Posted on 01/27/2011 3:19:12 PM PST by Chicago Lampoon
Did anyone really doubt that the Chicago fix was in all along? The Illinois Supreme Court just announced a 5-2 decision to allow Rahm Emanuel on the ballot for the February 22 Chicago mayoral election. Earlier today, former IL Republican Gov. Jim Thompson and other members of the state GOP establishment came out in favor of giving the former Obama ballot access.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsblogs.chicagotribune.com ...
His “intent” is completely beside the point.
What would be the point of specifying that a candidate must be a “qualified elector,” for which “achieving residency” is already a requirement, and then specifying that the candidate must “reside in” the district?
Section 3.1-10-5(d) exempts active duty military who “reside” elsewhere for a time from the “reside in” requirement for candidates, but it does not exempt people “in the service of the United States” or Chiefs of Staff of the Obama Administration.
So basically, the Illinois Supreme Court has repealed 3.1-10-5(d) and the second half of 3.1-10-5(a) by judicial fiat, and have shown themselves to be black-robed b**ches of the Chicago Machine.
It was manifestly not the intention of the writers of the Illinois Constitution, nor of those who wrote that particular law regarding residency for the purpose of running for office, to REQUIRE that anyone wanting to run for office stay within the bounds of Chicago for one year immediately preceding an election.
For one thing that would be IMPOSSIBLE to enforce. For another you would necessarily violate almost every other civil right any potential candidate might have to begin to enforce it.
Your reading that requires perfect attendance is NONSENSE. Those who came up with that idea just wanted to harass the man with it, yet, if it were to prevail, I daresay NONE of the candidates for office in Chicago would qualify to run for office.
Illinois has a lower aggregate income tax rate than DC. That means that if Rahm only filed in DC he'd pay more income tax than if he filed in both DC and Illinois.
That's why I cannot believe he filed only in DC.
Most Congresscritters live in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs. Several reasons for that ~ LOWER CRIME RATES, and LOWER CRIME RATES, plus LOWER CRIME RATES.
Don't ever think the Leftwingtards don't know where the criminals are.
BTW, DC is considered DIFFERENT than a state for tax purposes.
That's 'cause it's not a state.
NOTE, the rules are different for private sector employees ~ if they live in Virginia and work in DC for a private company (say a LOBBYIST), they will need to pay taxes to DC and Virginia.
OK look at it from the other side. What would it have taken for Emanuel to do if he had purposely wanted to STOP being a resident of Chicago?
He had an expected date for leaving the White House (where he was chief of staff, not chef of stuffing) and returning to Chicago. The court noted that he'd done everything necessary to indicate his intent to NOT abandon his domicile in Chicago.
Basically Rahm Emanuel is entitled to the same rights everybody else in Chicago is entitled to ~ and that includes the presumption that he "lives there".
He sure doesn't "live here"!
You fully do not understand Illinois law....
There was a court case on this very subject that went to the supreme court ruling the same way as it did this time.
Immanuel never relinquished his residency. By renting his house it supports that fact.
His residence is still Cook Co as mine is in Mclean...
The Appellate court used their own interpretation.
The Supreme court held in favor of Immanuel unanimously.
What are you trying to say, the whole court is corrupt...?
Three republicans....
You fully do not understand Illinois law....
There was a court case on this very subject that went to the supreme court ruling the same way as it did this time.
Immanuel never relinquished his residency. By renting his house it supports that fact.
His residence is still Cook Co as mine is in Mclean...
The Appellate court used their own interpretation.
The Supreme court held in favor of Immanuel unanimously.
What are you trying to say, the whole court is corrupt...?
Three republicans....
You fully do not understand Illinois law....
There was a court case on this very subject that went to the supreme court ruling the same way as it did this time.
Immanuel never relinquished his residency. By renting his house it supports that fact.
His residence is still Cook Co as mine is in Mclean...
The Appellate court used their own interpretation.
The Supreme court held in favor of Immanuel unanimously.
What are you trying to say, the whole court is corrupt...?
Three republicans....
BS... we’re talking about residency not where you live....
You’re wrong...plain and simple...
Immanuel is the best of this worse lot of candidates...
Anyone else would be a disaster for our city...
BS... we’re talking about residency not where you live....
You’re wrong...plain and simple...
Immanuel is the best of this worse lot of candidates...
Anyone else would be a disaster for our city...
BS... we’re talking about residency not where you live....
You’re wrong...plain and simple...
Immanuel is the best of this worse lot of candidates...
Anyone else would be a disaster for our city...
It does mean physical presence, but what the court said was that once physical presence was EVER established, only an intent to abandon that presence results in it going away. In other words, he “resided in” Chicago, according to the court, because he once resided there and intended to return.
This is totally stupid.
I understand, and it’s a ridiculously permissive standard.
>>There was a court case on this very subject<<
Actually, the court case wasn’t “on the subject.” It involved a challenge to someone already in office, and was decided 125+ years ago under a totally different statute that no longer exists. So, it wasn’t factually similar, and was not based upon a previous ruling on the same law. It had no precedental value, but the Ill. SC decided to use it anyway to justify the result they sought.
The decision was wrong and stupid. You can try and defend it, but that makes you look silly.
Why did the Supreme vote unanimously in favor of Immanuel? Just answer me that one question, so I can go to bed....
Any reason you insist on multiple postings of every entry you make?
Haaaa.... The dreaded triple post. It happens I think when your laptop is slow to respond. Sorry...
I live about five miles from Chicago, and I work in downtown Chicago. I disagree with the IL Supreme Court because Rahm didn’t live in Chicago since last Feb. He might have intended to return, but he lived in Washington, DC, most of the last year.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.