Emanuel off ballot

Sounds pretty straight forward.

He had to live there for a year and he didn't.

That's like trying to run for President of the US when you weren't born in the country.

Well, evidently he didn't listen to my advice on how to lie to the American public. Dumbass.

X-Runner wrote:

He had to live there for a year and he didn't.

That's like trying to run for President of the US when you weren't born in the country.

Or claiming to live in Wyoming instead of TX so you are eligible to be VP.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

X-Runner wrote:

He had to live there for a year and he didn't.

That's like trying to run for President of the US when you weren't born in the country.

Or claiming to live in Wyoming instead of TX so you are eligible to be VP.

The Constitution doesn't have a 1 year requirement like Chicago does.

Or claiming New York when you are from DC...

Or claiming New York when you were actually from Little Rock...

So in effect this would mean that no one could go from Congress or the Senate to running for Mayor of Chicago because they'd be DC residents. Sounds silly.

Man in the Iron Mask wrote:

So in effect this would mean that no one could go from Congress or the Senate to running for Mayor of Chicago because they'd be DC residents. Sounds silly.

I agree that it seems silly, but I think this could have been avoided if he did not rent out his place. Doesn't seem like it's worth the extra money now, especially given how well off he is already.

Man in the Iron Mask wrote:

So in effect this would mean that no one could go from Congress or the Senate to running for Mayor of Chicago because they'd be DC residents. Sounds silly.

Members of Congress need to maintain residence in their home districts. Some may do so deceptively (I've heard of 2 Senators who had their home state residence be at their mother's house).

Someone serving in the White House would not have the need to maintain residence and the claim against Emmanuel was that he didn't.

asdgfh wrote:

Members of Congress need to maintain residence in their home districts. Some may do so deceptively (I've heard of 2 Senators who had their home state residence be at their mother's house).

They may have had a room in the basement (and probably posted on letsrun.com from there as well).

Man in the Iron Mask wrote:

So in effect this would mean that no one could go from Congress or the Senate to running for Mayor of Chicago because they'd be DC residents. Sounds silly.

It is silly, but that's the law. Even sillier is expecting a democrat to respect the law. They're too smart to follow a silly little rule meant for the rest of us.

Emanuel will undoubtedly appeal, it will go to the IL supreme court and it will probably be overturned and he will be allowed to run. I do not have the exact wording of the law (if someone does please post it), but I think the arguement that he went to DC to serve the president will hold up in court.

X-Runner wrote:

That's like trying to run for President of the US when you weren't born in the country.

There's no rule saying you have to be born in the country to be president of the US.

So, no, the two are not alike.

Here's the pertinent text from the Illinois municipal code

"(65 ILCS 5/6‑3‑9) (from Ch. 24, par. 6‑3‑9)

Sec. 6‑3‑9. Qualifications of mayor, city clerk, city treasurer and aldermen ‑ Eligibility for other office.

No person shall be eligible to the office of mayor, city clerk, city treasurer or alderman:

(1) Unless he is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided therein at least one year next preceding his election or appointment"

http://ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=006500050HArt%2E+6+Div%2E+3&ActID=802&ChapterID=14&SeqStart=61200000&SeqEnd=62400000

Given all RE's Chicago connections, and that he maintained his Chicago voter registration throughout, he probably has a chance on appeal to the state supreme. But, yeah, he should have thought ahead.

Russ Feingold's people had targeted Rahm for treason against the United States. Them Semites really play dirty politics.

It is even sillier to expect a Republican to be a able to read the law, let alone understand or respect the law.

As followup, the problem with the "business of the United States" exception is that, in specific context, it applies to voter eligibility, not officer eligibility.

(10 ILCS 5/Art. 3 heading)

ARTICLE 3. QUALIFICATION OF VOTERS

. . .

(10 ILCS 5/3‑2) (from Ch. 46, par. 3‑2)

Sec. 3‑2. (a) A permanent abode is necessary to constitute a residence within the meaning of Section 3‑1. No elector or spouse shall be deemed to have lost his or her residence in any precinct or election district in this State by reason of his or her absence on business of the United States, or of this State."

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=001000050HArt.+3&ActID=170&ChapterID=3&SeqStart=10200000&SeqEnd=11000000

Although RE will certainly rely on this before the supreme.

You Jane wrote:

It is even sillier to expect a Republican to be a able to read the law, let alone understand or respect the law.

Not as silly as fvcking Democrat telling the world we have to pass the law so we can read the law.

kartelite wrote:

X-Runner wrote:

That's like trying to run for President of the US when you weren't born in the country.

There's no rule saying you have to be born in the country to be president of the US.

So, no, the two are not alike.

You're joking, right???