maybe out-of-state running a Boy Scout ranch or something, I'm sure we'd all agree that the state Supreme court would have done exactly the same thing.

Whew! Thought there was some special treatment there for a second. My enormous faith in government to put equal treatment under the law before special treament for the "power elite" was taking on serious water.....

indyernie said...

Chicago is a political Sodom and Gomorrah. I look forward to another challenge to this ruling.

Maple Syrup Maven said...

It's obvious that both US reps and senators don't "live fulltime" in their places of residence...because they're in Washington, DC!

If one could be disqualified for public service outside one's residence, then no one could ever be re-elected to Congress.

Advance Indiana said...

Rahm was not serving as a Member of Congress; he was working at the White House.

dcrutch said...

Whether "actively serving" at the time or not, I have no problem including Senator Coats in a elite class that bascially get a pass on any common sense interpretation of residency. Probably a more offensive example than Emanuel.