10
   

Rahm Emanuel off the Ballot in Chicago Election

 
 
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 12:15 pm
The Illinois court of appeals has ruled that Emanuel does not meet the, fairly clearly stated, residency requirements for running for Mayor of Chicago. This occurred after the local election commission ruled him eligible and a lower court upheld the commission's decision. Emanuel has stated he intends to appeal to the state supreme court, arguing that his service to the president meets the residency standard for Illinois voters, and should apply in this case as well.

Removing Emanuel from the race leaves the field fairly wide open for a fairly unsavory cast of Chicago characters, prominently including former Senator Carol Mosely Braun. Chicago may go from one crook who is able to control the others to another who very likely is not. What do you think?
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 01:12 pm
@georgeob1,
I think if you retain your voting rights, that should count for election residency as well. Emanuel voted in Chicago, paid taxes in Chicago but he's not a resident of Chicago? I understand the court separated the two saying there is a higher standard for running for office, but I don't agree with it. Not that I have a dog in the fight, but I hope the state Supreme Court asks quickly to resolve it.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 01:27 pm
@engineer,
I think the legal issue is that there is a distinct standard in existing law for candidates for Mayor of the city. Such local standards are fairly common throughout the country, and I doubt that there is a strong legal case for overturning this one. At the same time there is the distinct prospect of the transition of government in Chicago from one that was corrupt but competent to one that is corrupt but incompetent. An interesting situation with complexities on both sides of the issue.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 01:30 pm
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.


It still has to play out with the higher court, I would guess.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 02:01 pm
@edgarblythe,
Interesting. The news report I just read indicated only that the Supreme Court has issued a stay of execution of the Appellate Court ruling and indicated that it will expedite its decision based on the legal briefs submitted by the parties. If I understand it correctly, this stops the printing of ballots but is not (yet at least) a favorable finding for Emanuel.

It seems to me the Appelate Court's ruling was an obvious and direct result of the wording of the law applicable to candidates for Mayor. It appears from the press reports that Emanuel's case is based, in part, on previous appelate rulings on analogous cases - something as yet unknown to me and probably most of us.

I'm confident of the Chicago political machine's ability to get nearly any result it wants.
wandeljw
 
  2  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 02:29 pm
@georgeob1,
What actually happened is that the state supreme court ordered that no ballots should be printed without Emanuel's name until that court has a chance to review the legal briefs and issue a decision.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  5  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 02:58 pm
The appellate court's decision can be found here(.pdf).

Having scanned the majority and dissenting opinions, I'm persuaded by the dissent. The majority has, in effect, created a new definition of "resided in" that applies only to candidates for office, and which amounts to "lived in." That's a standard that has never applied to candidates for office, for very good reasons. If a candidate were required to "live in" a district for a significant period of time (i.e. physically reside in that district without interruption), then incumbent legislators who spend a good deal of the year in Springfield or Washington would be barred from running for reelection.

The dissent focuses -- properly, I think -- on the candidate's intent to return to the district, rather than the candidate's actual physical presence in the district. That makes sense. The majority's distinction between what constitutes "resides in" for electors and what constitutes "resides in" for candidates is, in contrast, artificial and unmanageable.

The Illinois Supreme Court's decision to take this case on an expedited appeal is, I think, a fairly good indication that the court is leaning toward reversing the appellate court and reinstating Emanuel on the ballot.
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 02:59 pm
@joefromchicago,
Following along with interest, thanks for the expert commentary joe.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 03:58 pm
@georgeob1,
Dead fish Democrat
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2011 04:07 pm
Anyone who takes the CTA to and from work has probably had the chance to shake hands with Rahm Emanuel. In recent weeks I have seen him three times at different CTA train stations. At first I thought he was stalking me, and then I realized he was running for mayor. Smile
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 01:48 pm
Residents say to let them decide who they want for mayor.

Quote:
CHICAGO — Chicagoans are having no trouble summing up their thoughts about the drama now before the Illinois Supreme Court over Rahm Emanuel's name appearing on next month's mayoral ballot. Some call it ridiculous and confusing. Others, just plain baloney.

But whether or not they had planned to support Emanuel, voters expressed two prevailing sentiments Wednesday: Let the former White House chief of staff run so the voters can decide and, no matter how embarrassing or maddening the latest election spectacle has become, it's vintage Chicago politics. Source
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 02:56 pm
Denying Rahm Chicago's mayoral office would be like denying a duck water.

It's too inhumane to stand.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 03:18 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I watched a panel discussion on the local PBS station last night that included the lead legal guy from the nay-sayers (don't remember his name). The other two were legal "experts" of sorts, both of whom thought the SC would overturn the appellate court. The nay-sayer dude said the issue is that Emanuel rented out his house and had no place to hang his hat. He said that Obama could still claim residency because he could still sleep in his own accommodations if he returned to Chicago for a visit. He said that it isn't because Rahm did live here in the past year, but that he had no bed of his own to sleep in here.

Strange!
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 05:20 pm
Breaking News Alert: Court clears Rahm Emanuel's mayoral bid
January 27, 2011 6:12:09 PM
----------------------------------------

Rahm Emanuel is eligible to run for Chicago mayor, the Illinois Supreme Court has ruled. A lower appellate court had found that the former White House chief of staff did not meet residency requirements to run for the office.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 05:31 pm
@djjd62,
Good.

Me, I disagree with Rahm Emanuel on many issues (I've no idea if on most issues) but I somewhat like him, not that that is relevant. The precedents seemed to fall on his side.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 06:46 pm
@ossobuco,
I think his terra would be more firma if he hadn't rented out his house. In most states, congressmen keep a physical residence in the states they represent, though any actual requirement probably varies from state to state. He did attempt to persuade his tenant to move out, which may indicate some doubts on his part.

Personally, if that's who Chicago wants as mayor, it's just fine with me.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 07:02 pm
Well this decision saves Chicago from worse alternatives.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  2  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 07:03 pm
I totally support Rahm Emanuel, I think any relative of Baba Rahm Daas must be a friend of Chicago because he is like so here now no matter where he is even when he's nowhere at all.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Jan, 2011 07:05 pm
The Illinois Supreme Court's opinion can be found here (.pdf).

The court agreed with the dissenting justice in the appellate court that the 1867 case of Smith v. Frisbie controlled. Here's what the court said about that:
Quote:
Thus, from April 1867 through January 24 of this year, the
principles governing the question before us were settled. Things
changed, however, when the appellate court below issued its decision
and announced that it was no longer bound by any of the law cited
above, including this court’s decision in Smith, but was instead free to
craft its own original standard for determining a candidate’s residency.
See No. 1–11–0033, slip op. at 6-8 (dismissing the foregoing
authority in its entirety). Thus, our review of the appellate court’s
decision in this case begins not where it should, with an assessment of
whether the court accurately applied established Illinois law to the
particular facts, but with an assessment of whether the appellate court
was justified in tossing out 150 years of settled residency law in favor
of its own preferred standard. We emphatically hold that it was not.


And then there's this gem:
Quote:
The appellate
court’s other basis for rejecting Smith was its determination that,
“although the supreme court’s discussion in Smith was based
nominally on principles of residence, it appears from its analysis that
it actually applied concepts of domicile.” No. 1–11–0033, slip op. at
7. In other words, the appellate court concluded that Smith is not
binding because this court did not know what it was talking about
when it wrote it.

Oh snap!

And the court brings up a point that I raised in my previous post:
Quote:
Assuming without deciding that
the appellate court was correct that the government service exception
does not apply to candidates, consider the example of Representatives
in Congress who often spend 4-5 days a week in Washington. If a
Representative from a Chicago congressional district owns a
condominium in Washington, where is that representative “actually
living” or “actually residing” when Congress is in session? Under the
majority’s test, would the candidate have been ineligible to run for
mayor even during the time he was serving in Congress? The same
confusion would arise with respect to State Representatives or State
Senators who must spend considerable amounts of time in Springfield.

It was a unanimous decision, although two justices specially concurred because they didn't think the issue was as clear-cut as the majority thought it was.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  6  
Reply Tue 22 Feb, 2011 09:25 pm
He was on the ballot, taken off the ballot, and put back on the ballot again.

Now he's the mayor-elect of Chicago.

Quote:
CHICAGO — Former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was elected mayor of Chicago on Tuesday, easily overwhelming five rivals to take the helm of the nation's third-largest city as it prepares to chart a new course without the retiring Richard M. Daley.

With 86 percent of the precincts reporting, Emanuel was trouncing five opponents Tuesday with 55 percent of the vote to avoid an April runoff. Emanuel needed more than 50 percent of the vote to win.

The other major candidates — former Chicago schools president Gery Chico, former U.S. Sen. Carol Moseley Braun and City Clerk Miguel del Valle — had hoped to force a runoff but were no match for Emanuel.

Chico had 24 percent of the vote compared to 9 percent for both del Valle and Braun. Two other lesser-known candidates each got about 1 percent of the vote.

Emanuel, who takes office in May, thanked Chicago voters for welcoming him back from Washington. "You sure know how to make a guy feel at home," he said in his victory speech. More
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Rahm Emanuel. What a Turd. - Discussion by edgarblythe
Dead fish Democrat - Discussion by H2O MAN
Rahm's Gonna Try to Succeed Daley - Discussion by sozobe
Obama's choice draws anti-Arab taunt - Discussion by Zippo
Rahm Emanuel Is Not Partisan Enough? - Discussion by Finn dAbuzz
Rahm Emanuel - Discussion by blueflame1
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Rahm Emanuel off the Ballot in Chicago Election
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 12:45:29