[PBRCat]

The statute reference in your past message cites from the Election Code with respect to eligibility to vote. There is an entirely different statute concerning eligibility to run for elected office contained in the Municipal Code.

A person could be theoretically eligible to vote (based upon a thirty day residency requirement) while being ineligible to run for office for not maintaining a residence for a full year.

These are meaningful legal distinctions with a difference.

[11th_VA]

The statute reference in your past message cites from the Election Code with respect to eligibility to vote. There is an entirely different statute concerning eligibility to run for elected office contained in the Municipal Code. A person could be theoretically eligible to vote (based upon a thirty day residency requirement) while being ineligible to run for office for not maintaining a residence for a full year.

I heard the attorney on WLS last week - this is the whole Crux of the argument. He expects to lose the first two hearings, but win at the State Supreme Court level.

There is case law with a WWII vet(?) that was not allowed to run for office after the war, until he had established residency again. He could vote but not run for office because of the 1871 residency law.