Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ill. court issues stay; Rahm back on the ballot

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:24 PM
Original message
Ill. court issues stay; Rahm back on the ballot
From NBC's John Yang
The Illinois Supreme Court has just issued a stay of the appeals court's order knocking Rahm Emanuel off the ballot and directing the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners to restore his name to the ballot.

This is a strong indication that the court will accept the case and, perhaps, of which way the justices are leaning.



http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/25/5915616-ill-court-issues-stay-rahm-back-on-the-ballot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. Endless frivilous appeals
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. The 2 appeals judges who ruled him ineligible were put on bench by Chico supporter
This was an important--but overlooked story--in today's Chicago Tribune:

The two Appellate Court judges responsible for tossing Rahm Emanuel from the ballot in February's mayoral race both won their jobs after being anointed by a Chicago political power broker who openly supports an Emanuel opponent.

Whether or not their opinions are colored by politics, the case has recharged the debate among critics who decry a process of selecting judges that relies more heavily on political clout than merit.

Longtime Appellate Court Judges Thomas E. Hoffman and Shelvin Louise Marie Hall — who on Monday ruled that Emanuel's stay in Washington precludes him from running for mayor this year — were both judicial candidates slated for election by the Cook County Democratic Party judicial slating committee chaired by Ald. Edward Burke, 14th.

Burke, one of Chicago's most powerful politicians, holds huge sway in the election of judges at every level, including the Illinois Supreme Court, where his wife, Anne, sits as a justice and where the Emanuel ballot question is now headed for a final decision.

Burke has openly supported another candidate, Gery Chico, for mayor. A recent Tribune poll showed Chico badly trailing Emanuel.

"The real question now is whether Anne Burke must recuse herself," said Malcolm Rich, executive director of the Chicago Council of Lawyers, a group that evaluates judges and advocates reform. "Yes, there is an inherent conflict. These judges are slated by politicians. That is just the way it is.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/elections/ct-met-slated-judges-20110124,0,3891974.story


So, longtime boss Ed Burke, who has openly endorsed Gery Chico for mayor, was the one who slated both judges from the appellate court who overturned the lower court's judgement on eligibility. And his wife sits of the Supreme Court. Tricky, tricky.

You should also read the Trib's editorial today:

With startling arrogance and audaciously twisted reasoning, two appellate judges ignored more than 100 years of legal precedent, invented a new definition of "residency" and ordered Rahm Emanuel off the Feb. 22 mayoral ballot.

With the election just four weeks away, the appellate panel voted 2-1 to reverse the decisions of the Chicago Board of Elections and a Circuit Court judge. It's an adventurous, flawed ruling that has immediate and profound consequences. The case is headed to the Illinois Supreme Court, but the ballots are headed to the printer — without Emanuel's name. Early voting begins Monday.

In a blistering dissent, Appellate Justice Bertina E. Lampkin accused her colleagues, Thomas E. Hoffman and Shelvin Louise Marie Hall, of "careless disregard for the law," and harshly criticized them for refusing to ask the Supreme Court for an expedited review.

Lampkin accused the majority of ignoring case law that clearly supported Emanuel's argument —including a significant case in which Hoffman prevailed.

"The majority's new standard is ill-reasoned and unfair to the candidate, voters and those of us who are charged with applying the law," Lampkin wrote. The decision "disenfranchises not just this particular candidate but every voter in Chicago who would consider voting for him."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-rahm-20110124,0,848590.story




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC